Monroe Doctrine

[evirus]

ok heres what im thinking, after the island you have spawned on has been fully explored (or just the coast line) you can establish a treaty acting like the monroe doctrine, basicly forbidding nations who did not spawn on the island from building cities on that island,

i get vary mad how after going through some of the game clearing out the jungle squares to make my island habitable by a larger population then i find a bunch of AI civs landing on my island and setting up cities on every unclaimed square that they find

 

[Nobody]

basicly forbidding nations who did not spawn on the island from building cities on that island,

really this is the kinda of thig that i will enfoce on my own games anyway

 

[mokeysonice]

or maybe they could work in a feature to expand your borders artificially through areas u dont control nor have influence- like land claims how the french claimed Louisiana territory but didnt control all of it and how the US had the "west" in its boundries but didnt control or influence alot of the middlelands

 

[evirus]

or maybe they could work in a feature to expand your borders artificially through areas u dont control nor have influence- like land claims how the french claimed Louisiana territory but didnt control all of it and how the US had the "west" in its boundries but didnt control or influence alot of the middlelands

thats why i suggested it as a treaty option... an agreement between nations

 

[Pacifist]

I had a similar idea of how to prevent rival Civilizations developing closely to your area, though its not through treaty agreements & not through territorial expansion either.

To summarise, the idea was to "frighten" the opposition through "superstition", preventing "Settlers" from building cities where that "supertition" is in effect. This would only work during the early eras and would no longer be in effect once an appropriate Tech has been researched.

If you want to understand my idea better, read here: Superstition

That's just one idea and I'm glad to see more ideas coming through in how to solve this "annoying" aspect of the game.

@evirus
I like your "treaty" solution. At least a rival nation could still say NO and spark a race for territorial expansion between you and the rival in question

@mokeysonice
I also like your "claiming land" solution through "artificial" means as you put it. Maybe this feature could be implemented through "Worker" actions, where the Worker would build some sort of structure on the terrain tile that expands the border of your Civilization. The unit animation could show the Worker "planting" a flag into the soil with a caption over it's head, saying, "I hereby claim this land for the <insert Civ name> people" - LOL

Very nice ideas

-Pacifist-
"Finders, keepers, losers, weepers "

 

[apatheist]

Your claim shouldn't be a global one, however. The United States and France may have agreed that Louisiana would belong the USA, but China didn't care. If there's an island between Greece and me, I can negotiate with Greece for a claim to it, but Rome doesn't have to respect that claim. I'm not talking about declaring war and trying to take the island; if Rome isn't a signatory to such an agreement, they should be able to settle that island without it being a legitimate casus belli.

 

[evirus]

i understand with what your saying apatheist... and i do think that this should be limited to the parties who agreed to the treaty... maybe the value and amount of land that your trying to sign off on rights too should determine the willingness of the ai to agree to such a treaty

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

So, if I understand you correctly, evirus, you want to extend diplomacy to the 'trade' of territory (e.g. sort of like the Louisiana Purchase and the like)? If so, then I support that 100%, and definitely think it should only apply to the civ with whom you make the deal-not global, unless you get a multiparty agreement happening.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[The Yankee]

So far, this stuff about treaties really has nothing to do with the Monroe Doctrine. It's more like that treaty (forget the name) where Spain and Portugal split the world in half and agreed not to claim any land in the other's half.

The Monroe Doctrine isn't a treaty, it's a threat.

So, the best way to do that would be to declare a continent off-limits. Then, any other civ that tries to settle or take whatever's there will get an automatic declaration of war.

Probably wouldn't be best to use a continent, since continents in Civ can be huge. Perhaps a set amount of tiles, and can only be declared once. Wouldn't know how to implement the real purpose of the Doctrine, which was protecting the independence of the newly formed Latin American nations against European powers.

 

[rhialto]

The Monroe doctrine was to protect their independance? While that was the purpose for public consumption, I doubt it was the real reason. No nation is genuinely so selfless that it would spend its own resources for perfectly altruistic reasons.

 

[The Yankee]

Protect their independence so that the United States could exert their influence, yes. We didn't want the European imperialists back in Latin America after they had been kicked out.

But, the gist of the doctrine is that the United States will go to war should any European power try to colonize the Americas again. The existing colonies were exempt, however.

 

[searcheagle]

I think, evirus, you should rename your thread to Diplomatic Action: Claiming territory OR Diplomatic Action: Negiating Claimed Territory.

 

[evirus]

i used the name monroe doctrine because it gives a pretty close description to what im suggisting from what i read about it

 

[apatheist]

So far, this stuff about treaties really has nothing to do with the Monroe Doctrine. It's more like that treaty (forget the name) where Spain and Portugal split the world in half and agreed not to claim any land in the other's half.

That would be the Treaty of Tordesillas.

The Monroe Doctrine isn't a treaty, it's a threat.

So, the best way to do that would be to declare a continent off-limits. Then, any other civ that tries to settle or take whatever's there will get an automatic declaration of war.

Then what's lacking isn't the mechanism for declaring war but rather 1) the ability to designate such an area 2) communicate that claim to the AI 3) be alerted if it's violated. That shouldn't be a legitimate casus belli, however. Also, I expect that such a claim itself can be treated by the AI as a legitimate casus belli, depending on how large the claim is, how powerful you are, how close, etc.

Probably wouldn't be best to use a continent, since continents in Civ can be huge. Perhaps a set amount of tiles, and can only be declared once.

If you want it in the game, then you should allow it to be unlimited (by the game mechanics). Any limitations should be imposes by the opponents ignoring or rejecting your claim (forcefully, if necessary). A mechanism like this should only be in the game as a courtesy between players. It would be a way for two friendly powers to avoid misunderstandings in the future by partitioning empty (or occupied) lands between them.

Wouldn't know how to implement the real purpose of the Doctrine, which was protecting the independence of the newly formed Latin American nations against European powers.

Then skip it. Generalize it to a "sphere of influence" or something like that. The European powers weren't intimidated by the United States; it's not like the USA in 1823 was considered a threat to Britain, France, Spain, or Russia. The Monroe Doctrine only worked because Britain supported it and the rest of the European powers didn't care enough to violate it. Also, its application by the USA was not completely consistent, either.

 

[mokeysonice]

apathest i would definetly disagree with you on that last part, by the time the Monroe Doctrine was stated the us had already beaten england twice in wars, which made them be considered about the same as probably the US considers France right now, while we more or less agree to what they think on many things--they cant really hold us back but in alot of things no reason to mess with them

nvm ur pretty much right

I think the claim should be global regardless of whether or not other countries care about it (like china and the Louisiana territory) But again anyone else CAN settle on your claimed lands, and it will affect diplomacy (with AI or with people) if you fail to attack the impeeding lands. So i could claim that noone can settle on a group of islands but me, but they can. It would just than be seen as a legitamite reason for me to invade. (I did the same thing in a ptw game last week with people--ya he didnt like it too much but after i destroyed the first 2 impeeding cities he gave me the other 2)

XD

 

[The Yankee]

That would be the Treaty of Tordesillas.

There we go. Thank you. Knew it was T-something...Still, the treaty was only between Spain and Portugal. Meaning that Britain and France did whatever the hell they pleased.

Then what's lacking isn't the mechanism for declaring war but rather 1) the ability to designate such an area 2) communicate that claim to the AI 3) be alerted if it's violated. That shouldn't be a legitimate casus belli, however. Also, I expect that such a claim itself can be treated by the AI as a legitimate casus belli, depending on how large the claim is, how powerful you are, how close, etc.

True...I imagine it would be pretty complicated to implement and might also be complicated for a generic, mass market player, especially if the AI actually used the thing.

]If you want it in the game, then you should allow it to be unlimited (by the game mechanics). Any limitations should be imposes by the opponents ignoring or rejecting your claim (forcefully, if necessary). A mechanism like this should only be in the game as a courtesy between players. It would be a way for two friendly powers to avoid misunderstandings in the future by partitioning empty (or occupied) lands between them.

Perhaps. But as a courtesy, then it'd only be allowed during multiplayer between human opponents. You can do that already. For the AI to be able to do that, a way to implement a Tordesillas would have to be coded in. Might be as simple as "You don't wander around Land X and we won't wander around Land Y plus we'll give you 100 gold upfront." Now, it'd be a heck of a lot easier to designate such a thing if there were a system to mark off areas of land (or sea, for that matter). Perhaps taking the grid system we already see at the bottom of the editor telling us the axes would be enough. But then, this makes me want the ability to stake claims to land without having to build cities, or borders that aren't decided by culture, or at least culture alone.

Then skip it. Generalize it to a "sphere of influence" or something like that. The European powers weren't intimidated by the United States; it's not like the USA in 1823 was considered a threat to Britain, France, Spain, or Russia. The Monroe Doctrine only worked because Britain supported it and the rest of the European powers didn't care enough to violate it. Also, its application by the USA was not completely consistent, either.

Same thing as above with the marking off of the areas. Britain backed it up and hardly anyone wanted to deal with a mess of recolonizing a newly independent nation, given how hard it would be to maintain control. The Doctrine was basically scrapped as policy when the Soviets put their missiles in Cuba.

The US certainly didn't have much of a navy to enforce the entire Western Hemisphere, but its political goals weren't aimed so much at Europe as at Latin America, later strengthened with "dollar diplomacy."

 

[apatheist]

apathest i would definetly disagree with you on that last part, by the time the Monroe Doctrine was stated the us had already beaten england twice in wars, which made them be considered about the same as probably the US considers France right now, while we more or less agree to what they think on many things--they cant really hold us back but in alot of things no reason to mess with them

nvm ur pretty much right

Huh? Not sure what that last bit means. The US did not win the War of 1812. At best, it was a draw. The US only got as far as it did because Britain was tied up in the Napoleonic Wars, though you could also argue that the war wouldn't have happened without the Napoleonic Wars anyway. The United States was a tiny player on the world stage in 1823. Your analogy is reversed; in relative power, Britain in 1823 was like the US today, and the US in 1823 was (at best) like France today.

Perhaps. But as a courtesy, then it'd only be allowed during multiplayer between human opponents. You can do that already.

The cheap way out is with chat.

The Doctrine was basically scrapped as policy when the Soviets put their missiles in Cuba.

You could argue that the final result of the Cuban Missile Crisis showed that the Monroe Doctrine was alive and well, although, once the Spanish-American War was concluded, the Doctrine was becoming increasingly irrelevant.

 

[Atrebates]

In Cold War history I was taught that the Monroe Doctrine was slightly less benign than suggested here in its modern sense it was to prevent any none US dominated gov setting up home in the US's backyard although its was not referred to in conflict, it was like an ideal or guideline. (?)

Anyway back to the topic, I like this idea, in solves the AI sneaking in problem far better than any solution I've heard and it refects national thinking as well; you feel the landmass is yours and make a declaration.
I think it should be international and you don't need to negociate it (its only limited by you having complete (map) knowledge of the landmass and there being no other cities on it).

This way you could demand foreign settlers leave (threaten with war in the same way as a 'something for nothing or else' deal) and ask any cities founded there to be turned over.

In terms of AI aggressive expansive leaders would lay down extensive claims which you might brave in hope of their bluffing (your foreign advisor would say 'This land is claimed by the Russians' OS when you land)

My only concern would be that it might creates ridiculous situations where people claim everything in sight. Perhaps people would have to own 75% OS of a large landmass before they can claim.

PS. I think the game already possesses the mechanics to understand a continent, after all it uses continent only wonders- the declaration could be to the landmass of city X and civ would get it.

 

[evirus]

or prehaps a small wonder like thing, that you can build to claim the island... that would partialy solve the "player claims everything" exploit you hinted at

 

[Atrebates]

Interesting idea, small wonder (ie 1 off) or improvement? Dunno what cost it would be, expensive to prevent lots of claims or cheap so that player can make 'landfall' and quickly establish a claim (as most cities produce poorly at first esp. on new continents).
My instinct is for a cheap model 'cos it sort of defeats the point if it takes forever to lay claim to a landmass, exploration should take care of the timing. However I can see valid arguements against this, people may only want claims to be made to continents that you are well established on for instance. I suppose it depends on how you view the 'spirit' of land claiming.