More Useful UN

[FaIaChad]

I just wanted to say this and see if others would agree with me. That this should be added to the game.

Modern combat has changed since Vietnam. You dont actually go to war with somene anymore, you use the United Nations. They do limited warfare. Such as bieng limited to air rades and such. Along with the UN should come the ability to declare war with out declaring war. But it should be limited to who you declare war on. Such as a person who is going to war with someone else you should be able to declare war on.

And it could be made so while doing this you cant take cities but yuo can attack them. This would be useful if you have an ally that is getting his ass kicked, and you dont want him to lose becuase he has valuable resources you need. So with out actually gioing to war and cuasing war weariness you could do an Act of UN, and you can do 1 of a 2 things. Limited to air rading. Or you can fight full on, but you dont have the ability to take cities.

Since this type of thing is not available in CivIII or any other Civ, I just make a unit that has a hidden nationality, and I go help out my allies when I dont want to go to war. In the new modern mod Im making there are a few units that Im giving this abilty. They look much like UN peace keepers. With blue helmets, and the mech has a blue sripe.

But I was wondering what people thought about this idea, or if it has been brought up before, becuase to me the UN is worthless since I dont like going for Diplomatic Victories. Doing that is too easy.

 

[Catt]

Interesting ideas about the UN. But this closing comment confused me:

Originally posted by FaIaChad
. . . . to me the UN is worthless since I dont like going for Diplomatic Victories. Doing that is too easy.

I often can win diplomatically, and I often build the UN but don't call a vote becuase I'm not certain of victory, and sometimes I know that I d*** well better build the UN otherwsie I've surely lost. Unless you employ one of the many exploits to ensure a UN victory, I wouldn't call a diplomatic victory "too easy."

 

[FaIaChad]

The way I play it becomes too easy. Plus I dont play on Diety, I play on one step below. Once the industrial age hits, I dont declare war on anyone unless they declare war on me. Thus making my relations good, and there is a good chance I will get the UN, since I am usually the most productive, and i can keep up with science.

 

[Catt]

I also mostly play on Emperor (sometimes Monarch, sometimes Deity). I can often build the UN, but sometimes I dare not call a vote. The game becomes much more challening if you play it assuming that an AI civ may be in a position to call a vote (because they built the UN) - no breaking trade or diplomatic deals, and limited razing (if that's an approach you take), but at the same time you need to be one of the leading civs to be included in the balloting, meaning you must "conquer with compasion." I tend to think of the UN as a powerful check on behavior - and a check that goes as far back as the early BC years.

 

[Sim_One]

Originally posted by FaIaChad
Along with the UN should come the ability to declare war with out declaring war.

I just think this statement is very funny.

As to the creation of UN Peacekeeper troops I am somewhat against that idea. Many people will not be using a hidden nationality unit for "humanitarian" purposes but for more sinster reasons.

 

[WHTKD]

Originally posted by FaIaChad
...I just make a unit that has a hidden nationality, and I go help out my allies when I dont want to go to war.

Wouldn't your allies attack your hidden nationality unit, too?

Unless of course you could protect that unit. I've never tried it but can you protect a pirate ship with a frigate or something? Can the two ships share the same square? (almost a tongue twister)

I gotta try this...

 

[Dran]

Originally posted by WHTKD


Wouldn't your allies attack your hidden nationality unit, too?

Unless of course you could protect that unit. I've never tried it but can you protect a pirate ship with a frigate or something? Can the two ships share the same square? (almost a tongue twister)

I gotta try this...

Check out the thread on 'Privateer Cheat'

 

[cgannon64]

Yes, I think the UN should limit the amount of large wars, as countries now-a-days solve many problems in the UN. There should be no diplo win, just the UN wonder which makes big wars less common and allows troops to go to war without goign to war (lol) like you said. The US does it all the time.

I don't know if I would like this though, because I love World Wars!

 

[WHTKD]

Originally posted by Dran


Check out the thread on 'Privateer Cheat'

Thanks.

Originally posted by FaIaChad


...I dont like going for Diplomatic Victories. Doing that is too easy.

I only use Domination and Conquest Victories. I always win with the other three. They're just too easy. Even in the game the UN sucks!!!

 

[nicuss]

Another useful thing for the UN would be to allow you to switch govts with 1-turn anarchies (0-turn for religious civ) and allow all govts even not discovered.

 

[Furry Spatula]

Just remember it isn't going to war without going to war. It is a military action .

 

[nicuss]

another idea: the UN allows you to build a "peacekeeping army" (or several). when built you can specify which civ to maintain peace against and every other civ will view it as friendly with ROP while the target will see it as barbarian and thus won't go to war with you. then you can load stuff in it like in a regular army.

and the icing on the cake could be that the unit is not alowed to enter the target civ teritory, thus you can maintain world peace by killing only thier agressive units that wander off.

how about that!

 

[Loaf Warden]

"Police action", I believe they officially called it in Korea and Vietnam. But ask anyone who was there. They were wars.

I confess I don't understand why you would no longer be able to capture cities. Maybe it has been a while since anyone in the real world has succeeded in conquering new territory--but that's only because when someone tries, they find themselves up against a coalition to stop them. If Hussein had won the Gulf War, it seems to me that Kuwait would now be under his control, U.N. or no U.N. The only reason it isn't is because a whole bunch of people rose up and fought against him. But if you're the only major world power in a Civ game, and you decide to conquer some territory, and everyone else in the game rises up to stop you, and you crush them like so many ants, why wouldn't you gain new territory? Especially if you are the one in control of the U.N.--it certainly won't stand in your way.

 

[Emerald Knight]

Yeh the UN in Civ 3 needs work besides a simple vote...

 

[Chieftess]

Originally posted by S1m0ne


I just think this statement is very funny.

As to the creation of UN Peacekeeper troops I am somewhat against that idea. Many people will not be using a hidden nationality unit for "humanitarian" purposes but for more sinster reasons.

You could always add invisibility/hidden nationality to your units.

 

[Hamlet]

The game doesn't adaquetely convey the shift towards collective security away from alliances that has happened since the turn of the 20th century. How that should be transfered into game terms, I'm not sure.

Civ 2 tried to do it to some degree via the Senate, but Civ 3 has seemingly just ignored it altogether.

 

[WillJ]

With your idea, FaIaChad, would the only point in "declaring war without decalring war" instead of just declaring war (by declaring war) after the UN is built be to avoid war weariness? And if you did take military action against a civ without declaring war, would that civ get furious with you like when you actually declare war? And would you be able to trade with them during non-war military action? And are you saying that after the UN is built you can't declare full-scale war at all, or just that you have the option to take military action via the UN?

 

[FaIaChad]

Yes my friendly nations do attack my units, only when they are not guarded. The good thing about Military Police, or Military Action is that war weariness would be less. Unless you started drafting units. But to have a UN, and have the ability to build peace keeping units, that are basically a country of there own would be awsome. What I mean by a country of its own is, the UN has the abiltiy to declare war on a nation for its agression to take nations. Thus making it a UN war, making it so war weariness is limited. And by using the UN, it would be cool to have all members of the UN, declare a trade embargo on the enemy nation. The UN would also need RoP from all nations.