POW's

[rcoutme]

There should be a limited chance that units that are getting beaten to a pulp surrender. This could cause them to become POW units with limited worker capabilities for the capturing nation. The new POW unit would not be able to create colonies or join cities, but could perform other worker tasks, albeit and reduced efficiency. The quantity of POW's lost by a nation could directly affect war weariness. Since both sides could have unhappiness due to lost POW's, exchanges could be made, even while at war.

If a POW unit was recaptured, the rescuing player would still be forced to find a way to transport it back to his host nation for it to be disbanded (and thus not cause unhappiness).

Finally, the POW unit would have a limited lifespan (unlike other units). Since there are no fresh bodies taking the place of POW's, after a certain amount of time, the POW's would die of old age and disease (this could even be shortened if the poor bastards are used to clear jungle, etc.) When a POW unit died, the nation the troops originally came from would then have a set amount of turns for further unhappiness. This could also be done if the POW units were murdered. However, purposely killing the POW's would have a BIG relationship hit throughout the world.

 

[Suki]

capturing workers should go by the same mechanic, give tem a defensive stat but just have the game set to give a chance at capturing a pow unit if they have a very very good chance of winning.

 

[Mewtarthio]

Well, everything seems good except for one clause:

Originally posted by rcoutme
If a POW unit was recaptured, the rescuing player would still be forced to find a way to transport it back to his host nation for it to be disbanded (and thus not cause unhappiness).

Wouldn't it then be possible to just recapture the POWs after exacting your tribute?

 

[rcoutme]

Sorry Mew, what I meant, and perhaps did not convey was the following: Suppose that Civ A captures 3 Civ B units (thus creating 3 POW's). While the poor bastards are hard at work clearing a jungle, Civ B launches a counterattack and frees his lost units. Civ B would still be forced to move the recaptured POW's back to his own territory (before Civ A takes them again) before they could be disbanded.

In the case of armistice or peace, POW units would be instantly disbanded (no moving of units would be necessary). In addition, the unhappiness factor could be similar to the current war weariness where a lost unit counts as 2 unhappiness points. The POW could count as only one unhappiness point until dead or liberated.

 

[Obi-Zahn Kenobi]

I think that the POWs should return to being the units they were before they were captured. Damaged, possibly. There should also be the small possibility that they will "escape" so to speak and return to the control of their originator.

 

[rcoutme]

Obi, I have to disagree with the POW's becoming the former units. Very few POW's rescued during WWII became fighters again. Granted, many of them were rescued near the end of the war, but the Phillipinos and Americans rescued on the Phillipines were in no condition to fight--for that matter, neither were the Russian and allied POW's rescued from Germany.

In addition, the POW's would be lacking all of the basic items, i.e. weapons, command and control, supply etc. Finally, when they are taken prisoner, obviously not all of them survived the fight. Granted that this could be addressed by giving hp reduction, but I still think that this would add unnecessary complication to the entire POW idea.