MOST prople? It starts as soon as you add one Slave to your 100 Pop megacity... What would you otherwise do? Imagine you didn't capture this slave. Your
would be the sum of your populations creativity. Then you have your slave and force him to work in a Stone Quarry. Why would you get LESS
then? It just doesn't make any sense. Even if 1000 Slaves work in your Quarry, they don't sabotage your nations artists. The only thing that could considered as "loss" in
is that you don't allow your slaves to freely express themself. But that is, as I stated, not an acutal loss but just a not-gain.
This is probably the argument that holds the most merit to me that tells me to concede. If you're continuing to debate purely to 'pick my brain' and see why I only partially agree however, it's because I feel that every person is interconnected. If you enslave one you will all share in a part of that experience. Your culture dims if you enslave due to the basic repulsive nature of it. I could probably go on and on with weak side-arguments here but again, I'm going to not so much say I outright agree that the cost should be gold as to say I no longer feel like resisting that movement because I can see how irrational it can appear to players to have slaves costing a base commerce (and how counterintuitive a situation it can setup.)
Why not? If you capture a Warlord or even a General, they can join your forces and LEAD them. Even against their motherland. Why don't they have a negative
? Why hasn't ANY unit a negative
? They all are fighting rather then contribute to your nations total culture... And as a General who leads your troops, he has way more power/knowledge that he can sell to your enemies, and he doesn't have any penalty for
...
When I said "no argument here" I was saying 'I
agree with you' not 'your point makes no sense'!
Correct.
It might be a simple move.
Another thing I can do that would be much easier in the meantime would be to move outcome displays to an isolation that excludes the !bOneLine check - but it's going to REALLY highlight ALL outcome abilities on units - to a fault I think. For now, it's the simple way to go. That buys me a bit of time to try to learn some things about your programming structures that I don't currently understand enough to build a text string from your generic programming.
See... the big difference when putting it into the combat context is that it should be displaying YOUR unit's outcome possibilities against THAT unit rather than THAT unit is displaying the outcome possibilities against itself from whatever unit happens to be selected. Vice versa should show too... its outcome possibilities towards you should be shown also. So that's an honest rewrite from go on the outcome text call and the way you go about those are so fragmented and utilizing methods I struggle to follow.
For example: mergedList.addOutcomeList begins the process of building the display. Then I go there to add OutcomeList and find that the variables that determine the amount of outcomes are generated in some other function and on and on like this and I get lost in the maze of function calls until I've traced my way through it 10-20 times. Then if I look at it again the next day I'm starting all over at the maze doorway. It intimidates me to even ATTEMPT to work with it.
I suppose if I were a patient programmer who charts out the flow charts of all the processing I work with it might make the structure easier to work with... I recall a friend of mine in his first year of programming schooling being taught to do this.
Sorry man... I gotta break down some of these statements and embrace the joy of argument for a minute - I'm not really doing so with an agenda anyhow since I think I'm fairly convinced of the ultimate point of the argument from your side anyhow but...
No nation has ever had more slaves than free men.
Looks like historically all manner of population percentages have existed... 30% being common but also as high as 90%.
This document was one interesting one outside of the Wikipedia page on slavery. It mentions many historical civilizations and give some average population percentages that were enslaved.
Culture loss due to the majority not being able to express themselves should be represented in the civic choices already.
Slavery is no longer a civic and the greater the population enslaved, the more the drain.
Slaves are always a positive thing for the owners (the nation's rich members)
In and of itself debatable. People tend to spoil and become selfish, lazy, sucked into power mongering and self-gratification when they have such power over others. It's to say that the pursuits of slave owners tend to move away from the benefit of the community and purely into the benefit of self (which often still benefits the community as it often drives commerce - but not in any way that compares to an actively competing company.) Am I REALLY suggesting its a bad thing for the individual whom has obtained wealth and power over others, particularly when earned by birthright rather than merit? Yes. Most assuredly. The cost is just harder to realize it's being paid. Struggle is where most innovation is born. The privileged stagnate.
the slaves would usually not be a part of the nation if free (captured in other lands)
I don't recall that there was a mass migration to Africa that should've then ensued after the Emancipation Proclamation... Honestly though it really would depend on how long the generations of that family have been enslaved.
Note to DH: this would mean that after a while we should allow the data on what unit a military slave was before being captured to be 'forgotten'.
the only real negative i see is that they should increase revolution status or cost some money to keep alive, and content (content meaning you have to pay for guards to watch, punish and guide the slaves).
Being as this is the easiest effect to understand for most players observing and interacting with the game I can agree that this may be the best way to encapsulate the cost of a slave.
rather then 
?
