Slavery

[Jimmyballz]

Voted "Yes, I use it whenever it benefits me strategically."

It benefits me most if warring, especially with limited avail. chopping. If not warring, I dont use it.

Almost always use it if spiritual tho.

EDIT:

 

[Lemon Merchant]

You make a very interesting statement here. Now I'm not "attacking" you so please don't take any offense.

None taken, you bring up a very valid point.

However, you stated that you don't like using the game mechanic of slavery because "By using the civic, I feel I am condoning it, and that makes me uncomfortable." But you then go on to say that war (and all the civilian deaths and atrocities and war-crimes that inevitably follow any war), "As far as going to war and wiping out civs, well, that's just part of the game and I don't feel bad about doing it at all."

I quess it's a bit of a paradox. I don't like war. Watching the news from Iraq and Afganistan makes me ill. I have never fired, nor will I ever, fire a gun. Man's inhumanity to man has been well documented throughout the ages and it boggles the mind to think of the cruel and vicious things that we have done to each other under the banner of a colorful rag.

War, genocide (wiping out a civilization), and slavery are all parts of the game's mechanics yet you have a distinct aversion to only one of them (slavery). It's a very interesting study into the morals of today's society and what is and isn't deemed acceptable.

My earlier post was simply a response to King_Ford's question about how people who dislike the slavery civic feel about the war aspect of the game. I felt it was a valid question and tried to give a reasonable answer about how I feel about it. I was trying to give a sense of what someone (like me) might think about using it, based on my 38 years of collected Irish-Catholic guilt. The game is what it is, and I love to play it. It's pure fantasy and (almost) everyone who plays has to check their "morality" at the door. It's the only way to have fun with it. So yeah, i don't like war either, but I still play and I still have fun. You're right, though, it is an interesting study, but as Civsassin pointed out:

This is all a bit silly... It's a game folks; play and enjoy. Try not to add morality to it

I agree.

 

[King_Ford]

The game is what it is, and I love to play it. It's pure fantasy and (almost) everyone who plays has to check their "morality" at the door. It's the only way to have fun with it. So yeah, i don't like war either, but I still play and I still have fun.

I just think that it is a great game because if you have moral objections to certain civics and war, the game gives you options and different routes that can be used to steer clear of having to go against your "morality."

I for one like to play games because I can set aside my "morality" in a pure fantasy realm and let the bad boy shine!

 

[Astax]

Playing one game on a really bad map, some donut variant with next to no hills anywhere but ton of food. I made 3 cities with 2 food sources each, got grainary, barracks, monument, and lighthouse in the 2 on the coast. Reach Monarchy (Team game some pretty easy) and slaved Jaguars nonstop. Outcome was 4 units per 5 turns in every one of the cities. Sadly being team game with sudden death we lost after both sides lost 2 people, and the one I went to kill survived with a 0.2 axe :/ Oh well, still I calculated my production between 3 cities to equal to about 57 hammers a turn, not bad. Only problem with this strat is ur GNP is in the gutter, and when you finally send out your huge army, you tend to go on strike :O so make it quick

 

[Whiskey_Lord]

I don't know what I'd do without Slavery. Warmongering would be nearly impossible and violent conquest is the only reason I play this game. Besides, the civilization I choose in each game has a right to subjugate all others because I'm leading them.

 

[BarmyArmy]

I feel I don't use slavery enough. I end up only using it once or twice a game in order to protect a city which is under imminent attack. I don't like losing the population and then having to get it back as it seems to me to take too long to regrow. Also if you are only sacrificing 1 or 2 popualtion then its the same as waiting up to about 5 turns which I am usually happy to do.

 

[Joesocwork]

Actually I enjoyed reading the conversation, both in terms of game mechanics and the philosophical aspects of it.

In terms of mechanics, I'm finding it useful when feel I have to play catch up w/ aggressive civ's or want to make a quest deadline. Sometime the red frowns will go down with the population and I weigh the length of them against beakers, bread, and coins created, depending on what I am rushing. I will sometimes keep it until I reach the Universal Suffrage where I can use gold instead of population to rush production. But the side effects of annoying random events and the score going down tempers my use of it.

Even though "it's just a game" and obviously I do use it in game play, I'm glad to see the discussion. Candidly there are certain Role Playing Games, First Person Shooters, and Action genre games that I love but I personally think are too violent or gory to play in front of my children and I wait until they are in bed to play them. And there are certain games that I think are too graphic or in poor taste for me personally to play at all. I otherwise don't consider it my business what anybody else does privately for entertainment as long as they don't push it in front of my family.

In terms of Civilization, I think it's probably easy for me to see this civic as just another aspect of game because of how it's protrayed. My gut tells me that if it was shown more graphically in gameplay or displayed as a RL ideal then I probably be much more offended. I respect that various aspects of Civilization are part of representing society in differing stages, phases, and cultural modes, as each matures, just like in RL. And even though Civilization represents the ideal of growth, a lot of it is and will remain personal and cultural bias. There are some of the higher end civics that I think could reflect biases from the game makers if they believe that is the height of civilization. But I'm still cool with that whether or not I would personally want to see them as the end result in a RL civilization I live in. Somehow I would hope that in 2008+, regardless of national identity, that mankind would morally outgrow the need or belief in slavery. I think the game, at least so far, is tastefully protraying it as a historical fact with terrible consequences without making one feel like they are endorsing it if they decide to use it in gameplay.

 

[Rusty Edge]

On the bright side wars have evolved in regards to how enemies are treated.

Extermination/enslavement/ emprisoned/ assimilated/ and in recent times we tend to try to eventually restore nations and refugees as an independent entity.

 

[Mowque]

I never use it, because of moral issues. I could just never bring myself to do it! I feel bad about killing my citizens, they trust me to run the country......crazy? maybe.
BTW, slavery became outdated because it is ineffiecent not because of morals

 

[Joesocwork]

^Sometimes self-interest is ironically the best motivation towards altruism of all!

 

[Mowque]

Yep, just like when being 'green' becomes a profitable thing, it will take off.

 

[CivEikka]

There should be one more option: "Yes, i use the whip in every situation."
My games usually ends in 300-500AC, becouse of the whip. Whipping armies is the key to early victories.

 

[Jerrymander]

AC? Is that like some kind of new era? :0

I use it all the time.

 

[Bostock]

Wrong thread.

 

[CivEikka]

AC? Is that like some kind of new era? :0

I use it all the time.

After Christ. I don't play the english version of the game. AD is the correct term. (i suppose)

 

[Jerrymander]

After Christ. I don't play the english version of the game. AD is the correct term. (i suppose)

Yeah, AD is the English version. Anno Domini.

 

[Wodan]

Yeah, AD is the English version. Anno Domini.

Which is very English-like, except not so much.

 

[Joesocwork]

Anno Domini? Now why am I suddenly hungry for pizza?

 

[bennos76]

I often pull out the whip once a city has reached it's maximum size without going into unhappiness or unhealthiness. I try not to whip again until the penalty has been removed. I hate having to turn on the avoid growth option, it feels like a waste to not be using those food tiles, so bringing out the whip ensures that my cities are nearly always growing.

So, if slavery is objectionable on a moral note, why not try the aztecs and their sacraficial altar instead? hehe.

(remember that many an aztec volunteered for the altar, not just the slaves).

 

[Wolfshanze]

So why can you have long philosophical discussions about slavery, but the minute anybody asks about Hitler in Civ4 the thread gets closed? (oops, I said a forbidden word!).