Thoughts on the "United Nations" Wonder?

[MrBullterrier]

Hallo, everybody. If you have played the Civilization Series, chances are you already have used the U.N. to achieve a Diplomatic V. and are familiar with the way this Wonder works. However, have you ever considered the idea, that it is not nearly what it could be? Didn't the Resolution-choices seem kind of... Well, limited and dare I say forced ? What I mean by that is you can only implement certain civics,which may not really represent what your civilization, or you yourself support and in a game, where the end goal IS dominance over the globe(in one way or another), shouldn't there be a greater variety of choice? Wouldn't you like to see a world, where the dominant political movement is determined by yourself and not simply a reflection of the assumably current zeitgeist? Well, why not talk about it and share what you'd like to see in Civ5, should they keep this Wonder.

 

[Zhahz]

I always disabled diplomatic victory since the UN was too annoying.

 

[CTH]

I agree that the UN could be used for more, but the voting for resolutions is a democratic process, wouldnt it be strange if you could vote to implement slavery?

 

[MrBullterrier]

I agree that the UN could be used for more, but the voting for resolutions is a democratic process, wouldnt it be strange if you could vote to implement slavery?

I don't think so... While the U.N. does use a democratic porcess of making decisions, that does not necessarily mean it must defend democratic ideals. The main question I am posing is, that if a world goes through varoius different experiences than our own, then the perception of what is a functioning system and what is virtueous should also be different. Besides, the democratic voting process is flawed in the way, that it does not often defend the interests of what may be right democratically, but the interests of a ruling majority. Following that logic, why shouldn't it be possible to implement a potentially backward (in our view) civic if that's what most of the world wants? Or if you're powerfull enough on your own, simply use this flaw to bend the world's societies to match your own? History proves that Might usually ends up as Right.

 

[helpless_writer]

I think it should be based on majority ideals. It's understandable that the UN is made for peace amongst nations as a whole but let's be real its about major powers getting what they want and slowing down anyone who wants to get there too.

On the topic of Civ's UN, I think anything should be on the table. Changing civics, trade and all of it should be based on who has majority. For at the moment the only difference between the Apolistic Palace Palace and the UN is religion and # of members.

I think you should be able to defy a resolution and then be penalized for it. More so b trade than war, war if anything should only be used in cases where say you were going for a conquest victory type thing. Then I can see the UN trying to take you down since you are a threat to humanity.

Also, say if you are in the position where you own a lot of land but aren't a super power, maybe they can try to take tiles away and create new civs or even out other lesser civs.

I mean the ideas are endless and only limited by what they allow modders to do.

 

[MrBullterrier]

Modders will definetly be allowed their fun with the game, however the question is what would you like to see in the original version. There is already talk about a more complex diplomacy system, although the exrtreme diplomacy mode they have planned kinda puts me off.
Maybe another, more U.N. type of action will be to settle territorry and trade disputes between different members. I can definetly see how a majority can influence a powerfull member to extend humanitarian aid in the forms of resources, money, technology etc. . Should you decide not to play along with a U.N. decision, you may recieve sanctions in the forms of temporary trade blocks and/or a certain number of with other members.
That the possibilites of the U.N. were sadly downplayed in previous games is beyond question, so what ideas do you have that you'd like implemented?

 

[helpless_writer]

1. Imposing Demerits: I'm sick of war being the main punishment. If anything it should be strapping trade, restricting routes and maybe even dispelling you from the UN

2. Have the AI actually look down on war and actually try to create peace rather than just watch
2a. When there are disputes they actually use war as a last option. If its a land thing, then they try to appease you by allowing you to host a major global event, use money or even coerce you into a appeasement with some of the demerits listed.

3. Create Diplomats, these figures act similar how spies do but they are given names. They gain experience when ever issues end in your favor and can spawn Nobel Prize Winners (which can be modern age's great persons). However, these diplomats are as good as the education you provide your people.

Putting education farther up on what makes a cIV was also lacking. If anything it deserves its own list beside religion (or perhaps replacing it). Something like, Fables (citizens are taught through old stories - culture +), Public Education, Privatized Education and yada yada

 

[Shurdus]

Welcome to civfanatics, MrBullterrier!

 

[poom3619]

Umm. I don't sure. The Real U.N. probably work for humanitarian right. But in parrarel world could be United Dictator, Right? U.N. in any ciV game could spin off from main purpose of real U.N. The thing often have a part of creator, or whatever they say. I mean. If Aztec build U.N. when they are warring with Spain (no offense). They should be able to organize so-called "peacekeeping" mission against Spain. So it would be more realistic if this is use in ciV.

 

[Auncien]

I love the UN wonder, the power it gives the player and the depth it adds to the late-game world. I wish you could build and utilize the UN wonder without checking 'diplomatic victory' at the start of the game.

 

[helpless_writer]

I love the UN wonder, the power it gives the player and the depth it adds to the late-game world. I wish you could build and utilize the UN wonder without checking 'diplomatic victory' at the start of the game.

In a custom game I think you can turn off Diplomatic Victory and still use the UN

 

[GlobularFoody]

I'm with the other guys, get rid of diplomatic victory but keep the wonder. The UN should behave like another civ but what it does is determined by the voting like in civ 4. It could call a vote to stop a war then deploy troops to try to stop an invading civ, if peaceful negotiations failed.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

The UN is a useless pain-in-the-arse wonder...just like in real life.

Hence, I almost always disable the diplomatic victory.

Edit: Also, disabling the diplomatic victory removes the Apostolic Palace and UN from the game.

 

[attackfighter]

I've always disabled the UN in civ games, however I've used it in Alpha Centauri and I liked how it was implemented there.