UN stuff (AGAIN)

[Nate128]

If they could figure out a way to get the UN in earlier, shouldnt the UN be able sto stop starvation in willing cities. I meen there arent many starving cities left on Earth that the Un or sum other foundation doesnt try to help.

 

[Hygro]

the whole issue of genocide, starvation, nuclear weapons, and the united nations should defintely be worked on!

 

[El Loco]

yeah, altough it would make the game very complex, perhaps too complex

 

[Elgalad]

The UN (in real life) is usually the last group to step in. Most of the time, religious and other charitable organizations start sending aid on their own. This has been changing in recent years though.. but even in cases where massive aid has been sent, a lot of it often ends up getting diverted by warlords or organized crime into the black market. It would be nice though to see starvation actually cause unrest or even rebellion instead of population just dying. That would seem more logical, wouldn't it? And to reflect the 'charity' thing, maybe randomly, some of your cities (or even another nation's) might start sending food units one at a time on their own without prompting. This might even have a small chance of happening during wartime. Compassion knows no boundaries.

-Elgalad

 

[Colonel]

If they could figure out a way to get the UN in earlier, shouldnt the UN be able sto stop starvation in willing cities. I meen there arent many starving cities left on Earth that the Un or sum other foundation doesnt try to help.

BACK ON TOPIC, I have a way to get the UN in early, League of Nations, it was the predessor to the UN. This of course would require to UN type buildings maybe split the UN abilities in half if someone builds the LoN gets the first half and the person who builds the UN gets the all the ability

 

[Elgalad]

This sounds good, say beginning of the Industrial Age (for reference comparison to Civ 3) ? Maybe there could even be an infantile one in the middle ages sort of like the Hamburg and Luebeck Treaty or the Treaty of Tordesillas. It would be a lot weaker of course than even the League of Nations.

-Elgalad

 

[Civanator]

IIRC the LoN had almost no power over the world in comparison to the UN

 

[Yuri2356]

But the UN only has power if you listen to what they say.
*cough*IRAQ*cough*

 

[Yom]

The LoN was a failure. Look at Italy's invasion of Ethiopia and WWII. There's absolutely no reason to include it. The Diplo victory isn't meant to be an early or quick win. In fact, it's pretty useless as a victory as it is right now. It's too easy to influence the votes.

 

[Elgalad]

Is that what this is all about, Diplomatic Victory?? Gah!!

Always turn that off.

This is my kind of diplomacy..



90,000 tons of Diplomacy!

-Elgalad

 

[BasketCase]

The big problem with the in-game UN (problems with the United Nations OUTSIDE the game are another matter entirely) is that while it's built by ONE player, it really isn't meant to benefit that one player. The UN is supposed to be a benefit to everybody.

I have no problem with only one UN-style wonder. Past organizations such as the LoN, and others before that, are still based on the same basic concept, and a single in-game building can be used to represent them all.

The UN wonder needs to be remodeled so that it gives a worldwide-benefit impression, while still giving one player a reason to build it. Either that, or change the UN into something outside the scope of wonders, such as the Orion Senate in the Master of Orion games, which is created automatically once a certain percentage of all the planets on the starmap have been colonized.

A few possibilities....

1: The player building the UN receives extra happy points for being the world's center of diplomacy.

2: The UN gives extra happy points to EVERYBODY.

3: The UN raises war weariness for everybody (i.e. worth building if the player wishes to AVOID war and gain a Space Race victory or culture win, and minimize interference from the AI's)

4: The player who builds the UN automatically gets a seat on the Security Council; anyone who wishes to join the SC can then do so. If anyone in the SC is attacked, all other members of the SC are REQUIRED to declare war against the aggressor; civs outside the SC are not protected by this process or required to declare war. Therefore joining the SC has pluses AND minuses.

For extra realism, members of the SC could be required to pay some gold per turn, and "donate" military units every now and then.....

 

[Elgalad]

A universal wonder could work. Considering what the UN does (and fails to do) now, it's hard to really envision its usefulness. The Security Council idea is good, there's some similarities to a notion I came up with for dealing with a Cold War/Nato/Warsaw Pact. But I suspect that even if the UN had never existed, the Security Council would still have been formed. The world's great powers were so sick of war after Hitler I think they would have signed anything if it meant preventing number III. Particularly a Nuclear number III.

Coming full circle again though, I realize that just because the UN doesn't seem to do much in (our) real world does not mean that it couldn't be a powerful organization in the game. Give it some teeth, get rid of that silly diplomatic popularity contest victory condition and it might be fun.

-Elgalad

 

[BasketCase]

HEY, here's an idea! When the UN is built, UN leadership ROTATES among the civs in the game (isn't that how the real UN is run?). Whoever controls the UN gets to boss other civs around: impose trade embargoes, hold votes on declarations of war (say, the UN leader is allowed to make one embargo or war resolution every five turns or so), use the UN peacekeeping force as if they were their own troops, etc.

This would make for some ways to really mess with the end-game diplomacy!

 

[Elgalad]

Bingo, you nailed it.

And good point too, it (leadership) would rotate, because the Security Council doesn't have the monopoly on the UN chief's office. They'd still get a veto though, have to work that in there somehow. Maybe give them the right to say 'No!" but then lose relations with all other members who didn't also say no?

-Elgalad

 

[MeatWad]

Think about being on the other side of any AI UN sanctions, or military actions. If you thought the AI was a gangbanger before, wait'll you do something to spark conflict. Not only will you get a thrashing, but you'll be the "bad" guys too . But if you like the idea of being "bad", what could be more fun than wiping out "peacekeeping" forces? Mwuu-hahahahahahhah!!
What about this concept - after the UN is formed, charter Civs contribute Units to a neutral pool that can be used by whomever (human or AI) has control of the UN. The number and relative strengths of the units given could be a factor in determining who gets UN control, but not forever. It really should be a fluid position.

 

[Jake5555555]

The UN should be modeled after the planetary council in SMAC

 

[Yuri2356]

You mean how you could buy everyones votes?

 

[jkp1187]

The UN should be modeled after the planetary council in SMAC

Yes, once again SMAC has something that could make Civ 4 a little more interesting. The Planetary Council, where you could hold votes on things like a global free trade pact, or take collective action against environmental threats. We could come up with a whole list of things that might be voted on.

Problem is that none of this would come up until the UN was built. Even if we go to a UN-precursor (such as the EUropean Congress system starting with the 1815 Congress of Vienna...perhaps this could be tied to Nationalism?) this still leaves you without a UN for 1/2 the game....

 

[Stid]

i don't believe the UN should be a winning condition as pointed out above everybodies supposed to benefit. does america get any special brownie points for having the building in new york? no course not. it should basically act as a massive mutural protection system where the members vote on accepting new members. obviously they could leave at anytime and countries can vote on kicking others out for going to war for no reason such as germany invading france cos they want to own disney land.

 

[jkp1187]

i don't believe the UN should be a winning condition as pointed out above everybodies supposed to benefit. does america get any special brownie points for having the building in new york? no course not. it should basically act as a massive mutural protection system where the members vote on accepting new members. obviously they could leave at anytime and countries can vote on kicking others out for going to war for no reason such as germany invading france cos they want to own disney land.

Well, the point is to have a diplomatic victory option for the players -- sort of a last resort reward for "being nice" the whole game, when military victories are out of the question, culture is a joke, the space race is being lost, and the histograph is just too far away. Any of these game models will break down if you try to introduce too much "model" and not enough "game". If you want the UN to be real, perhaps it should increase corruption in the civilization that builds it, while reducing culture, or something like that.