Whipping, Backstabbing, and Jails

[LucyDuke]

I was chuckling to myself reading the most recent thread about the ethics of whipping. People have such an overwhelming aversion to slavery that they won't use a powerful tool in an abstract game because it's called slavery. No reasonable person can support slavery in reality, but this is Civ, not reality. In the game, it's simplified into a food-to-hammers exchange, with the temporary storage of that food in the form of population. I have no qualms about transforming one type of production into another, whatever you call it.

Then somebody asked if it was unethical to attack an ally. The ethics are irrelevant, the point is to win the game. That's artificial intelligece, not your friend.

Then I realized that in the year-odd since I started to play Civ4, I have never built a single jail, nor run Police State for a single turn. I've suffered awful war weariness, but I have never even considered building a jail an option. If the jail were removed from the game, I don't think I would notice. My problem is that the function of the jail in the game is decreasing war weariness - that's it. How on earth could a jail decrease war weariness? The only mechanism I can think of is imprisoning the dissidents. As a dissident myself, I can't play with that, even in the abstract. Police state is obviously the same thing in a different format, though the additional military unit production seems more like an arbitrary bonus to the civic (though appropriate to its function) than a realistic side effect of a police state.

To the bleeding-hearts, I apologize for my quick judgement. I didn't realize it at the time, but I'm one of you.

Out of that longwinded can't-shut-up, there were two things I wanted to bring up, rather than driving either thread too far off-topic. One's a dumb newbie question, the other is looking for more opinions on this in-game morality thing.

- How bad does war weariness get? Is there a cap? How do you deal with it?

- Do factors outside of the game affect your gameplay? I suspect there are people that beeline to Theology because they're seriously into Jesus, or that exclusively run Pacifism because of ideology. Do you avoid slavery, or never build jails? Never DoW Gandhi? Do you think that's compatible with playing an optimal game?

 

[Cristoval]

I'm one of those people who goes all the way to theology to found Christianity, Because I'm a Catholic, Christian. The religion always spreads all around the world automatically without me training missionaries and sending them out to spread the religion. I get atleast four civs to convert to my religion, and that gives me allies I can trade with anytime.

 

[DigitalBoy]

There aren't any game features that I avoid or prefer due to my personal convictions. There was a time when I never used Slavery, but that was because I didn't understand how hammers at the expense of city growth could be useful.

I have an atheistic friend who played CivIV once (on my comp, he didn't own it) and realized half-way through his game (industrial era) that he hadn't researched some really basic religious techs. I don't think he even had monotheism. I had my suspicions, but I'd be lying if I made any assumptions about it.

I don't know the exact mechanics of war weariness, but I do know that it can get ridiculously high, producing 7 or more unhappy faces. The way I like to deal with it is to use the culture slider, especially in conjunction with the theatre, 2 happy faces per 10% culture. Toss in a colosseum and you can run 20% culture for 5 happy faces. I suppose you could also spam military units with Hereditary Rule, but if I'm making units I like to send them to the front lines instead.

 

[Mowque]

never used whipping. I never could bring myself to do it. i always treat my cites well. don't really know why. i try to be a good king.

 

[DrewTate]

i too usually skip the other quick religions and go for theology being a Catholic Christian.

 

[Duraska]

When I play, I like to build up my empire with Universal Suffrage, Free Speech, Emancipation, Free Market and Free Religion. I like to aquire lots of luxory resources - plenty of gold and jewels to make my people super happy. I like to see them celebrate with fireworks because of their insane happiness.


And then... when that starts to happen frequently, I switch to:

Police State, Barbarism, Slavery, State Property, and Theology. Then I trade away all my happy resources, and send goon squads around razing towns while I force everyone to worship the least popular religion they know, and force their women and children into slavery so that giant, gaudy monuments to me stretch across the land.

I like to zoom in real close to my cities and turn up my speakers -- I keep hoping I'll hear them moaning and weeping about how great their lives were at one point, and how terrible things are now.

HAHAHAHA! That will show them!!

 

[Morgrad]

I don't have a problem with any of it, for two main reasons. One, it all just boils down to a game mechanic. Two, it's all appropriate for a civilization to do, looking at things from a historical *or modern* point.

It all boils down to controlling a population, and if history has taught us anything, it's that those in power will do *anything* to control the populace. This is no less true in the modern world than it has been since the first human met the second.

Jail the dissidents: Call it what you want, but stopping those who speak against the government's actions is a normal state of being. Stick dissidents in jail, censor the media, assassinate/murder those who disagree with you (or cause trouble). Jails (as they function in Civ IV) could also be Propoganda networks, or even idiotic entertainment distractions - does it disgust anyone else that Anna Nicole Smith's corpse has gotten more media coverage (including more front-page and leading-story placement) than the war in Iraq, recently?

Enslave the population: this could be actual slavery to build something (like the Pyramids or the American cotton industry), pathetic working conditions for mass-production where the people don't matter (China, anyone?), or second-class non-citizens who aren't on the books (America's produce market comes to mind).

Control the church: the espionage aspect of this in game-terms is brilliant because it's true. I also love the fact that religion inexplicably makes people more content and is primarily used as a source of income - just like real life!

Stab your neighbor/attack the pacifist: one thing mankind is really, really consistent about is our overwhelming compulsion to kill other people so we can steal thier stuff. This happens on a global level (wars between nations), a regional level (civil wars), a local level (political influence and/or violence between municipalities to control *something*), and even a personal level (on the streets of cities and the homes of citizens every day).

Is any of it particularly uplifting? No. But all of it is appropriate.

 

[King Flevance]

Bah, just because a "good king" isn't the norm for humanity doesn't mean we have to opress imaginary people in an imaginary world so that it will be realistic. Realisticaly, a good king could exist. Just like in the game one can. I just view the game mechanics differently. Here is how I view them when I play:

Slavery - work for the state without pay for a short period of time. Some people don't like this, they move out. However, it is something for the best interest to our civilization. Like if here in KC they said every citizen MUST help build a new hospital. There is not enough money to pay you all so it must be done for free. If you don't co-operate, you may leave the city without question. All remaining citizens must help on this community project though.

Religion - Whatever one I get is Christianity.

Jails - I have seen people say (even armed forces members) that if they saw someone burning a flag they would beat the crap out of them. I need jails for people like this not the people excercising their rights to protest. When people protest - usually it is the people that don't understand the protest that start the violence. Which also tends to be the 'oppressive force' that the protestors are protesting. I build jails to make sure my people have the right to protest, peacefully.

 

[KMadCandy]

- How bad does war weariness get? Is there a cap? How do you deal with it?

i know one surefire way to deal with WW. if you've never tried it you should, at least once. it is very different from a "normal" game (yes, i know that you, knowing me, will be shocked at hearing that word from me, but bear with me here)...

try a one-city-challenge. build globe theatre in your one city. you will never see an unhappy face ever again that entire game.

it's really interesting. you'll learn a lot if you've never tried it. OCC is kind of my new addiction. and they're quick, even if you micro-manage your entire empire every single turn, it's one city, it doesn't take long *giggle*. i highly recommend it, at least one time.

 

[Mercenary82]

Depends on the civ I'm playing, when playing Civs like the Mongols I run slavery as long as possible, demand tribute, raze holy cities, backstab, and warmonger a lot. War weariness becomes a problem when playing like this since I'm almost always at war in the later era's, so switching to police state and whipping Jails everywhere becomes necessary

 

[Strato]

When I played a conquest game on monarch, (small map, first time trying) I was in effect really unorganised with the sacking of cities. As such, wars that should have lasted a few turns got dragged out, and my commerce was crippled, in part because of the number of units churned out, and mainly because I had people not working. I'm not sure if there is an absolute cap, but once I started getting 2 or 3 guys revolting (including the fact I "spared the rod, used the whip") my only source of income (teching at 0&#37 was sacking cities, and awfully glad that I had a great merchant pop when he did.

I suppose in late games, the best way to deal with WW is to raise the culture slider. The other option of course is to make the war short. If you are the aggressor, then be prepared. I personally have never built a jail, not because of ethics, but simply because I never think to. The same applies to castles, and often times walls.

I really never worry too much about the ethics of what I do, ie: use slavery police state etc. It is a game, so the ends justify the means. In real world of course, I never would support either.

 

[Bushface]

Never tried OCC (and won't - just not my style) but how can you build the Globe Theatre without having the necessary number of ordinary Theatres? Is this requirement removed when playing a OCC ? What about Oxford and cathedrals, etc.?

 

[KMadCandy]

Never tried OCC (and won't - just not my style) but how can you build the Globe Theatre without having the necessary number of ordinary Theatres? Is this requirement removed when playing a OCC ? What about Oxford and cathedrals, etc.?

yes. if you check the OCC box, you can build globe after building a theatre there, no need for 6 since of course you can't have 6 cities. same with oxford, and there's no limit to the number of national wonders you can have there. you can't build any cathedrals tho, they didn't remove the number of temples limit. if i'm warring, that's not an issue. last week tho i was trying for a deity diplomatic OCC win, staying at peace the whole time, and the cathedral thing was a huge issue! they were trying to crowd me on all sides and ended up actually taking away squares in my fat cross after they built apollo, the meanies! i would have loved to be able to build cathedrals to help out with culture /sigh.

but seriously, globe theatre solving all unhappiness issues in your entire empire is just really and truly bizarre. and can be addicting!

 

[Ankh-f-n-Khonsu]

Just last week I switched to Police State and built a few jails for the first time. The revolution succeeded in getting me through a war, but I felt dirty nonetheless.

I confess to preferring Judaism, but that's less to do with the culture into which I was born, and more about wanting to be able to say that I have a city which does nothing but spam Jews.

Slavery took me a while to get into. It just seemed mean. It still seems mean. I don't care, though, it's clearly an effective tool.

Which leads me to your concluding question: If you mean by "optimal game" a game which mechanics are thoroughly wrung in order to achieve the greatest possible score (or earliest launch, or quickest conquest, or what have you), then there is no doubt at all that the allowance of one's personal ethic to interfere with gameplay decisions is sub-optimal.

You're right, it's a game. But it's not Hi-Ho Cherry-O or Pictionary, eh? You note, "As a dissident myself, I can't play with that, even in the abstract." This game -- this simulation -- requires copious attention and concentration, often largish time committments, a quickening of imagination, and an unfurling of deep cognitive analysis. You can't provide all of that without providing a great deal of yourself to the game, so even "in the abstract" some choices are difficult to make.

One might even question whether the decisions made in a simulation under these conditions will modify you in the same or similar ways to decisions made in the physical world.

 

[El Koeno]

When I play, I like to build up my empire with Universal Suffrage, Free Speech, Emancipation, Free Market and Free Religion. I like to aquire lots of luxory resources - plenty of gold and jewels to make my people super happy. I like to see them celebrate with fireworks because of their insane happiness.


And then... when that starts to happen frequently, I switch to:

Police State, Barbarism, Slavery, State Property, and Theology. Then I trade away all my happy resources, and send goon squads around razing towns while I force everyone to worship the least popular religion they know, and force their women and children into slavery so that giant, gaudy monuments to me stretch across the land.

I like to zoom in real close to my cities and turn up my speakers -- I keep hoping I'll hear them moaning and weeping about how great their lives were at one point, and how terrible things are now.

HAHAHAHA! That will show them!!

And the Oscar for being an insane evil maniac (albeit in a somewhat geeky way) goes to....

 

[SwordofStriker]

I can't say I avoid any particular civics or techs based on my own personal preferences/beliefs.

I have my preferred civics of course, just like everyone else does, but I'm quick to change them around as necessary.

As far as WW goes, I try to build jails when they come available because I am usually either currently in a war, or gearing up for one. Since my wars generally don't last very long, I have never had a serious problem with WW.

 

[feldmarshall]

- How bad does war weariness get? Is there a cap? How do you deal with it?

War weariness mechanics

 

[Rancid Sushi]

Slavery-I'm a practical leader who acts on an efficiency vs. inefficiency basis. Morality does not concern me, only what is best for my civ. I've been leaning more towards SEs lately so Slavery is detrimental and is replaced by Caste System ASAP.

Religon- As much as it pains me, I have to skip Christianity and go for Confuscianism (for CoL). Theology is on such an inconvenient tech path for domination wins (but it's a good one for cultural). However, if I decide to build the Oracle and it generates a Great Prophet for me, I'll save him to pop for Theology. If I've already founded Confuscianism, I'll use the prophet to build the shrine though.

Jails-My favorite building. Nothing gives me more pleasure that throwing a bunch of bleeding-heart liberals in with hardened criminals. It only gets better if the war weariness continues, as I can then switch to Police State and have my soldiers mow down those annoying protestors. I have to remind my people that some must suffer and make sacrifices in order for the great nation I've built to continue to exist and prosper.

 

[Solver]

Good post.

I don't go as far as not using some feature for moral reasons, but I do usually have a small grain of roleplaying when playing Civ. The biggest thing for me is that I don't like to attack my allies. I don't like short one-evening games, I prefer longer games that last at least a few days, and during these longer games, relationships to build up. I just don't like attacking allies. I do it if I can beat them and have to beat them to prevent a loss (like spacerace), but don't like it.

I will found whatever religion(s) it's convenient to from a strategic point of view, but being Jewish, I like having Judaism in my cities somewhat more than the other religions. Of course, I'll still found and run any of the other religions if that's what happens.

On the topic of Jails, I rarely build many of those, but sometimes, in that era, there's nothing else to build. In which case I'll build Jails in some of my biggest cities, which are hence also the most prone to being hit by unhappiness. They're a fairly useful building for prolonged wars, really, you don't want angry citizens in your most productive city in the middle of a war.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

I hardly ever used Slavery before, though I am experimenting with it a bit now since people say it is so useful. Partly it was the ick factor, since to get any use out of it one is not just enslaving people but beating them to death to get work done faster. Partly it was not understanding how efficient it is (in game; in actuality it is not very economically efficient.)

I usually try to found Judaism, partly because an ai might beat me to Hindu or Budhism, and partly because I like Judaism. By the time I get Christianity, I've usually established Judaism in my nation and don't want to switch.

I also try to avoid state property, police state, and environmentalism. Theocracy only when I really need the XP.