Will there be slavery in Civ6?
- Thread starter Valmighty
- Start date
Even if we didnt have a policy called slavery in civ5 it was still there, obviously. Your citizens work day and night for no pay, you can steal workers from enemies and force them to work for you etc. I think the in the current PC climate firaxis will not outright spell it out that it is slavery anymore.
In civ4 you had Stalin, Mao, communism, fascism, slavery, serfdom, caste system, I do not think they will use those words again but be more careful.
In civ4 you had Stalin, Mao, communism, fascism, slavery, serfdom, caste system, I do not think they will use those words again but be more careful.
I hope it comes back but more for the game play reasons rather than historical.(it could be callled drafting instead or whatever) It serves as a good mechanic against warmongers to sacrifice some citizens (food) for some emergency military. Or for rushing a building maybe
Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk
Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk
Yes, PC culture nowdays is why i ask.
But i have to disagree on Civ5. It doesn't have slavery. Citizen work is just like infantry fight. But infantry is no slave, neither is worker.
I hope it's back in civ6. They can name it anything so long as it reflects its real world counterpart.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,395
Probably not in any form other than the very... stylized version that we get with the Aztecs.
I doubt there would be an "uproar" by the Social Justice Warios if slavery were a mechanic (with Civ not depicting real historical scenarios and thus probably dodging the ball), but I don't think it would fit into the "Show the history of humanity from an overly positive side"-narrative that Civ V has gone with and that Civ VI seems to heavily follow up with.
I doubt there would be an "uproar" by the Social Justice Warios if slavery were a mechanic (with Civ not depicting real historical scenarios and thus probably dodging the ball), but I don't think it would fit into the "Show the history of humanity from an overly positive side"-narrative that Civ V has gone with and that Civ VI seems to heavily follow up with.
Scaramanga
Brickhead
The only enslaving Civ 6 will do is against me. Hashtag one more turn.
stealth_nsk
Deity
I don't think there's a problem with mentioning things like slavery or sacrifices. And personally I'm not against having Slavery as civic or policy card. However, making Slavery to be one of the viable civilization choices, like in Civ4, may not look good from the modern point of view. Like "Slavery has its advantages and disadvantages over free work. Surely they revolt sometimes, but you could fix this by having enough military". Not very good point of view to promote.
stealth_nsk
Deity
It's a personal preference where to draw the line. It's a game with some touching subjects and a game where people spend thousands of hours.
Does it affect people playing it? Yes, likely to.
Is the effect significant? I think not. But others may think otherwise.
Also, look from developers perspective. They have policy cards to name. They could use controversial names like "slavery" or just neutral ones. In the first case they have risk of the game accused of justifying slavery and thus having maturity rating increase, have the game prohibited in some areas, have potential court case and so on. Or they could just silently avoid all this. I believe the choice is quite obvious.
lorrydriverjr
Warlord
I always assumed the workers and settlers I captured from other civs were my slaves.
There might be a "slavery" economic policy card with some fitting effect in the earlier aras. Then slavery would be in the game but wouldn't be a prominent seperate mechanic.
I would find it lacking if they let out slavery now that they have goverm,ents with policies in the game.
I would find it lacking if they let out slavery now that they have goverm,ents with policies in the game.
Plus Ultra
Conquistador
This seems like a good compromise. Call it "forced labour" or "servitude", include it as a card for certain goverment types. Good idea masda_gib.
tranx
Civilized
Well I would like a civ game where I'm asked to make some moral choices as a leader.
Give me slavery, sacrifices, assassinations! Give me forgery, arm or drug trafficking, terrorism, genocide!
I want to be able to play Evil Empires and rogue states, and bear all the consequences for it. I want the ideologies of BNW to set themselves naturally over the moral path I chose during the history of my civ, as a replacement for the religious alliances of the midgame.
It's never going to happen, though. But it would be ridiculous to ban slavery from the game, considering its historical impact on the development of countries.
Give me slavery, sacrifices, assassinations! Give me forgery, arm or drug trafficking, terrorism, genocide!
I want to be able to play Evil Empires and rogue states, and bear all the consequences for it. I want the ideologies of BNW to set themselves naturally over the moral path I chose during the history of my civ, as a replacement for the religious alliances of the midgame.
It's never going to happen, though. But it would be ridiculous to ban slavery from the game, considering its historical impact on the development of countries.
Acken
Deity
Doubt it but someone will mod it in. Along with a Hitler an Stalin mod probably xD
As for the consequences... I can't remember Stellaris being under an uproar for its slavery mechanic. That game even has a Purge mechanic where you remove pop. Admitedly this is not as mainstream as civ.
As for the consequences... I can't remember Stellaris being under an uproar for its slavery mechanic. That game even has a Purge mechanic where you remove pop. Admitedly this is not as mainstream as civ.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,395
Sure, I was mainly wondering about this part:
stealth_nsk said:
Because I'm not sure what you mean by that. To me it sounds like: "A game should not make slavery an option that gets you ahead"
A game mechanic could never promote Slavery as something "good", even if it's the best choice to get ahead, because its downsides were moral downsides, not economical ones. Economically, slavery was a win at the times it was prevalent.
There would be nothing wrong with depicting it as a strong economically minded option.
But of course:
Yes, as I said, I actually agree with this. As I said, it wouldn't fit the "light-hearted" style of the game.
It would however not be a problem if a more historically minded Civ-Clone used slavery as an option that promotes economic benefits during the earlier ages. It's just historically accurate and should not be conflated with an "endorsement".
In My mod I added slavery, with slave worker and senzala (slave home) with João I of Kongo. If Afonso there, maybe they bring it on?
Joao I enslaved other tribes too, then he sold them to Portuguese, not to take Portuguese from slavery equation at the time, but others did it too.
Stilgar08
Emperor
I don't care if they specifically name it. The way the Aztec Eagle Warrior works basically is enslaving your enemies... I doubt they'll make it a normal game-term again. No need to either. I also doubt that every civ will be able to "enslave" people in one way or the other. Won't miss it, though.
stealth_nsk
Deity
I believe the main problem here is a slavery which could be connected to US slavery. It was relatively recent and still fuels racial problems there. Enslavement by Eagle Warriors can't be connected with it, Slavery as social policy can.
Similar threads
