yes, i know it's contraversional but.....

[farting bob]

i think that in the later years, barbarians or people at war, should e able to commit terrorism . a barbarian could be discovered during modern era and be able to blow up a wonder, or maybe killing citizens in the city, not just workers and setlers. or this could be a way to start a war. what are your views, and pls don't get offended, i think it mght be a good idea.

 

[werdhertz]

WHy would we get offended? It happens in real life, denying it isnt going to solve anything lol It would be a decent idea, except by than theres no open terrain left and theyd need to pop up inside your borders.. plus there has been terrorism around a lot longer than just this modern era we`re in now... so i dunno, maybe civ 4.

 

[bige2002]

That actually isn't a bad idea, but I don't know about barbarians. Maybe you could give them limited abilities, or something. But with other civs it would be great. It could work sort of like the spy functions, with different costs and succses rates, although the succses rates should be low. Also, it should just about destroy your reputation.

 

[farting bob]

you could lose between 500 - 2000 gold and 3 or 4 citizens but be able to kill up to 10 of theres, depending on how much you pay, there defense etc. the inteligence agency would reduce the chance of being attacked.

 

[Mercade]

Firaxis said during the chat that there wouldn't be "events" and I think your barbarian terrorism would fit in that category, so ...

 

[Willem]

Originally posted by farting bob
i think that in the later years, barbarians or people at war, should e able to commit terrorism . a barbarian could be discovered during modern era and be able to blow up a wonder, or maybe killing citizens in the city, not just workers and setlers. or this could be a way to start a war. what are your views, and pls don't get offended, i think it mght be a good idea.

There's a few things you could try to make it happen, like adding a missile flag to a unit, maybe Hidden Nationality, or Invisible as well. Not sure if it would work out well, but it's something you can try.

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

Last year when this game came out someone modded and posted a "Terrorist" unit. Hidden Nationality was part of it, I think, and maybe it reacted like a nuclear weapon if it got to attack.

I do think barbs ought to continue into modern era, as cavalry landing out of ironclads like they do in Civ2.

 

[Minmaster]

cavalry coming out of ironclads? i think u mean frigates? i dont think ironclads were transports in civ2.

the problem is there is no space for barbies to spawn from in modern age, unless like mentioned earlier they were spawned off the coasat from a sea transport unit.

with terrorism, i think it would be better to have it as an espionage option like in civ2 with planting nuclear bomb or poisioning water supply, etc. but it should be limited to a certain government type that harbors terrorist activities. the problem is civ3 doesnt have such a government at the time, perhaps they can add something like fundamentalism which would be the government type to benefit from the additional espionage missions of terrorism.

 

[dropkick]

that's what spys are for in civ2. and any government can/will harbor terrorists, the repercussions should be greater for republics than despots.

 

[GerrardCapashen]

@Minmaster: Depending on the game, there can be plenty of space for barbs to spawn from in the Modern Age. Often in my games only about 1/2 the land is settled in the Modern Age because of constant warfare and the AIs always razing cities to prevent culture flipping. The result is a lot of railroads, mines and irrigation with nobody living on these squares. Although I have never seen a barbarian past the Middle Ages, I don't know of any game mechanism specifically preventing them from appearing.

 

[Willem]

Originally posted by Minmaster


with terrorism, i think it would be better to have it as an espionage option like in civ2 with planting nuclear bomb or poisioning water supply, etc. but it should be limited to a certain government type that harbors terrorist activities.

Except you can't have government specific units, only buildings. The best you can do is make them civ specific.

 

[GerrardCapashen]

I don't see why espionage activities should be limited to a certain type of government; there's no other reason for it in the game. I think that the civII way of having the Senate for Republics and Democracies that had a say in your nation's governing was a good thing. If they put this in, then there would be a precedent for government-specific activities and differences. However, it would weaken Republic and Democracy, and they would have to get something else, maybe no war weariness in a defensive war, to keep the balance among the governments.

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

In Civ3 you can't tie a unit to a government but you CAN tie a unit to the discovery of one of the government systems as a tech.

 

[GerrardCapashen]

I know, such as the Hanging Gardens requiring Monarchy or the Police Station requiring Communism (although I don't entirely agree with that logic). However, I was referring to actually having to be in that government while you initiate the espionage activities. I wouldn't mind if these espionage activities required a government technology, just that it would be rather limiting if you could only use them while in Communism, Despotism, or Monarchy.