Why do I *have* to do what the UN says?

[Alashar]

Its pretty easy to add new resolutions to the XML files. That is all that is required. 2 files, actually.

CIV4GameTextInfos.xml

Where you add a block like this:

-TEXT-
		-Tag-TXT_KEY_VOTE_SLAVERY-/Tag-
		-English-U.N. Resolution #111 (Global Civic - Slavery)-/English-
		-French-Résolution de l'ONU n° 427 (Doctrine mondiale - liberté de culte)-/French-
		-German-U.N.-Resolution Nr. 427 (Globale Staatsform - Religionsfreiheit)-/German-
		-Italian-Mozione #427 dell'ONU (Libertà di religione globale)-/Italian-
		-Spanish-Resolución nº 427 de la ONU (principio mundial - Libertad religiosa)-/Spanish-
	-/TEXT-

And CIV4VoteInfo.xml where you add a block like this:

-VoteInfo-
			-Type-VOTE_SLAVERY-/Type-
			-Description-TXT_KEY_VOTE_SLAVERY-/Description-
			-iPopulationThreshold-51-/iPopulationThreshold-
			-iTradeRoutes-0-/iTradeRoutes-
			-bSecretaryGeneral-0-/bSecretaryGeneral-
			-bVictory-0-/bVictory-
			-bFreeTrade-0-/bFreeTrade-
			-bNoNukes-0-/bNoNukes-
			-ForceCivics-
				-ForceCivic-
					-CivicType-CIVIC_SLAVERY-/CivicType-
					-bForce-1-/bForce-
				-/ForceCivic-
			-/ForceCivics-
		-/VoteInfo-

Note that the TXT_KEY_VOTE_SLAVERY tag must match in both files. I was able to vote slavery as the global rule just like doing the others.

One thing is that the GameInfo file contains the details in English, German, French, Italian and Spanish. So bablefish may be your friend!

Oh and the Civilopedia description of the United Nations lists each of the Resolutions you can vote on (and is not updated automatically... i.e. you gotta mod it as well).

Uh, well, I haven't figured out how to display the actual xml tags properly here yet. Sorry about that.

[Martinus]

Well, the game is geared, from the beginning, to MP as well as SP. If you could simply ignore UN dictates, it would have no power in MP game, simply as that.

[Utwig]

Well, in MP all human players would probably vote against it, except maybe for those who are nearing completion of spacerace or cultural victory.

[Byelotsar]

Originally posted by Martinus
Well, the game is geared, from the beginning, to MP as well as SP. If you could simply ignore UN dictates, it would have no power in MP game, simply as that.

With multiplayer, the UN instantly becomes more interactive by dint of the fact that you can influence the votes of the other players. You could form a bloc and force or prevent votes you favor/dislike. Besides, the problem with the UN being powerless is only an issue if dissention carries no penalty - and that's no better than lacking outright the ability to dissent.

Penalties won't stop people from dissenting if they want to, but if one of the penalties is the possibility of military response, you'd want to think real hard about it before crossing that mighty nation who supports the UN. Think about the US-led coalition involvement in Iraq. Whether you think that it was right or wrong, it would certainly present an "interesting choice" in gameplay, which means that the modifications which are being proposed here would only make the UN more enjoyable in a multiplayer game.

Originally posted by Alashar
Its pretty easy to add new resolutions to the XML files. That is all that is required. 2 files, actually.

It's a step in the right direction, but I expect it'd take rather more work to insert proposals which don't fit the mold of the existing proposals, or to create the possibility for dissent. I only see flags for the secretary general position, free trade, bonus trade routes, no nukes, and overall victory, which suggests that this may be a job for Python.

Originally posted by vovan
Way I see it, there should be resolutions for every civic out there, I don't see why I shouldn't be able to vote on adopting slavery throughout the world.

Somehow, that fails to make sense to me. Not that the realism argument carries much weight with me, but it at least makes sense to me that the UN proposals focus on the extremely progressive civics. Of course, the thought of the UN autocratically enforcing them without the right to dissent doesn't, but still....