Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How the UN completely destroyed Saladin (an AI problem)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How the UN completely destroyed Saladin (an AI problem)

    If a civ defies a resolution every time it is brought up, you can destroy that civ with the UN by bringing that same resolution up repeatedly. In this instance, Saladin defied a Free Religion resolution, and note the results:





    Medina had the Globe Theater, so that's why it's the only Arabian city that's not size 1. The AI should realize that the "villain" penalty is getting too destructive after a certain threshold and yield to just voting no or abstain. Otherwise, the UN becomes worse than a flood of spies or nukes for that civ.

  • #2
    Or the villian penalty shouldn't apply beyond one refusal of the resolution...
    <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
    I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

    Comment


    • #3
      I like snoopy's proposal better.

      Comment


      • #4
        Are certain AI civs "hard coded" into defying a certain resolution? I've seen this as well on a number of my single player games.

        If it is, I believe that the programming should be towards "abstaining" rather than outright "defying" a resolution brought forward multiple times.

        Defy the resolution on the first vote - Fine, the AI has made their stance on the proposition clearly known; but after that, I would think the AI should then just 'abstain' any further votes on that resolution - just so they don't end up self-imploading due to chronic unrest....but then, that is just my take on it.
        ____________________________
        "One day if I do go to heaven, I'm going to do what every San Franciscan does who goes to heaven - I'll look around and say, 'It ain't bad, but it ain't San Francisco.'" - Herb Caen, 1996
        "If God, as they say, is homophobic, I wouldn't worship that God." - Archbishop Desmond Tutu
        ____________________________

        Comment


        • #5
          SPI civs hate free religion and corresponding resolutions. They should get free "fanatic" units from the lost population. That would make the resolution spam almost suicidal. Just a thought.
          No matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
          "I played it [Civilization] for three months and then realised I hadn't done any work. In the end, I had to delete all the saved files and smash the CD." Iain Banks, author

          Comment


          • #6
            Since this is an exploit it should be limited. Perhaps a maximum of 1-4 unhappiness from “what the world thinks of us”. In theory there could even be positive at the point where they simply “cease to care”.

            Comment


            • #7
              The penalty should just have it's duration reset upon defiance, not be added to.

              Comment


              • #8
                Free Religion shouldn't fail if someone defies it, it should apply to everyone but the defiers.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by couerdelion
                  Since this is an exploit it should be limited. Perhaps a maximum of 1-4 unhappiness from “what the world thinks of us”. In theory there could even be positive at the point where they simply “cease to care”.
                  this would never work. even the smallest civ could effectively block every UN resolution at the price of 4 unhappiness. in that case, why have the UN at all?

                  blake's idea makes the most sense, but their should be a relations penalty that is cumulative. if the world thinks you're a villain they shoould treat you like one (assumign this isnt already in place).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Or make it just relational penalties.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by jbp26


                      this would never work. even the smallest civ could effectively block every UN resolution at the price of 4 unhappiness. in that case, why have the UN at all?
                      Well, The UN still isnt a very efficient tool IRL. Only when the US is very determined to get their way, and then they have to bargain a lot under the table with Russia and China to get it done. Other then that, it's still not very much a power to reckon with.. So, it would be kinda realistic to when consequence of defying isnt too hot..

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        to be honest, I hate the UN. they allways take away my nukes, the make me adopt things that will hurt me or my economy and I never get to build it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by HoldSteady


                          Well, The UN still isnt a very efficient tool IRL. Only when the US is very determined to get their way, and then they have to bargain a lot under the table with Russia and China to get it done. Other then that, it's still not very much a power to reckon with.. So, it would be kinda realistic to when consequence of defying isnt too hot..
                          I agree that IRL the UN is largely useless. I think civ4 attempts to model what the UN is supposed to be rather than what it is.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think Civ4 attempts to model the UN as something fun, rather than what it is OR what it is supposed to be.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I disagree. I think Civ4 attempts to model the UN as what it is supposed to be, rather than something that improves the enjoyability of the game.

                              Wodan

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X