A slave-alternative to the free worker?

[imgod2u]

I think the game should simulate real life. Otherwise, things wouldn't make sense. And I think reality works far better than any synthetic system that the developers could think of. Why not have slavery? Or a holocaust? Or maybe a real Crusade, not just some Wonder (it was a slaughter, one just as bad as the Holocaust, but because it was for "God" it's portrayed as a Wonder of the World). These things should be included to add not only more realism, but better stimulants for diplomacy, atrocities such as holocausts could unite other nations. The emancipation of slavery should actually affect your economy and population depending on how dependent you are on slavery as part of your economy. For instance, if your entire industry relied on slaves as their main source of labor, an emancipation would ruin your industry. These things considered, it would bring much more economic concerns to the game.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by Ralf
Theres nothing wrong with the idea. However, my the original simplified idea starts to grow more and more. Perhaps it becomes too complicated to add all this. As I said earlier; Remeber that Civ-3 is already is beyond half-finished. Every major concept is already in place. Im hoping here for a simple last minute way to add the slavery-concept, without asking for any major disruptive alterations - which Firaxis probably are very reluctant to make at this stage.

I think you are right, and I've read somewhere that workers can be captured. This might be slavery as you suggested it.

[BeBMan]

Ha! You are all for slavery! (joke)

My main argument is still that it is to difficult to implement all these details. If they include that, they should also include significant details of later economic systems (e.g. 5 year plans in communistic countries, or the influence of stock markets today), but I personally like the abstract model known from civ2. Sure, that doesn´t mean that it can´t be improved...

[Ralf]

Originally posted by vgriph
I think you are right, and I've read somewhere that workers can be captured. This might be slavery as you suggested it.

Yes, your right! Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS have confirmed it HERE. You can also read it below (my underlining):

"Workers are increasingly becoming mobile "population points", and building colonies is one of their more spectacular abilities. Unlike terrain improvements, colonies consume the worker, much like a city consumes the settler. You don't get the worker back if your territory merges with the colony (the editors will probably allow this to be customized). Workers can also be merged with cities, captured if unattended, and even traded with your neighbors. In this game you need to defend your TERRITORY, not just your cities, or you will be swiftly punished. I find myself building hillside fortresses more in this game than Civ2/SMAC et al. One advanage of this terrain improvement is the zone of control it gives units normally without one (read: most ancient and middle ages units). But it's their ability to protect vital trade roads, colonies, and goods that makes them invaluable.

Jeff"

Originally posted by BeBro
My main argument is still that it is to difficult to implement all these details.

Well, I for one dont want ALL details suggested in this thread.

I just wondered if there was a simple way to tweak the now confirmed fact that workers can be captured if unattended. An action considered as an act of war, I bet. Now, take a look once again on the suggested list:

• You cannot build slave-workers. Only captured free foreign workers becomes slaves.
• Slaves can also be traded through the diplomacy-screen.

OK, they can take the existing graphics for the worker-unit, then just switch the colours of the clothes to something slave-unique. Its confirmed that captured workers can be traded.

• Slaves cost only 1/2 the support compared with free workers - and they are not that expensive to buy.
• Slave-workers cannot found colonies, and they cannot merge with your city, however.
• Slaves normally work unguarded within city-areas, but the city revolts and/or the city is unguarded then they always takes the opportunity to pillage the tile they currently working on - and others, as long as your free citizens are still revolting. Alternatively; move any combat-unit on top - that certainly pacify them.

The team takes the existing worker-unit, and add some modifiers whenever worker-unit is captured. Is that so difficult? Below is an response to Captains objection, I changed my mind somewhat:

• Slave-workers only work at half the speed. Forge an slave-army of two and they work as a regular free worker, in terms of efficiency. Add a guard-unit and you can move them outside city-areas without them escaping.

I think above tweaks would be fun extension to an already confirmed concept (capture-able foreign workers). I not sure the AI can handle it that well, though. The whole thing evolves how good the AI can work with this, I guess. On the other hand; neither the human player, nor the AI-civs is forced to exploit slaves. One can choose too completely bypass it - the free worker is (of course) always available (and needed).

This feature must also be tweaked so that it only work really well ancient times - then increasingly worse, until unavailable under moder civilized government types. Yes, I know about 1900-century US south-states, but in the name of game-balance and simplicity.

[SerapisIV]

As important a historical concept as slavery is, I don't think that its going to make it into Civ3. I say this only because its inclusion would be obvious to any of the previewers who have seen the game, yet none have made mention of it. Also its inclusion would be a major addition to a Sid Civ game, yet previews still don't mention it. I could easily be mistaken and Firaxis just hasn't said anything about slavery yet because the game is so far away, but I'd give it even odds that its not in Civ3. I think its too bad. Slavery is an enormous concept in ancient through early industrial times, it would be very interesting to see how Firaxis included and balanced the idea in a Civ game

[Grumbold]

If Civ III were to have a S.E. model or distinctions between ancient and modern governments like republics then the use of slaves could be subtly worked into the government model. There need not necessarily be slavers or slaves visibly moving on the map. Increased work rates, lower food costs, increased unhappiness or additional effects during a revolt can do it all without needing to involve the player in actively persuing slavery.

A monarchical, religious or repubican government should have the ability to evolve somewhat over the centuries without having to cease being a monarchy, theocracy or republic. In a thread a while back the concept of a simcity-like set of edicts that (once researched) could be activated to make small distinctions between fundamentally similar governments (like all the current modern democracies that all have their clear differences from the others.)