25% for U.N. ; Discussion

[Trifna]

"The catch here is that in order to even be on the U.N. council (and thus eligible to be elected U.N. leader), you must either control 25% of the world's territory or population."

This is from the Q/A from the official site. Woundered if 25% is not too much... Japan is VERY strong and are in the U.N. Same for some other countries. Not so sure that it's the population or territory that decides about it! If you don't know, Russia is a very wide country. USSR was even wider. But they aren't the strongest in U.N. at all. I guess it should be based on power or something...

Any comments?

[SerapisIV]

Well, they did say that the numbers were in flux. I trust Firaxis to playtest game concepts correctly. Bugs on the other hand...I wish there was a Beta

[MarkG]

numbers like these are set in stone. the percentage for the domination victory have changed in the last weeks(used to 75% now it is 66% i think)
as play-balancing continues, it could change...

[Haphazard]

I think the conditions are reasonable. It keeps out the minor / subjugated civs who have little influence. The most advanced Civ will probably build the UN, so the council will represent the balance of power quite well.

I'm kind of concerned that the UN will meet up frequently, and the game could be finished just by a vote. Maybe the AI's might elect them self the winner by conspiring against the Human!

I think the UN council is based on the security council (and only the permanent members - US,UK,France,Russia,China) This was determined in the 40's on the most powerful (and largest spheres of influence) nations when the UN was founded after WWII. I think this is modelling the Real world quite well, considering there are only 8 (maybe 16) civs, rather than the actual 190+ of the UN.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Haphazard
I'm kind of concerned that the UN will meet up frequently, and the game could be finished just by a vote. Maybe the AI's might elect them self the winner by conspiring against the Human!

the same model was in smac(with the difference that all 7 civs took part) and it worked pretty well

[Trifna]

Well what I am woundering isn't only the 25%, but also that maybe it should be based on many factors. Doesn't means to put it overcomplicated, but territory and population, I think, isn't that much.

A very crowded territory will pass way after a powerful little unpopulated country.

[Haphazard]

Originally posted by MarkG
the same model was in smac(with the difference that all 7 civs took part) and it worked pretty well

Yeah, but that was because each civ's vote was weighted to their population size, and if that's the case here, that's fine. If it's one civ one vote, there could be problems...

Of course Firaxis won't make such a mistake

[Roland Ehnström]

Hmm, with these rules (25% of territory or population), I think there will hardly ever be more than three civs in the UN council...

An example:
Civ one holds 30% of the land and 20% of the population.
Civ two holds 20% of the land and 35% of the population.
Civ three holds 20% of the land and 15% of the population.
Civ four holds 15% of the land and 15% of the population.
Civ five holds 10% of the land and 5% of the population.
Civ six holds 5% of the land and 10% of the population.
Civ seven is a tiny one-city-civ.
Civ eight is extinct.

In this example, only two civs get a position in the UN council.

-- Roland

[Haphazard]

That's assuming that 7 civs make it to the modern age, with about 6 reasonably balanced civs. Won't happen too often I think. Also whoever builds the UN gets on too.

[TechWins]

I think Firaxis might have mis-worded the description. What I mean is that any Civ can be in the UN but you have to either control 25% of the world's territory or population to be on the UN council. The UN council would be all Civ's eligilbe to be casted as leader and are allowed to vote for the leader, while the Civs just in the UN would be allowed to vote for the leader and that's it. This may be highly unlikely but it still isn't out of the realm of possibility.

If my explanation holds not to be true, then I'm not sure if I like what I read. At best only a few Civs will be in the UN each game and that is not good.

[Roland Ehnström]

Well TechWins, you may well be correct. At least what you are saying makes sence to me.

However, then we are in an even WORSE position! How? Well, look at my example again. In this example, seven civs would vote for a leader, but they can only vote on either Civ one or Civ two. This means that the very FIRST time that a vote takes place, one of the civs will get a majority of the votes, and the game ends. Ouch!

Haphazard:
"That's assuming that 7 civs make it to the modern age, with about 6 reasonably balanced civs. Won't happen too often I think."

Well, if there are fewer civs, and they are even less balanced, won't that make it so that even FEWER civs have a chance to get voted as the leader?

Hmm, an example again then:
Civ one: 50% land, 40% population.
Civ two: 35% land, 45% population.
Civ three: 10% land, 10% population.
Civ four: 5% land, 5% population.
All others extinct.

No, still only two civs above 25% in either population or landmass...

Haphazard:
"Also whoever builds the UN gets on too."

Yes, but I assumed that one of the most powerful civs would do this (otherwise, this civ is virtually giving either of the two most powerful civs a free-ticket to victory...).

-- Roland

[Inverse Icarus]

yea, i read ti the same way techwins did, basically sayign you cant get a diplomatic victory without having the 25%.

[Haphazard]

Oops. Good points Roland. Let me try again though...

Why would Firaxis include both Territory AND population as individual factors? Possibly because quite often they are not the same over civs. A militarist civ would have high territory. A civilised civ high population (maybe based on number of people, not pop points). Example:

Civ 1 (Nasty aggressive): 35% territory 20% population
Civ 2 (Peaceful builder): 15% territory 30% population
Civ 3 (Balanced - large continent with plains): 25% land 15% pop
Civ 4 (Balanced - island with grassland) 10% land 25% pop
Civ 5 (just lucky with resources/tech trading, or human OCC) trivial land/pop but built UN
Civ 6-8 (small or dead)

This would give a UN council of 5. More unlikely than your example, given, but still possible. I guess the average no. on the UN council will be about 3.

[TechWins]

First off, I'm surprised on how some of you thought what I said is a possibility.

This means that the very FIRST time that a vote takes place, one of the civs will get a majority of the votes, and the game ends.

Who's to say that there will not be an option to vote for nobody? Since that will most likely be an option, it is going to be very difficult to receive a majority (I'm assuming 3/4 or 2/3) of the votes.

One more thing, if the Civs do wind up being the way Roland portrayed them to be, then the game is going to be very boring. My assumption is that we will see more games like Haphazard portrayed. I'm making this assumption because in most of my Civ games there were more than two "good" Civs at the end of the game and not that many Civs usually died (1 or 2 or even sometimes 0).

[Marcus Agrippa]

I hope the UN council membership won't be based exclusively on population. If it was, the 5 members of the S. Council would be:

China
India
USA
Indonesia
Brazil

The Brits and French have relitively small populations and territory in square miles. However, I think it is good that they (rather than, say, Indonesia) are Permanent Members. They have a ton of experience from the Age of Imperialism (good and bad experience), stable governments, powerful militaries, and a good deal of cultural influence. (The UK or France both have far more overseas influence than Indonesia, Brazil, or India.) As for the Russias... they aren't in good shape, but we can't deny all their nukes.

There has to be a more complex system than "Builder and anyone with X% of the world population." In fact, the builder is probably going to be one of those civs with 25% pop. Therefore, we might have a council with only two members, or possibly only one!