25% for U.N. ; Discussion

[Kc7mxo]

Hmm. Why is the usa on there? We've only got 250 million.

And we certainly aren't that big territory wise.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by the Civ team
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.

Somehow I would have feelt more at ease with the following version:

Allthough every empire, regardless size & population, are free to vote, the catch is that in order to be eligible & possibly elected as U.N. leader, you must either control 25% of the worlds territory or population.

In order to avoid backward and/or stubbornly aggressive empires having too much negatively shortsighted influence, each empire could be allocated vote-points from a pool of (lets say) 100 points - according to their historic/present empire-status and their diplomatic history & reputation.

[Phutnote]

Needing 25% of land/pop to even be on the council seems a little odd to me. In civ II, I often find 7 civs left near the game end (some of them have been restarted ones --- I usually play with that option on).

So say there are 8 civs playing, one has 30% of the world or pop, and the 7 other civs each have 10%: that means, that even though you have the max number of civs, the UN council consists of a grand total of 1 civ.

After a certain year/tech point, the AI becomes more aggressive in the endgame and starts to gobble up the other, weaker civs. This would change the balance and centralize pop/territory so you have more on the council, I suppose. But what if it's then 25%, 20%, 15%, 20%, 5%, 5%, 10%? You still only have 1 civ on the council.

The 25% rule just seems a little unusual to me when I look at it out of context.

Phutnote

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Kc7mxo
Hmm. Why is the usa on there? We've only got 250 million.

And we certainly aren't that big territory wise.

Ahem! Territory-Wise

1. Russia
2. Canada
3. China
4. America?
5. Brazil

[dennis580]

Yea I'm also very concerned with this. I have a fear that most UN Meetings will be conducted with only 2 members. In some cases thier might only be 1 member in which case that civ can go ahead and vote for themselves to go ahead and win the game.

[dennis580]

I personally would like too see this lowered down to 15% instead of 25%.

[Christantine The Great]

I think the whole point of the UN is to be the civ who builds the UN. Then you equip your allies with lots of your units and tech and they go conquer/diminish your enemies. They grow in size, pop on to the council, and elect you leader. VIOLA! You win.

[faded glory]

Sorry Im not in tune to Civ news, so please enlighten me.

What will the UN do? What kind of powers will it have? There will actually be more than 1 civ in the UN . I thought it would be a useless wonder like in Civ2

[Christantine The Great]

Sorry Im not in tune to Civ news

Get in tune by going to the latest Ask the Civ Team replies. They describe what the UN is now there.

[SerapisIV]

The UN is mentioned on Civ3.com regarding victory conditions. What it's wonder function is, Firaxis has not announced this yet. Odds are it will change from Civ2 though (it appears most wonders will have at least somewhat changed powers)

[Christantine The Great]

I think that is its function. Lets the world hold a council meeting and gives you an automatic place on the council.

[tishco]

i thought it was 25% of the whole map like domination to join, which is reasonable then the votes based on population like SMAC

[korn469]

in the latter stages of the game, any player who can persuade all other civilizations to nominate them as the UN Secretary General will triumph

this is from the gamespot uk preview

so what i assume is that whoever builds the U.N. wonder will always be up for election as will all of the players who control either 25% of either population or territory (ie those are the requirements to be on the U.N. council and only civs on the U.N. council can be elected Secretary General)...but before you get the U.N. win you'd have to convince all if not most of the civs to vote for you (even civs not on the U.N. council get to vote)

[faded glory]

This 'UN' is going to make PBEM lots of fun

[Tventano]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Ahem! Territory-Wise
1. Russia
2. Canada
3. China
4. America?
5. Brazila

I decided to look this information up in the World factbook. I've looked it over manually so I may have missed something.

Country	million sq km	million people
Russia	17	146
Antarctica	14	a few thousand
Canada	10	31
USA	9,6	276
China	9,6	1262
Brazil	8,5	173
Australia	7,7	19
India	3,3	1014
Kazakhstan	2,7	17
Sudan	2,5	35
Algeria	2,4	31
Congo	2,3	52
Greenland	2,2	0,06
Mexico	2,0	100
Saudi Arabia	2,0	22
Indonesia	1,9	225
Libya	1,8	5

Of course Antarctica is not a country, but defintely a large area. Greenland is a part (colony?) of Denmark. The USA is just a little bit larger than China, I did not know either.

Only in Civ power has a relation with population, in real life economy is much more important. Having more population does not automatically give you more scientist etc. Feeding a billion or a few 100 million people is quite a hard job for lots of countries. But anyway population is the most important resource in Civ. What a shame that in real-life we do not invite refugees in and try to send them away with lots of lame excuses.