Nuclear disarmament?

[Pods]

In the real world we see agreements between some nuclear powers to cut their arsenals.

Is the diplomacy model in Civ3 known to support an agreement between civs to disband nuclear weapons, if they are a major threat between two civs?

Anyone know?

S.

[isaac brock]

That would be a good idea, but no info exists to support that. Someone had an idea on how nukes would be become useless in this thread.

P.S. Happy Thanksgiving to me and everyone important

[Oligarf]

Originally posted by isaac brock
P.S. Happy Thanksgiving to me and everyone important

Thanks

I read that the diplomatic possibilities were increased. Therefor I hope that forming all sorts of treaties will become possible. Nuclear disarmament could be one of them, or declaring neutral areas or so.

[isaac brock]

They never mentioned disarmament though. I don't think it's in, but I suppose you could buy all their missiles.

[Oligarf]

That could be a way round it. But a bit expensive.
Maybe we gotta send an e-mail to those Firaxians.

[isaac brock]

Originally posted by Oligarf
That could be a way round it. But a bit expensive.
Maybe we gotta send an e-mail to those Firaxians.

Take one of their cities by culture and offer to sell it back for missiles. Then your culture will just take it back again!

[Akron]

I wouldn't be surprised if it is in. I'd think that there would be diplomatic consequences for the use of nuclear weapons. In SMAC, planet busters were atrocities, though you could change this with the UN council (or whatever). Its likely that the U.N. in civ 3 can do things like this too, maybe making use of nuclear weapons an atrocity.

[isaac brock]

Why does everything useful have to be a fugging atrocity?! Whats wrong with ethnic cleansing, slavery, or nukes? Not being allowed to do it sucks the fun right out of the game.

[Trifna]

I allready proposed an idea of disarmament in general, but my thread was so long (was englobing many ideas) that about no one responded

Disamement is used in many cases. Was used by Spartians against Athenians after they won I think (oh well... somethign like this with Greeks)

Was used after WW I and WW II for Germany. Japan also isn't allowed in its constitution to get a serious army since WW II. Disarmement pacts exist quite commonly in history (even if not always respected in some specific cases).

I would propose the introduction of disarmement in general, not only for nuclear. Or maybe specifically for a frontier. Did you ever played Risk? We may put our armies all at same place to protect a passage. Well, in Civ III, it could be a pact between two persons that they wont put more on their frontiers, or soemthing like this.

[Oligarf]

Nice idea

Dan around here?
I like Trifna's idea, is it in CIV III?
If yes, how is it implemented?

[Oligarf]

and...

Forgot something...

If no, why not?

[Akron]

Originally posted by isaac brock
Why does everything useful have to be a fugging atrocity?! Whats wrong with ethnic cleansing, slavery, or nukes? Not being allowed to do it sucks the fun right out of the game.

Of course you can do all that good stuff. Just don't expect the ai to like you.

[Jason Beaudoin]

Although I am no advocate of real life atrocities in any way, I do think these things should be included in CIV3, which as mentioned, most are. (I'm not sure about the ethnic cleansing part.) There should, and probably will be negative effects of doing things like this, like massive-world-wide economic sanctions, which could cripple an economy.

Firaxis can have their cake and eat it too. In other words, they can incorporate these "politically incorrect" aspects of world history, but by creating negative responses by the AI, they can claim that they are trying to teach good behavior. We win by getting more choices, and more fun.

[Inverse Icarus]

nonsense. no one will ruin my nuclear fun.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by isaac brock
Why does everything useful have to be a fugging atrocity?! Whats wrong with ethnic cleansing, slavery, or nukes? Not being allowed to do it sucks the fun right out of the game.

Well, for everyone like you who considers those things fun, there is likely someone who takes them very seriously and would not consider their inclusion fun or in fact appropriate. I think Firaxis would be wise to err on the side of caution and favor the latter so as not to offend people. The former group, while it may be irritated, is unlikely to be personally offended by the exclusion of such things.

With the exception of ethnic cleansing, I think these things being in the game wouldn't bother me...I would just refrain from employing them.

Cheers.