Is "war wearyness" a temporary glitch caused by Vietnam?

[Fredric Drum]

Originally posted by karlmarx9001
War weariness is a perfectly acceptable construct for republics and democracies. Do you think the US would have put with with a version of WWII that lasted, oh, 30 years? There was a lot of grumbling domestically about luxury shortages just in the short time it lasted. As this is probably the most popularly supported "real" war fought in a democracy (that is, between actual Great Powers), Sid's design decision makes perfect sense to me.

30 years is one thing.. in a game of CIVIII, my democracy was overthrown after 1 - one - year of war. This was after over 50 turns of peace. It's interesting, but I'm not saying it's wrong.. I initiated the war, it was a HUGE invasion (18 transports with modern armour) and the evil Egyptians NUKED me. I nuked back... and the nation fell into anarchy. Dunno which of the factors was the real cause, though.


Fred

[Aewulf]

I think war weariness in Civ hinges a great deal on the length of the war and success with progressive weight given to the war's duration. On the other hand, anarchy after a nuclear exchange sounds very plausible.

[optimus2861]

Originally posted by nato
During World War II, U.S. leaders were very concerned about winning the war quickly because it was felt the public could not or would not support a prolonged war.

Here in Canada, there were issues with the war as well, especially in Quebec. The province was dead-set against wartime conscription, and the federal government hemmed and hawed for the entire war about introducing it. (IIRC, there had been riots in Quebec during WW1 over the issue, so their caution was justified.) It wasn't until very late in the war that conscription was introduced, and even then the blow was softened by having the conscripts assigned to "home defence", or some creative term like that, though they were able to transfer them to the front later. All of our armed forces up to that point had been volunteers.

Personally I've never understood Quebec's reasons for their opposition to conscription. Especially after France fell. But that's an example of war weariness for you.

[Barnacle Bill]

War weariness was a major factor in US political decisions at the end of WWII.

It was an important factor in deciding to drop the bomb.
- the Navy told Truman that Japan could be starved into surrender by blockade, but it would take months/years.
- the AAF told Truman they could bomb Japan into submission with conventional bombs, but again it would take months/years.
- the Army told Truman you had to put an armored division on the grounds of the Imperial Palace to settle the matter, and it would take months/years and cost 1/4-1/2 million US casualties.
- the political advisors told Truman the American people would neither tolerate the war running into 1946 or a settlement that left the Japanese regime which bombed Pearl Harbor in power.
- the scientists offered Truman a way to end the war NOW.

Then there was "Operation Magic Carpet". Once the war was over, the folks back home wanted the boys back home NOW. Relations with the Soviets were already going south, continental Europe was a wreck and its political stability questionable, and it made good sense to keep a credible conventional force in place in ocuppied Germany to deter Stalin from taking advantage of the situation. So, the brass wanted to return the troops to the States by units, holding the guys in the units that stayed "over there" as long as it took to replace them with newly raised units of volunteers. However, the White House bowed to public opinion and ordered troops returned as individuals based on a point system - longer in = sooner out, married = sooner out, etc... and ordered the boys ferried home ASAP on anything that would float or fly. Marshall dubbed the result "a rout" - the military effectiveness of the US Army was destroyed for years (until during Korea, basically).

War weariness did not start with Vietnam.

[dannyevilcat]

Here is my opinion on the subject.

All people under any form of government are against war. People in China are as against a war as people in America, or Canada. To be clear, All people is a term I use for the majority but could also be used to coin a very vocal minority.

"War-weariness" plagues democracies and republics because they have an open media. Military states don't, therefore back at home the images that the word "war" evokes tend to be more heroic.

If I'm not making my point clearly, Civ is wasting the concept of propaganda. Democracies have been able to fight unpopular wars for long periods of time without mobbing buildings, etc.
War-weariness only really should be a factor in the television age, don't you think?

That all said, democracies/republics operate sooooo much better than in Civ2.

[Barnacle Bill]

Originally posted by dannyevilcat
War-weariness only really should be a factor in the television age, don't you think?

Well, the New England states almost seceeded from the US over the War of 1812, which was popular in the West & South but very unpopular in the NE.

[Thrawn05]

With no Senate in Reps and Dems anymore, playing those forms of goverments are more fun (I remember in the civ game for SNES, china had a damn mech infantry ourside my capital of Rome!!! Could I detroy it? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Damn you senate!!!), anyway, I feel that war wearyness sholud be tweaked like this (thanks for dannyevilcat fot eh ispiration)

War waryness for the most part has little effect in any form of goverment. But you research radio, support for the war actually INCREASES. Repeat, your citizens will become more happy and productive once you research radio and you are at war. BUT, once you research TV (i'm typing from school, I don't think there is TV in Civ3, so if there is no TV in the research tree, then someone make it) war wearyness actully kicks in for Reps and Dems.

[Aurochs]

Originally posted by Wrong_shui
I dont think ppl protesting for peace would burn down civilian buildings like temples, maybe a barracks but not a cathedral

When mob mentality strikes, logic is the first thing thrown out the window. Rioters will do anything. For no reason.

At least Civ doesn't simulate football fans...

[Dadeo]

One of the problems I have with war weariness is that if you want to end the war and the other side doesn't want to talk you are stuck. I have had to endure 10 - 15 turns of gradually decresing stability back home because I was unable to contact the other civ.
Fortunately I can always become a commie.

[Spiffor]

Everytime a rival civ refuses to talk, even when I have a clear advantage, there is the miracle option : burn down its capitol or a wonder city. The AI won't hesitate to talk then