civ3 and the problem of the vietnam war

[Napoleon I]

Overall, I agree with the ideas that Korn suggested but I have one possible addition to make. Why don't we make the unhappiness go along with the number of units lost in combat in the last several turns. This way we can simulate both losing, drawn-out conflicts such as Vietnam and short victorious campaigns such as the Spanish-American war of 1898, and the Gulf War?

------------------
Napoleon I

[korn469]

Napoleon I

great idea! i love it

[Urban Ranger]

Any comments on my ideas?

[Napoleon I]

UrbanRanger:
It is possible to implement your idea but I have several suggestions:
1. The War Time economic setting should not be dependent on the % of units but rather on the % of support for the units in hostile territory relative to the total resources generated by your civ. This would prevent a huge economic power with few units from being penalized for a minor military operation.
2. Entertainers should still be allowed to model government propaganda during wartime.
3. I don't think that economic exhastion should set in automatically, but rather that the benefit of increased production should diminish over time, eventually falling below the peace time rate. This would make sure that countries do not stay in a losing war for a long time.

Also, I do not quite understand what you mean by the draft? Are you operating under the assumption that civ3 will implement a model under which some population will be deducted when you build a unit?


------------------
Napoleon I

[Urban Ranger]

Napoleon I:

Thank you for your feedback. What do I meant by draft? Good question.

Myabe we can implement it as this: a country under "war time economy" are allowed to produce substandard units at a cheaper price.

[Napoleon I]

Urban Ranger:

Thanks for clearing up the draft issue. I think that it is a really good idea if it was imlemented. If you want to push these ideas to be in the game you can count on this guy's support .


------------------
Napoleon I

[Urban Ranger]

Napoleon I,

Thanks for your support

I tend towards simpler and more elegant solutions to a problem. Not to say korn's idea is bad, but it seems a tad complicated to me

[PrinceOfWeasels]

Hello! I know you all have better ideas going on, and already pretty much thought out, but I was just reading through and thought of a fairly simple solution that I'd like to share.

What if the people-icons (I'm only familiar with Civ I !) in a city-view could be clicked on, and then changed into a special type of unit? This unit can take as many turns as it wants, so long as it stays within a certain number of squares from its home-city. If it leaves the squares-range, it loses the privelage of increased movement numbers, among others to be named. The people are taken from the production and trade and specialists of the city, not the farming, so the city stays supported to some degree. Perhaps they can also have a limit of so-many turns able to take, once the home-city is destroyed. If the attacker occupies, you see, or destroys, they would still exist using guerilla-tactics.
The special units could be called guerillas, even. While in their sqaure-range, even if the city is destroyed, they have superior defense and attack. Their range is set when they are made, and if the city is destroyed, after their number of turns left is up, they'll die. They won't be able to move to another city, because out of their range, they lose their strength. It would take a real war-effort to beat a nation full of these units. I'm thinking that for every 5,000 people changed, you could get three units. Their attack and defense and movement decrease to the minimum (1/1/1) outside of their range, though, so they can't be used for attack.

I don't know anything about how the Civ2 works with things, but maybe you all will b eable to, if this sounds good, make it work out. 8)
Thanks, all! 8)



------------------
|\/\/|
^(o)o)___O
| \______/
|