Espionage!

[ajbera]

I love espionage.

In Civ2 I loved moving agents into cities and spying, stealing, poisoning wells and blowing up churches. That kind of stuff just tickles me.

Anyone care to speculate on the future of espionage in Civ3? I find the introduction of non-military activity/"warfare" a superb addition to empire-building games. I thought one of CtP's strengths was the introduction of slavers, clerics, lawyers, etc. Even though these concepts were not quite implemented properly, I salute Activision for at least giving them a try.

Now, I don't want to start another Civ vs. CtP argument (Allah knows the settler vs. PW debate is getting a tad tiresome), but does anyone else feel that espionage should be expanded in Civ3? We should definitely keep all the abilities of the Civ2 spy (especially sabotage - gotta destroy those cathedrals), but is there anything new that should be added?

Stealing an idea from CtP, the clerics could prophecy doom and gloom in opponent's cities and decrease happiness. Spies could do the same via propaganda, possibly even temporarily raising happiness in cities, even your own.

You should also be able to fund dissidents in opponent cities (if their happiness levels are low enough) to interfere with the commerce and science of that city.

Just consider all the wonderful things the CIA (and other intelligence agencies) have done over the years. I want to do those things too.

Virtually, of course.

Opinions?

-ajbera

[raingoon]

Agreed! Espionage was one of the great things in Civ 2. With so many new diplomatic options, I can only assume there will be attendant increases in available options for back stabbing as well!

Consider the new diplomacy option to allow military units to cross your borders. Is it possible now that stealth espionage units can "attack" one of these units and steal the technology needed to build it? Just an idea...

[airdrik]

This reminds me of the espionage system used in Shoghun: total war. In there if you have a spy in one of your provences then he increases happiness and also acts as an anti-espionage agent (killing other spies, or just countering the bad that they do), and in other provences they do the reverce and cause unhappiness.

[Sindai]

And don't forget framning other civs for your own crimes! There's nothing quite like getting two large neighbours to go to genocidal war with each so that you can waltz in and pick up the pieces.

[dognheat]

SMAC had a very good espionage model, with a variety of different things your probe teams could do. However the best espionage model I have come accross so far had to be the original Master of Orion. Building spys and putting them either to work in an empire of your choice or counter inteligence roll was a great way to do it. I would rather have a non-combat pool where built clerics,lawyers,spies,thieves etc. could be put to general work either in the empire of your choice or at home foiling others efforts. When they have an opportunity to have some kind of influence on the empire they are assigned to, you would get a popup menu asking what to do. The longer you have spies in an empire the more things they would be in a position to influence. Want to capture a city but can't take it militarily, just invest your lawyers into the city to become politicians and if they are there long enough without getting caught they could be in a position ot hand the city to you.

------------------
*PLOP*

[SerapisIV]

I never played MOO, but I played Imperium Galactica II (not very good though) and its espionage system sounded similar. I wouldn't mind having diplomats be pushed into the background, as in not being actual units and instead turned up as a seperate background layer, sort of like a diplomacy screen, but just for spies. It make more sense to me that you give a spy a mission and he goes off, its kind of hard for me to see a spy actually marching across the battlefield. I wouldn't mind a sepearate spec. ops unit that does damage to units covertly or attempts to subvert them, but I think that the actual civilization spying such as leader assasination, industrial or scientific espionage could be apart from a spy unit and performed as a kind of shadowy background action, one in which you don't know what actually happens. THis also turns up the possibility of double agenting.

I won't complain if espionage returns from SMAC unmodified. The idea might be overly complex (which it only sounds that way, it isn't actually) but either way, It's an idea I'd like to throw out.
[This message has been edited by SerapisIV (edited April 13, 2001).]

[ajbera]

Ah, yes, assassinating Leaders.
Very, very important. This must be an option.

[dognheat]

Oh, good call. I do remember Imperium Galactica II's espinage model being one of(if not the only) good things in the game. There were a variety of missions to choose from and you didnt have to move them around the map. MOO's model was more general, you had an espinage screen with a pool of spies built by your colonies. You could then assign a number of spies to each empire or leave them at home for counter-espionage. The main thing I am looking for is macro-managing espionage.

One thing I mentioned above but will reiterate again is the concept of infiltration. Once a spy gets into a position of immportance in the enemy government, they could then be more usueful than say a spy just dropped into enemy territroy. Lets say you leave your spy in thier government, military, science dept, etc. for a long period of time without demanding anything from them, they would naturaly be in a better position to get more information as time goes on. Like wise if they do get caught the thought of being fed bad information introduces another level into the spy game.

The thought of James Bond hanging out in the battlefield next to some marines makes me giggle.

------------------
*PLOP*

[SerapisIV]

quote: Originally posted by ajbera on 04-13-2001 11:59 PM Ah, yes, assassinating Leaders. Very, very important. This must be an option.

I think assasinating leaders should be in there, but I don't want it to be killing Queen Elizabeth if I'm playing the English. Part of Civs fun (and definitely SMAC) is steadily fighting one personality. I always laughed when Gandhi of all people launched nukes at me. Personailty makes a big difference in making Civ fun, besides I'd rather they focus on making a few leaders really well (for the diplomacy screen) then lots of leaders with few extras. I'd rather it assasinate some prime minister or something, something very rare and difficult but would create a few cities to revolt, or some other major reaction

[ajbera]

quote: Originally posted by SerapisIV on 04-14-2001 12:15 AM I think assasinating leaders should be in there, but I don't want it to be killing Queen Elizabeth if I'm playing the English.

Actually, I was referring to the military Leaders spawned in the game. Hopefully the designers will include scientific, artistic and commerce Leaders too. Depending on how Leaders are used, the ability to send a spy in to assassinate them (and undoing their benefits, plus perhaps causing extra unhappiness) would be a very cool feature. But it does depend on how the Leaders are implemented.

I would love to be able to assassinate a nation's ruler, but since Civ3 will likely maintain the "one ruler throughout the ages" theme, this is impractical. If a future game has successive rulers, though, then perhaps head-of-state assasination can be considered.

Also, as another poster has mentioned, for any spy activity, you should be able to expend an amount of resources (gold, production, whatever) to try to make it look as if another nation had committed the act of espionage. The more you spend, the greater the chance of success.

Bear in mind, though, that the more complex expionage becomes, the less practical it is to have it done by a unit. If espionage becomes very elaborate, a separate screen should be used (kind of like the trade and public works screens of Call to Power.) It then becomes a matter of determining what players want more - unit micromanagement or screen macro management, the same debate the settler vs. public works people are having. Sid may wish to maintain individual units, which is a hallmark of his series, while the screens are indicative of Activision's efforts. Though some have advocated blending the two systems, this is impractical.

There is currently a settlers vs. PW poll going on. I believe that this poll will help to capture the mindset of the Civ-fan public, and tell us whether unit-micro or screen-macro systems are preferable. I consider this audience to be the best arbiters of Civ matters, because we are the fanatics, and care deeply about these products. I don't know which system is more approachable to the general public who will make up the bulk of purchasers, and will thus determine the product's commercial success.

[SerapisIV]

I think a mix is best. Have a large macro-scale espianage screen (like diplomacy, more of a background effect) and then a weakened covert ops unit on the map. One that can sabotage units, destroy railroads, capture units, but doesn't do any city spying, that would be done in a seperate background game where agents are assigned to espionage (maps including unit locations), counter-espionage, industrial/scientific espionage, city demolitions, creating double agents

[Admiral PJ]

Assasination, yeah, I was thinking about that in my god style Game,
imagine you could recreate the JFK assasination, and have unhappiness
caused in your cities.
Spies should have a greater amount of power i think, and consequently need
more support cost than in civ2, though i guess the quite large build cost represents training,
(in my game even if you build a unit in one turn with a big factory, you still have a mandatory couple turns where they go through basic training, before being let lose)
What about Terrorists too? Fundamentalists etc, but they would be a new unit and could be able to bomb random targets and transport links, but not
very succesfully. These could recreate the IRA or Palistinian terrorists
using guerrila warfare.. In effect this is like the partisan unit.

I liked the Birth of the Federation (based on MOO2 etc) where you could
steal or sabotage the enemies research points, but I think it is better having civ like spies that can go among other units.. in the real world Intelligence operatives in the Navy or CIA often go with submarines and land units, I believe.

email me for my game info: peter@artpac.demon.co.uk

[jglidewell]

There is one thing I want and that is the ability to create traitors where the unit's color and control continued with the native civ until such time as you spring him (take control of and swithc color) on the unsuspecting(perhaps?) civ.

It would do the Baron Harkonnen proud! Awwww you broke my heart

[Mars_Col_44]

Uh.... bring in that floating fatman... that Harkonnen fellow! Well, that's what he gets for leaving the nephew in charge.
OK, so you're saying that a military unit would become traitorous after some sabotage/psychological operations performed by the enemy's spies? I would believe that this could occur to green draftee troops after being heavily bloodied or captured. Of course, being bloodied could have the opposite effect, like increasing from green to disciplined.
For an entire military unit to turn traitor would require a high level of inherent UNHAPPINESS. I believe that this did occur (rarely) in WWII between the Germans and Russians after a unit was captured and given the choice to turn on the former empire. I believe that some of these units were comprised of soldiers from conquered territories of the units' prior nation.
Well, there were a few (this is rare) mutinies on US troop ships during the late phase of WWII (OK, I watch the History Channel). These units were being transferred from the European Theater to the Pacific Theater after Germany surrendered. Gee, these guys thought they were going home....they weren't happy to go thru this stuff again in the Pacific?
Was it not George C. Marshall who wrote, among other things, about democracies having time limits on their wars... else the democracies risk increasing unhappiness at home and in their military units? I think that this democracy war unhappiness was simulated in Civ1 and Civ2, but not at the unit level.



------------------
Service means Citizenship. I'm doing my part!

[jglidewell]

quote: Originally posted by Mars_Col_44 on 04-17-2001 02:48 PM OK, so you're saying that a military unit...

I'm not thinking that the unit represents more than one, I see only one.

I want Benedict Arnold to hand over West Point to the British all over again. We're all patriots here aren't we?

As Lady Jessica thought 'Could he be the traitor, but the doctor Yueh has the emperrors seal'

All civ's have thier own aspiring dingbats. Even in fiction.