Some ideas to improve slavery

[Azaelus]

Slavery could be a much more complicated and involving system in Civ, but it is, unfortunately, quite simplistic. Anybody else think so? I've made some notes on how I think the concept of slavery can be modified for the better... in short, cities with slave labour have production benefits, slaves only eat half that of a free citizen, etc. What do you think?

-- Azaelus

SLAVERY
*******

* Units with the "Enslave" ability have a 1/3 chance of producing slave workers when you defeat an enemy unit. Existing units with the slaving ability: Mayan Javelin Thrower, English Man o'War, Privateer. New units with slaving ability: Aztec Jaguar Warrior, and a brand new unit, the Slaver (which requires a new tech, Enslavement).
- Naval slaving units turn defeated ships into slave workers, which automatically appear as transported units in the ship's hold. If a ship is at maximum carrying capacity, it is unable to capture slaves.
- The Slaver unit has hidden nationality, and has a unique "Slave Raid" ability when attacking cities - it will steal one unit of population and turn them into a Slave Worker. This is prevented by a strong military presence in the target city, or city walls.
* Slave workers complete tile improvements 50% faster than regular workers, and act in all regards the same as any foreign national worker, except:
- Slave workers can only join a city if that city has the Labour Camp improvement (req. Enslavement, free upkeep if govt=fascist) necessary to contain them. The extra population unit in the city is then a "slave citizen" (i.e. citizens are classified as 1 of 4 categories - happy/content/unhappy/slave), which has specific advantages and disadvantages over regular citizens:
- Only eat half the food of a regular citizen (i.e. slaves eat 1 food/turn, therefore a city can support 2 slaves for the same "price" as 1 regular citizen.)
- Produce +1 shield in any square they work in which already produces 1.
- May not become specialists - they can be used for manual labour only.
- Slave population units do not count towards the size of the city in terms of unhappiness due to overcrowding. (Slaves are kept out of sight and out of mind of the free citizens.)
- Slaves have no mood, and so are unaffected by the presence of temples, entertainers, etc. As above, they have no affect whatsoever on the happiness of the free citizens.
- Slave population units can be used to exceed the city limits of 6 and 12, as there is no concern for their living conditions.
- Slaves retain their foreign nationality, and can never be assimilated.
- Owning slaves is a valid pretense for the appropriate civilization to declare war on you.
- The city requires 1 military unit per slave, or there is a chance of slave revolt.
- Slaves may revolt if the city ever falls into civil disorder or anarchy.
- Democracies may not keep slaves. Once Democracy is researched, you are given the option to "declare emancipation", whereby all slaves are immediately turned into happy foreign national citizens (in time, they will be assimilated into the normal city population) - the consequence of this is that you lose the slave production benefits, etc. You may only change to a democratic government AFTER emancipation has been declared, and foreign powers will look down upon any civilization which has not done so.
- Slave revolt: the labour camp is destroyed, a unit of "normal" population is slaughtered, and a hostile unit (a conscript swordsman/medieval infantry/guerilla) appears in the city radius, one per slave.
* Slavery through time.
- Slavery starts early on in ancient times, with both the Slaver unit and the Labour Camp improvement requiring a new tech, Enslavement. Enslavement prerequisites are Masonry and Warrior Code, and it is an optional tech.
- Generally, slavery disappears as you progress towards modern times, but the ancient and middle ages have plenty of opportunity to use slaves. Historically, it is still in action today, albeit in a relatively small amount of nations. The benefits of slavery are quite vast, if you have the military capability to back them up. It is an optional aspect of the game, though - the appropriate technologies relating to it are optional, after all.
- The technology that spells the downfall of slavery is Democracy. Once it is researched, the "Declare emancipation" option appears on the F1 screen. Once you declare it:
- All slaves are immediately turned into happy foreign national citizens (in time, they will be assimilated into the normal city population).
- All slavers are immediately disbanded, and cannot be rebuilt.
- All labour camps are sold off, and cannot be rebuilt.
- All existing units with the "Enslave" ability lose it.
- Naturally, you don't have to declare emancipation, but you cannot change government to a democracy unless you have done so. Any nation that has declared emancipation will look down upon any who haven't. It is not possible to build the United Nations if you have not declared emancipation.
- There is a 10pt culture bonus in all once slave-keeping cities for the first civilization to declare emancipation.
- Researching Democracy also gives you an anti-slavery unit, the Abolitionist. Not everybody wants to give up the benefits of a healthy slave-based economy, after all.

[justjake73]

Naturally, one has to be verrry careful on this subject.

CTP had slavers, and they were a pain in the butt. They also had Abolitionists, which were fun to use, along with Subliminal Advertisement. I once sent Russia into a frenzy with multiple SA attacks.

I wouldn't say they were "happy" immediately, rather they're turned into regular citizens. They should have an increased probability of becoming unhappy until you discover "Civil Rights."

There could also be a disaster like Plague but reads like this: "Descendants of former slaves riot after unfavorable court decision! MARKETPLACE looted!" and you would lose some gold.

[Inverse Icarus]

i still think that all elite units should have enslave, but thats just me.

i've also wanted a slider for how hard you work your slaves. it'd be fun if i could work them to death, and get things done 2x faster than my normal workers.

[mrmitchell]

what uberkrux said

The ability to sacrifice a worker to immediately get a terrain improvement done.

[GePap]

Originally posted by mrmitchell


The ability to sacrifice a worker to immediately get a terrain improvement done.

Very good idea, and simpler to manage.

[MattPilot]

what terrain improvement is worth giving up a worker?

[Zero]

instant fortress could be soooo nice in soo many situations

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Uber KruX
i still think that all elite units should have enslave, but thats just me.

This would make mil civs much stronger and the Epic more useful. It probably would break things.

[joncha]

I'm not entirely sure why you want to make these particular changes... I'm guessing its for gameplay reasons, as slavery is easily one of the least efficient forms of labour (which, I think C3C reflects fairly well).

So... how do you think this would improve the flow of the game?

Just curious...
jon.

[mrmitchell]

what terrain improvement is worth giving up a worker?

BANG! Aztec cavalry suddenly rush over your border, shooting down your meager defense in that area. They are not long away from a vital resources city, but luckily there is a line of Mountains alongside it. Quickly, you rush your workers by rail to those mountains, and in a patriotic fervor they work themselves to death on building Fortresses. After the fortresses are built, your own infantry take their positions and entrench themselves for the fierce battle.

Through the turn, the Aztec Cavalry throws itself upon the fort walls, and collapses. The dead pile up on the outsides of the forts, but your great Civ is saved, thanks to the brave sacrifices made by those workers.

[Plotinus]

It's not going to happen *very* often, is it? I mean, for that to work, you'd have to have roads already on the tiles that you want to fortify, or you'd have to wait another turn for those workers to start piling themselves into barricades. Not sure this particular game is really worth that candle.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Some very neat ideas in those changes, Azaelus.

That said, it is clear that Firaxis intended slaves to be less effective workers than regular workers. Not only does this make sense (no-one works most effectively if forced to and lesser education/equipment means lesser productivity), but I think it was intended for balance issues as well. A boost to slavery would encourage warmongering, as slaves would be worth far more than than 1.5x, or even double their weight in regular citizen workers. They come free and cost zero to maintain as it is. Perhaps if Militaristic civs and war in Civ3 needed to be given a boost this would be great, but as it was in PtW combat was the best way to get by and win. At higher difficulties most of the time war is essential at some point or other. Some changes made in C3C (SGLs for example) were made to allow more peaceful strategies to be effective as well, and a change to slavery like this would go quite some way to returning to the status quo.

I would never consider NOT taking slaves if these rules were the case, and that would mean more wars and less development - surely not what a Civ game should be all about?

[chequita guevara]

I think all military units should be able to take slaves, until a certain tech is reached. Most civilizations did this, some up until rather recently.

Most pre-modern ships should have the ability, too. If only they stayed the ship they were before they were taken.

[Jaybe]

I think all military units should be able to take slaves, until a certain tech is reached. Most civilizations did this, some up until rather recently.

After the emancipation tech (early industrial, required) is researched, "guest" workers require support costs but work at the same speed as they did. This encourages you to incorporate them into your cities. Of course, it may also discourage warfare for a time, until they are assimilated.

Under communism or fascism governments, they do NOT require upkeep.

I am sure this would NOT be a "popular" rule change, but oftentimes social changes do not come without cost. It may be simple enough to actually be implemented into Civ3.

[Azaelus]

Cheers for the feedback...
I basically jotted down that random list as a few points to work on: if I could, I'd make a mod focussing on slavery, but modding isn't my strong suit. I just feel it's something the game can really boost... you're right in that adding to the advantages of slaves may make warmongering much more appealing, but then again: this is what civilization was all about. So many cultures have owned slaves at one point - the Pyramids and the Great Wall, off the top of my head, were definitely built using slave labour. Of the existing units, the Impi (Persian) and the War Chariot (Egyptian) should probably have the enslave ability too. Perhaps slave workers having an efficiency boost could be a bit too overpowering, but I think the ability for cities to keep slaves and use them solely for cheap labour is something to work on.
Not to say a civ game should be overly war-focussed - war and peace should be a very fine line, and I think it should be much harder for a civilization to try and be uniquely "war" or uniquely "peace." There are enough ways I can think of to promote peaceful gaming, too: just as my list for slavery boosts war, but only in the early game, I've already thought of one to improve tourism (another much underemphasised part of the game IMHO), which greatly boosts peace, but which only kicks off in modern times. Adding to cultural and diplomatic aspects of the game could do so much, too.
Anyway, the fact that so much can be done with this "toolkit" you have in a civ game... just goes to show what a game it is, really!

-- Azaelus

[chequita guevara]

Get rid of the ability to build workers under despotism. That would make the game interesting. Or, you can only build workers from unassimilated populations (so you aren't forced to constantly raze enemy cities to get workers).

[pvzh]

edit: Never mind

[Sarxis]

Its just not even funny CG.

I wouldn't mind something more with Slavers, since it did play a big part in history, but I doubt Firaxis is going to make the system any more 'involved' than it already is.

I wouldn't mind seeing Explorers or something with the enslave ability. Or something..

[Willem]

Originally posted by Uber KruX
i still think that all elite units should have enslave, but thats just me.

You'd end up with so many slaves you wouldn't know what to do with them all. Definitely overkill!

[okblacke]

Originally posted by Azaelus
So many cultures have owned slaves at one point - the Pyramids and the Great Wall, off the top of my head, were definitely built using slave labour.

Hmmm. I thought the mode in historical cirlces was to downplay the use of slaves in building the Pyramids. That is, I thought I had heard that most of the builders of the pyramids were Egyptian citizens who considered it an honor, from both a patriotic and religious standpoint.

The other side of slavery not mentioned in your suggestions is that it has a deblitating effect on the general population. A "good slave" renders his master incompetent. Romans didn't read, they had Greek slaves to do it for them. Perhaps slaves don't have a gold cost--but maybe they should cost a shield per turn! The deduction would come from the richest cities, too.

There's also a huge difference between what one could call "traditional" slavery and the racist slavery that emerged in the 17th century, given huge impetus by Social Darwinists and early psychologists, and culminating with fascism. Note that the US of A was a prime factor in this development, despite also being the prime champion and example of democracy. At the time of the Revolution, Virginia was, what, 80% slave?

Not that your ideas are bad. If I were going to object to them on any grounds, it would be that they make slavery a bigger part of the game and, well, ick. I find it weird to gleefully capture workers and turn them into slaves in the modern era.

I do think that, at a minimum, there should be an advance which a tribe cannot make until it has no slaves. There should be global fallout to using slaves in a world that has largely abandoned that concept. An interesting counterpart to slavery (in a post-slavery world) might be the P.O.W.

[ok]

[smellymummy]

if enslaved is increased our games would end up with lots of floating population. if units were to cost population (kind of like a draft) + shields, that could balance things out.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Anun Ik Oba
Its just not even funny CG.

A lot of people in the OT, where I crawled out of, thought it was hilarious.

Guess it's back to the dingo.

[Argos65987]

Originally posted by okblacke


I find it weird to gleefully capture workers and turn them into slaves in the modern era.


[ok]

How about the enslavement ability stops with units from a particular era? Say land units after the middle ages don't enslave (riflemen, cavalry and forward), and sea units after the age of sail ones do not enslave.

I know these may not be the most historically accurate places in time to stop the enslavement ability, but they seem the simplest and most balanced place to stop. You could even make an arguement to stop military land units from enslaving after the ancient era groups for play balance.

[Donegeal]

I frequently mod my game to give every ancient age unit the enslave ability. I continue this up to Muskets (as traditionally beyond this point gaining slaves through war diminishes considerably, IMHO). The one exception to this is the Guerilla. They remind me of partisans from Civ II. They do what ever it takes to win, including the use of slaves.

[Rugger-UK]

Best use is to use slaves for colonys when your borders haven't expanded enough yet, especially when you raze the cities they have just come from.

Or use them to expand slow growing cities when you have made peace with or destroyed their nation.