Terrorism in Civilization III?

[Zer0_T0lerance]

In the wake of Tuesday's attack on the United States and because Civilization III is still in Beta, I thought it would be a good idea to mention that terrorism should be added into Civilization III. Not that if I even know if terrorism is already in Civilization III. Just food for thought. . .

[TechWins]

Will you, perhaps, comment on how this might work?

[Gramphos]

Should it be the Modern Barbarian attack?

[faded glory]

Pousin water supplies will still be an option. That is terrorists. 'Suicide Bombing' a city improvement with a spy is an option also.I would like chemical warfare.....but thats another thread.

I dont know.....Terrorism is part of history. Civ3 will have it.

PBEM will definetaly be interesting with these kind of options. I hope it comes with the first edition

But again,not here, that is another thread....

[TechWins]

Should it be the Modern Barbarian attack?

Well, I never found that idea all that interesting. While it may have been a good idea, I just didn't see much point in it.

Pousin water supplies will still be an option. That is terrorists. 'Suicide Bombing' a city improvement with a spy is an option also.I would like chemical warfare.....but thats another thread.

It seems to me that this person was thinking of some new, radical idea for terrorism. If Zero was talking about what you mentioned then of course Civ will have "terrorism". I thought Zero was referring to something different.

[Rasputin]

i would like to see an option where you can Secretly enact terrorist activity agaisnt an opponent and the oppenonet wont know who did it... !!!!

[Ralf]

Implementing empire-indipendant terrorism in the game like civ-3 isnt viable - its out of scale. Theres only upto eight participants in this game - all of them full-scale standalone empires. If one empire is harassing another emipire, it isnt "terrorism" anymore - its a traditional WAR.

[SerapisIV]

In general, terrorism has not been a tactic of nations the size of Civilization countries. True, the US and Russia funded left and right wing terrorists during the cold war, but they were mostly contained to small countries and fall under the banner of "incite revolt" Terrorism as it was this week is an act usually by small minorities who hold beliefs counter to the beliefs of the larger powers. Such acts in Civ3 would then most likely consist of random events, usually impacting the Civs with the higher culture ratings. Being that the most recent Ask-the-Civ update declared that there would be no random events, I hold the possibility of terrorism in Civ3 highly unlikely.

Also, look at the industry as a whole, Red Alert 2 is being offered with new box covers because of pictures of war around US monuments. Microsoft Flight Sim 2002 is taking out the Wolrd Trade Center from its NY model. The game industry already recieved a backlash from Columbine and other school shootings, the last thing they want is publicity saying that games are "unpatriotic" or mocking of the victims of the recent atrocity. Even with a name like Civilization, no store would carry it amongst the current political climate of war and victim remembrence.

I hope that Civ3 does not include terrorism, even if it is a realistic part of history. I say so because I don't want any political horse$hit stopping me from getting the game I've waited years now to play. Save the idea for Civ4 when the political climate will most likely be more accepting of such game concepts

[Trifna]

"In general, terrorism has not been a tactic of nations the size of Civilization countries."

Well... Seige is some sort of terrorism. Blocking caravans and anything that isn't military is too. Some parts of spying. Destroying other's infrastructures, maybe also blocking other's access to some ressources or the outer citiy's fields (agricultural fields, ressources), etc, etc.

But that political thing...

I should add that, shamely, the general history of civilisation is pundered with atrocities, wars, city pillaging and all these things we would like to put out, as what about Americans were now victim.

[RedWhiteArcher]

But wasn't the sabotage in Civ2 somewhat a terrorism but against specific targets, poison water suply against population and the plant NUKE a major terrorism act?

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by Trifna
"In general, terrorism has not been a tactic of nations the size of Civilization countries."

Well... Seige is some sort of terrorism. Blocking caravans and anything that isn't military is too. Some parts of spying. Destroying other's infrastructures, maybe also blocking other's access to some ressources or the outer citiy's fields (agricultural fields, ressources), etc, etc.

But these concepts are for the most part already in Civ3. With resources, seiges/blocking caravans are actually valuable by pillaging road networks to starve weaken an enemy.

I think however, that the difference lies in the definition. Terrorism like this week is acts of violence directly against civilians who are not involved in any war and are not in a war-zone. Rape and pillaging the countryside, those areas are at least in the war-zone.

Actually, I guess that as long as the diplomat/spy unit make a reappearence in Civ3, that terrorism is already completely in the game, as you can destroy (bomb) city-improvements and poison water-supplies. And just as today, if you get caught, it's an act of war.

Now that I think more intently on the topic, I think that terrorism is already in Civ3, and I don't see a reason for its expansion from Civ2/SMAC abilities. I just hope it doesn't get labeled as "terrorism" for the political reasons I posted earlier.

[jsw363]

I'm not sure that sieges are in per se. I think that one could use theri units to cover all available food and sheild producing tiles, but I think that's the only way that you can actually lay siege to a town. Pillaging road networks won't do anything to actually starve a town into submission. It could drive the populace to rebel though, when cut off from thier luxury resources.

There are embargoes however where you (and any allies) could cut off supplies of a resource to an enemy.

I hope that the spy unit makes a reappearence as I liked some of the "attacks" that it could make on a city.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Zer0_T0lerance
I thought it would be a good idea to mention that terrorism should be added into Civilization III

what would the be difference from spies?

[Zer0_T0lerance]

Originally posted by MarkG
what would the be difference from spies?

There is a BIG difference between terrorists and spies. Spies only gather information about the enemy, while terrorists actually terrorize the people.

[tniem]

But where would the terrorists come from? The game is about different civs fighting it out. Where do terrorists come into play? All it seems to me is that they are random events that would hurt the player that is in the lead. So no I don't think it is a good idea at all.

And to tell you the truth, I think you are just trying to be a troll and get me pissed off. Well it ain't going to work, your not worth my time.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Zer0_T0lerance
There is a BIG difference between terrorists and spies. Spies only gather information about the enemy or send information to the enemy about their civilization, while terrorists actually terrorize people.

i'm talking about spies and diplomats who in civ games did more than collecting info

[Oligarf]

I think Terrorist should be small CIV's, computer-controlled but not as complex as a real CIV's. Bin Laden's should exist, in some way.

Oligarf

[Inverse Icarus]

nations don't use terrorism (although some may support it) as a war tactic.

the taliband has threatened pakistan with a real war, like a government should.

in short: terrorism should be added in to the "random events" that aren't in civ3.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by UberKruX
in short: terrorism should be added in to the "random events" that aren't in civ3.

It could be added as an act of modern Barbarians.

[Inverse Icarus]

eh. i dont like that idea.

"Barbarians hijack a few 757's and crash into the Hanging Garderns in Stalingrad".

nope.

[faded glory]

I do!!!!!!!!


Barbarian factions inside your borders should be able to allie with a civ. I like the idea of Terrorists...but not barbarian being them! Terrorism is a real part of war! You should be able to attack citizens in a city and score some unhapiness points

[Martinus]

Why don't we simply give barbarians possibility of spawning diplomats/spies as well, with the same option available as the players have.

So they could get next to a city and sabotage a building, poison a well or plant a nuclear device - wouldn't it be exactly what we are trying to accomplish here?

Also, since there are now camps of barbarians - it would be possible to destroy them, as terrorist camps.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Martinus
Why don't we simply give barbarians possibility of spawning diplomats/spies as well, with the same option available as the players have.

So they could get next to a city and sabotage a building, poison a well or plant a nuclear device - wouldn't it be exactly what we are trying to accomplish here?

Also, since there are now camps of barbarians - it would be possible to destroy them, as terrorist camps.

Awesome idea

God Bless the USA

[Lordfluffers]

Originally posted by UberKruX
eh. i dont like that idea.

"Barbarians hijack a few 757's and crash into the Hanging Garderns in Stalingrad".

nope.

I really like the idea of bing able to destroy a world wonder. It always irritated me there was no covert way of nullifying he effects of a civs wonder without physically capturing it!

[Zer0_T0lerance]

Originally posted by MarkG
i'm talking about spies and diplomats who in civ games did more than collecting info

I realize that. So why not separate terrorists from spies? After all, civilizations usually don't control terrorists. They can only support them if they choose to do so.

Terrorist units could be like Barbarians, only they don't attack the countries that support them. Supporting terrorists is like another way of waging war on enemy nations, but it's very dangerous because those nations don't have direct control of the terrorists networks. So if the terrorists go too far the nation(s) that harbor(s) them could be found responsible for the terrorist's actions and war might be waged on the harboring nation(s).

Terrorism could be quite an effective method of waging war because it may cause victim governments to collapse, but only if their governed nations already have a lot of unhappy citizens/corruption in them.

If a nation chooses to support terrorists it takes a chunk out that nation's tax dollars because it costs money for the terrorists to carry out their "evil plans."

Terrorism should only come during the modern age of a nation. A nation will have to discover some key techs before it is allowed to "terrorize" other nations.

[Fresno]

Although there are some bloodthirsty nations in the real world, I don't think terrorists should be added as a small civ. Terrorists are citizens of different countries (sometimes democratic, sometimes ruled by a tyrant) and haven't got their own cities, their own government or whatever.

I think terrorists should be included in a new version of civ, but only as very unhappy citizens of one of the already existing civs.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

First of all, I'd like to say that I really like the idea of barbarians producing diplomats and spies (in principle), but I'd like to see a vastly different approach to espionage/terrorism! As an anology, building libraries, Universities etc gives you research points that help you to get advances. So certain "intelligence"-style improvements should give you "Espionage Points" that help you commit acts of espionage! Basically, once you've built your first Intelligence-gathering improvement, you should be able to go to your Foreign Affairs screen and select which Civs you want to target, and whether you have a preference for Espionage, Sabotage or both! The number of "Espionage Points" would determine the frequency of events, the chance (and level) of success and the chance of the acts being traced back to you. In fact, when you commit a particularly nasty act of sabotage, you should be given the option to leave behind evidence to implicate another Civ!!!
Espionage improvements in your Civ (# and type) should also be able to Reduce the number of acts against you and their chancefor success (Counter-Intelligence!) Getting back to the Barbarians, however, I think that they, to, should have Espionage points that they can use to commit random acts of Sabotage (aka terrorism) against civs. It should be possible, however, for a civ to open diplomatic channels with the barbarians and either pay them money (or resources) to either stop them from targetting your Civ, or to get them to target one of your enemies (and thus keeping your hands clean)!!!
Anyway, I think that would work a lot better than the old Diplomat/Spy Unit!!!

Yours,
The Aussie_Lurker

[Martinus]

I like your idea, Aussie Lurker, but I don't know whether it will not complicate the game too much, making it more MOO- rather than Civ-like.

Another option can be to simply require money to stage a terrorist attack.

What about barbarians (terrorists) - well, they can have money from 3 sources:
1. conquered cities (obviously),

2. money paid to them in exchange for not attacking/sabotaging (there was something like that in Civ2 - now, if we have barbarian spies and diplomats, they can simply approach the city and demand like 100@ for not poisoning the city wells etc.),

3. some of the corruption money - the money from corruption has to go somewhere - why don't give some of it to barbarians/terrorists - this would make fighting corruption/criminal infrastructure/etc. all the more useful.

BTW, I know my ideas are not ideal. However I believe they can be applied without tweaking the current Civ model (unless Spies/Diplomats have been completely revisited in Civ3) - so hopefully my ideas could even be introduced in Civ3

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Actually Martinus, my idea is a tweaking of the Espionage model used in "Birth of the Federation" (a game which I REALLY enjoy BTW), all I did was to massively simplify it so it will fit into the Civ game. I feel, though, that with the massive change to Civs trade model, and the subsequent demise of the caravan (yay), that we may very well see the same thing happen to the model for espionage (ie. bye, bye Spy!!!) If that happens, then I think the model I've mentioned would definitely fill that gap.

The_Aussie_Lurker.

[Kurgan]

One thing would be intelligence, spies and things like that, and another to support and finance terrorism. But if the option of financing terrorism and support it, directed against other civ is put in place, it should be added the possibility that when you change government the terrorist group, that for example was created when your country was a Soviet Republic starts attacking you and asking another civ that is under Communist rule to help them to revert your country to the "true way of Comunism". This will add the backfire option, and will make think twice before supporting a bunch of bastards.