death camps

[ndnls]

Diseased human corpse missiles, forcing people to work to death,
starvation, brain eating worms, grinding people into a thick, red
paste with high callibre assault weapons, the posts of this thread
make me feel just the least bit queasy.


As for the death camps, Just hit the raze button. Those structures
in the city are useless if there's nobody to run'em

As for Canada being imprisoned in the shackles of imperialist
slavery, about the only people that really suffered were the
natives. Like America, Canada was isolated on a resource rich
continent with no one to pose a true threat to its continued
existence. America is about 10 times larger because of its
warmer climate and easier access to important agricultural
resoures. Canada was mostly independent from the economic ties
that preclude imperialism because of its growing exports,
domestic industry and intellectual capital.

CygnusZ is right about the dependency theory of third world
development. The middle east can 'choose' to not sell oil to the
west, but then the west can 'choose' not to give millitary,
economic and monentary aid to the middle east dictatorships.
Most of the supra-national bodies tasked with pulling these
countries out of the mire of poverty have failed miserably
and even nations that were formally flying high are now on the
verge of economic meltdown.

[splangy]

I Love killing masses of people , but only if its eficient, if I have doubled production for 3 turns by working the city to death its not as good as having that city forever and producing forever...

What I always thought was a good idea was to just mass-conscript a new city to fill your front lines. What do you think?

Uber does sound childish, but isn't that like calling a bird bird-ish? I mean, is there anyone who dosent know he is 13-15?

However, I must admit ive been planing to Raze certain cities on sight, but not just for fun but for a reason, like being pink (J\K)

[Boliao]

Originally posted by Admiral PJ
Stalins russia, the german and japanese fascists had, and the chinese still arguably have, slave labor camps.

You are wrong, there are no slave labour camps in china.... If you meant people sent to the fields during the cultural revolution, I regret to tell you that although thats inhumane it is not considered as "slave labour camps".......

[CygnusZ]

Originally posted by Boliao


You are wrong, there are no slave labour camps in china.... If you meant people sent to the fields during the cultural revolution, I regret to tell you that although thats inhumane it is not considered as "slave labour camps".......

I think he's making a refrence to the fate of the protesters at Tiennamen Square. It's arguable if they're slaves, though they should count as forced labor.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by UberKruX [list=1][*]i was banned for showing people how to get around the swear filter[/list=1]

Hey uber, here's one for you.
Do you think if Dan from Firaxis (or anyone from firaxis) started circumventing the filter that they would get a one week stay in mingapulco? If so, the integirty of the board in treating all equal would likely drive off Firaxis personnel. On the other hand, if the board plays favorites (letting Firaxians stay but banning rank and file users) then we see that all in the Apolyton community are not equal under law.

Just something that was bothering me earlier.

[Mankind]

i despise people that only wish to play the "good" parts of history.

the "golden ages" of every respective civ.

there's a large number of horiffic events throughout history, and i'm not one to ignore them.

and i'm im sick for thinking it, firaxis is sick for allowing it.

and they ADDED to my idea somewhat... i just wanted to kill off population and sell improvements, but they actually let us work them to death, increasing your army size.

death camps are, in my opinion, the best appeasement to warmongers in a game geared towards peaceful players.

We are a bunch of sadists

seriously ... it actualy IS a good idea/option i like it!

"i despise people that only wish to play the "good" parts of history. "=>you're right , i also don't want to play "the good side" all the time... even inversely

this will be one of the best option's [and nobody forcess you to use it!]

[The Negotiator]

Oh boy! What a sick thread!

I love it.

[Mankind]

Originally posted by The Negotiator
Oh boy! What a sick thread!

I love it.

nothing sick here! it's realistic to kill/force serfs and other Inhabitants [well it was couple of year's/centuries ago...]

[The Negotiator]

Originally posted by Mankind


nothing sick here! it's realistic to kill/force serfs and other Inhabitants [well it was couple of year's/centuries ago...]

Okay i agree with you.I love it still. That's something i have always wanted in civ. I hated it in the colonization when you hadn't even slaves. Whats american history without slaves.

[LarryLard]

Originally posted by Lonestar
While America may have been Imperialistic in the past, it ain't a patch on the various West European powers, all the way up to the British landing troops in Sierra Leone, 1999.

Actually... oh I can't be bothered.

[Th0mas]

I don't know if anyone has raised this point.....

The more atrocities the better IMO

Include all the atrocities (including Death Camps, Biological warfare and terrorist actions al. la. NY).

Because the AI would then be able to use these against you..
...it can be very satisifying to play against the 'evil empire'.

[The Rook]

The one thing about this death camp idea is. If you want that kind of realism, you have to take the concequences. All other civilized nations should immediately declare war on you and keep it up until you are eliminated or you eliminate them.

[knott]

Is everyone here psychopaths?

[The Negotiator]

I don't know about the others but I am usually quite sane. What's wrong with torturing and killing people. That's what history is like.

[Cyclotron]

History is history. People who think we shouldn't put atrocities like death camps into the game (albeit, not excessively) just don't want to hear about it. If everyone acted like it was "too terrible to mention," everybody would have forgotten by now and nobody ever would have confronted reality to explain why things like the holocaust happened. The game models history, who are any of you to edit history?

[Kc7mxo]

The funny thing about saying that deathcamps should cause other nations to go to war with you is that it really isn't historically acurate.

Do you think World War 2 was fought because the nazi's were slaughtering people?


And I do think that something like them should be included. But we already have a sort of slavery, so if you want work camps, make workers.

In smac there was an option to annilate captured citizens, i expect there will be a similiar option.

If you want more flagrant nastyness, use your imagination.

Last game i played the sioux pissed me off, so i bombed and poisened their entire empire out of existance, and just left big holes in the ground where there empire used to be.

[knott]

I love the idea of death camps?

[Inverse Icarus]

like i said before, death camps will be a viable strategy in civ3, and i will probably use them a lot.

if you dont like them, don't use them. if you consider it "sick" then don't read this thread, and don't study history. thank you and goodbye.

(mark you can close this thread now)

[TresXF]

well, at least in my upcoming SMAC star trek : deep space 9 total conversion will be the option to build cardassian forced labor camps... (but counts as an atrocity)

i agree with uber: everything should be possible (despite the fact that i'm a "good" player )

[Mahdimael]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
History is history. People who think we shouldn't put atrocities like death camps into the game (albeit, not excessively) just don't want to hear about it. If everyone acted like it was "too terrible to mention," everybody would have forgotten by now and nobody ever would have confronted reality to explain why things like the holocaust happened. The game models history, who are any of you to edit history?

I don't know if it's necessarily that, cyclotron. I think it's more of an issue of taste. I mean, if they implement a fully 3d "whip the slave" tutorial in a game, that's not dealing with the subject in a constructive manner, is it? Even if such things are included, the repercussions of those actions should also be modeled. These can be revolts and revolutions, or diplomatic problems. I believe Firaxis has modeled some of these into the game (anger towards conscription and forced labor).

[SITS]

It is all about being capable of having an emotional response. Good or bad.

I will feel good if I can work out a great deal with several AI's after careful bargaining or if I capture a city through my superior culture. I would have a bad emotional response to simply slaughtering 'innocent' citizens.

I'm not saying either of those emotions are 'right' but I'm happy that I'm capable of such a response and I will be happier and more satisfied if Civ 3 turns out to be a game that can generate that response.

But I kind of wonder - if you don't feel bad about something you do then how can you truly feel good about something you achieve? Having an emotional response to a game is the sign of being alive and not having bits of you turned off...

[kittenOFchaos]

Top of this page...concerning Canada and Imperialism

Without Britain Canada would have become part of the USA in 1812...this war that Britain won saw the conclusion of a peace treaty that remain to this day...it brough:

1. peace ever since between usa and canada
2. no troops guard this -is it 3000 mile???- border
3. britain has not been at war with the USA since this treaty.

And all because Britain returned all land to the USA and gave her respect territorially and in not making her appear to lose anything.


Canada prospered more than most because it was colonised versus subjugated...if we had killed all the Indians and colonised India I'm sure most of the colonists descendants would have it pretty good...sure less people would be alive but they'd be happy, like certain Canadians.

[Sava]

Did you know the United States is the only nation to commit genocide? The Nazis tried, but failed. The United States exterminated a culture and forcably removed anyone who didn't fight back. Remember that when you hear Bush talk about the "evil ones".

In addition to death camps, I'd like to see forced removal as an option in a Civ game.

[Inverse Icarus]

they're not dead, theyre everywhere. their culture still exists, and they adoped many aspects of our culture.

i even think some people on this board are native american (krazyhorse?).

i am not condoning what americans did to native americans, but that was back in america's "dark ages" the way i see it.

and didnt the spanish kill off a few races?

[TresXF]

they're not dead, theyre everywhere

that's a pretty simple point of view - but typical for the victorious... the rewriting of history to their own benefit, the logic and explanations of their acting, the morale justifications

[Executor]

Originally posted by TresXF

that's a pretty simple point of view - but typical for the victorious... the rewriting of history to their own benefit, the logic and explanations of their acting, the morale justifications

And what's wrong with that? That's the whole point of winning! Don't you think the Native Americans would have done the same?

[CygnusZ]

Originally posted by Executor


And what's wrong with that? That's the whole point of winning! Don't you think the Native Americans would have done the same?

No, I think that's the major problem with the world too. People are willing to accept the victor's no matter whom they may be as correct. Our society is so backwards that the American Revolutionary TERRORISTS are seen as hero's instead of common criminals.

It takes a level of objectivity which is simply not present to understand history. Instead history tends to be the teaching of propaganda alone. You're illustrating it perfectly. We live in a society where the extermination of the American-Indian race is being justified. Ideologies obstruct the reality that our great President Andrew Jackson murdered Men, women and children out of nothing but Bloodlust.

Your are speaking a mindset that one should believe what they are told because it benefits themselves. Black's should be put in their place, and given unequal rights because I am white. There are multiple races, and a master race, because I am a member of that master race. China is the center of the world because I am Chinese. The American Revolutionaries are great because I am American. Catch-22.

[CygnusZ]

Originally posted by Executor


And what's wrong with that? That's the whole point of winning! Don't you think the Native Americans would have done the same?

No, I think that's the major problem with the world too. People are willing to accept the victor's no matter whom they may be as correct. Our society is so backwards that the American Revolutionary TERRORISTS are seen as hero's instead of common criminals.

It takes a level of objectivity which is simply not present to understand history. Instead history tends to be the teaching of propaganda alone. You're illustrating it perfectly. We live in a society where the extermination of the American-Indian race is being justified. Ideologies obstruct the reality that our great President Andrew Jackson murdered Men, women and children out of nothing but Bloodlust.

Your are speaking a mindset that one should believe what they are told because it benefits themselves. Black's should be put in their place, and given unequal rights because I am white. There are multiple races, and a master race, because I am a member of that master race. China is the center of the world because I am Chinese. The American Revolutionaries are great because I am American.

[Inverse Icarus]

what you dont understand is that every nation does what is right for itself. it does what IT THINKS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. this is based on a region's background, geography, morals, and anything else that makes up the nation.

at the time, native americans were depicted as bloodythirsty savages hell-bent on destroying american settlements by brute force. their image was that of the vikings in europe. they'd run into a settlement, pillage it, kill people, and then go home. and the small number of tribes that did that made america assume, incorrectly, that all the indians were like that.

[Dodgedemon]

I agree with UberKrux, every nation has to figure out for itself what works best at the time.

The U.S. response to the Native American "problem" wasn't real nice, but it sure as hell was effective. Ask any conquered people wether violence solves anything, see what they have to say.

I'm not condoning what we did, making and breaking treaties wasn't honorable. I just don't think we had any other options.