UN victory too easy?

[Travathian]

Has anyone lost a Secretary General vote if they built the UN?

4 regent/2 monarch games and not once has it even been close in the voting. All I do is give away all my techs/money/luxaries to kiss butt, and most everyone votes for me. I'm baffled as to why the other civs would ever even vote for anyone but themselves? If they all abstain but the top two, then its a tie.
This has gotten to be ridiculous. I just build it, and never hold a vote now, and keep playing for a different type of victory.

[ICMB]

I lost a UN vote in my most recent Regent game.

I had been focused on the Egyptians, and was gleefully watching my opponents beat Egypt down, but in the meantime Japan was making lots of friends. So, when the vote was held in the 1700's, Japan won.

I reloaded, and didn't allow the vote to happen, and eventually *barely* won a space race victory in the late 1800's.

Note: ICBM's make *great* temporary standins while you get the tech necessary for wonders/spaceship parts. I was able to get most of the spaceship components the same turn I got the requisite tech, except for the last piece, which took an extra turn in my super-production city with the Iron Works.

Oh, and if you don't like the diplomatic victory, just disable it when you start the game.

- ICMB

[jack_frost]

I agree. My one diplomatic victory was sort of...anti-climactic.

There should be at least some kind of diplomatic negotiations or something. Yeah, actually, that'd be cool:

Once the UN is built the diplomacy screen has a new option. Secretary General Vote. You have to negotiate (for huge sums) in order to guarentee votes. It could get interesting both you and the japanese are trying to convince the germans to vote for you, and a bidding war begins. Almost like a diplomatic space race.

Anyway, yeah. I agree. The diplomatic win blows.

[vmxa1]

I did not lose it, but was out voted to no conclusion. I could have tried to win over a vote or to as I had plenty of stuff trade or give, but figured it was not worth it. I just wanted to see how it worked.

[Frodo_05]

Hello,

what I am really missing is the option to challenge the vote, i.e. if somebody else is elected you challenge the election and thereby immediately declare war on everybody.

No quarter will be given...

An option would be that all other countries 'unite' under the umbrella of the victor of the election. You would then face one 'super-country'.

Cultural takeovers, corruption and a few other factors must be tweaked as well. Nobody would join this pariah nation, while your citizens might be willing to join the others more likely.

[eMarkM]

I'm baffled as to why the other civs would ever even vote for anyone but themselves?

I think only the top two civs in terms of population/land mass are considered in a vote, so everyone can't vote for themselves.

I have not had the same experience with easy UN wins. What level are you playing at? Maybe it's because I'm practicing genocide on the other civs that they don't vote for me, I don't know .

e

[HunterAssasin]

I lost the only time I held votes. It was one of my first few games and I wanted to see how it worked, so I build it and it seems my warlike ways were not forgotten by the other civs, I lost 4 to 5 to the Japanese, it sucked so I reloaded and switched production. After that I was the agressor in two world wars(show them for not voting for me huh? what now! ) and eventually won in the space race.

I think they should change it to how diplomatic victory was in SMAC, a lot harder there.

[kmj]

I won it the first time I played (chieftan); the next time I played, I was smaller and didn't build the UN, but there were only 4 civs left, so I abstained to prevent a winner. Got a decent head start at the space race and won that way.

Perhaps it would be hard to buy off other civs if you had a history of war with them?

[Bill_in_PDX]

Originally posted by eMarkM

Maybe it's because I'm practicing genocide on the other civs that they don't vote for me, I don't know .

e

Mark,
I'm no expert on human relations, but I am guessing that you might be on to something there.

Bill

[solo]

To be included as a candidate you must:


1) Be the one who built the wonder.

or

2) Control 25% or more of the world's territory.

or

3) Have 25% or more of the world's population.


Thus, more than 2 can be included for the vote.

A UN victory is too easy, because gifts can make up for past treacheries, or be used to buy uncertain votes.

[GePap]

Diplomatic victory here should be closer to how it was executed in SMAC or even MOO2. Those were fine. Also, why no cool ending like with the spaceship?

[player1]

If you ask me, I think that Diplomatic Victory wasn't really finished by Firaxis because of lack of time.
So, that's probably a reason why is it so simple.

[vmxa1]

Frodo_05, sounds like you have MOO's Final War in mind, I like it.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Travathian
All I do is give away all my techs/money/luxaries to kiss butt, and most everyone votes for me.

The trick is NOT to "give away all my techs/money/luxaries" near the end-game, and STILL being able to win a diplomatic victory.

Anyway; Firaxis should fix this, so that one cannot do above in order to win diplomatically. In the mean time; Just dont exploit this loophole, this way.

I'm baffled as to why the other civs would ever even vote for anyone but themselves?

And IM baffled why the game even allowes any candidate to vote for themselves. It shouldnt.

[Travathian]

I think the way they did it in SMAC was so much better. So, this is yet another aspect of the game that took a step back.

I'd like to see it work like this:

Top two civs are the only ones you can vote for. When the vote comes up, you can see who everyone is voting for. You can also contact all of the leaders and negotiate for them to change their vote. Voting is NOT 1 point per civ, it is 1 point per population unit in the civilization. If everyone votes the same, game over. If not, the winner and everyone voting for him/her are then allied against the loser and his/her allies.

Possibly make it so that only population over 12 counts? I don't know. I just hate the thought of that little two city civ barely hanging on can basically veto an election.

[Master Marcus]

Oh yes the diplo elections were much better in SMAC. But the Space Race is by far the easiest victory - at least the fastest possible for the hybrids-peaceful builders. I guess the fastest way for warmonger players is domination.

[Dienstag]

I too lost my first (and so far only) UN vote. I lost another one once when someone else built the UN, prompting me to think "I better always build the UN or else I'll always lose." I haven't had a chance yet to win the vote by bribing, but if it's as easy as it sounds....

Does anyone have strategies for what to do if, somehow, another Civ builds the UN? Do you suddenly try to be really nice, while simultaneously increasing population and/or land area if necessary? Does taking over the UN city transfer its benefits to you?

[barefootbadass]

Originally posted by player1
If you ask me, I think that Diplomatic Victory wasn't really finished by Firaxis because of lack of time.
So, that's probably a reason why is it so simple.

@#$^% Infogrames!!!

[civ-n00b]

maybe they should do the UN vote like they did in SMAC (where # votes is proportional to total. pop).

also, if you were THE superpower - ICBMs, complete invasion fleets, future tech... and you lost, wouldn'y u want to challenge that (with an ICBM or 2?). i know i would...

[Blaupanzer]

The concept that the UN would elect a world leader and that everyone else would abide by it is a little nonsensical if a war is going on. If these votes were restricted to times of peace, then the result might make sense. I agree, the result is very anti-climatic.

Second question: If you leave the world-domination option on how can you win by conquering the world? Seems that ought to be an either/or switch on the victory conditions.

[Sevorak]

The only problem with the SMAC diplo system was that for leader votes (either Governor or Supreme Leader) it was more a game of expanding population and bribing/adjusting SE choices for people to pact you. A vote where executing a pop-boom was just as important as pacting a large faction...? Not as diplomatic as it could be. I agree it is better than this three-window thing we have now, but not by much.

That said, I'd like to see more resolutions in regards to the UN. Economic sanctions, world emissions agreements, antiballistic missile treaties, throw in a Declaration of Human Rights (auto-activating sanctions on people who rush-build with people), and the UN could become a seriously involved part of the game. Even better, your support on any of these issues could be part of a deal...or supporting someone else bringing an issue to the table could encourage them to vote for you later.

-Sev

[Kolyana]

I like Frodo's idea alot. The idea of going down in a blaze of glory is a whole lot better than the anti-climatic cumulation of the UN.

Hm. Maybe "Fizzle of Insignificane" would be more apt.