Nationalism in civ

[BeeBee]

Ok, firstly, I won't make any statements about nationalism nowadays to avoid political debates.

But in history it played a major role and guided the world into the current one.
I mean, when some civ conquered another nation, the work wasn't finished in most cases. The conquered were another nation, other people and they'd feel like that for still a long time, willing to revolt, willing to own or join their own nation again.

Somehow it should be in civ3. SMAC went a bit this way by adding one drone to each base taken, and this during a few turns (also by changing the base graphics only after those turns). Also should those conquered people be an important bone of contention in diplomatic meetings. Because ethnicly those people belong to the former civ.


------------------
C'est dur etre bébé

[MidKnight Lament]

Agreed. Should be included. Religion deserves a mention here too.

- MKL

[The Joker]

Not much discussion here. This is an absolute must for Civ3. The only debate should be on how to implement it...

[Gerv]

I agree at all.

[C0ckney]

Yeah nationalism should be included but I think that it should fade over time
say for example that a city is taken and held for 30-40 years then the inhabitants should become cultraly part of the civ that conquered the city.
I say culturaly because I that nationalism should be affected by 4 things
- the culture of the people (UK and USA have the same languegue and main religion but are very different)
- The ethnic roots of the people
- The History of the city (ie how long it has being part of that nation)
- and the happiness in that city ( if people are overworked and underfed then they are more likely to remember the "good old days" than if they are happy and prosperous)

So the "level" of nationalism would define the chance of civil disorder (peaceful (ish) protest)
riots or worse uprisings




------------------
Cockney used to be schizophereic but we'er ok now

[Otso Vuorio]

Nationalism has had very important role in the European history.
COckney's idea makes sense.

[The Joker]

I disagree on a conquored city totally assimilating into our civ after 30-40 turns. First of all, the assimilation time should be very dependant on you actions towards the conquored city/cities. If you have previously committed atrocities against it the assimilation time should be far longer. And as long as you're at war with the civ that the conquored city comes from the city should not at all assimilate, as it would have some chance of being liberated. The inhapitants of the city would live in this hope and therefor not assimilate. The assimilation time should also be determined by how how alike the conquored pop is to your pop (like how individualistic and militaristic they are), and on how similar your SE settings are to the conquored city's old SE settings.

Second I must say, that assimilation time is sometimes extremely long. Civs has been conquored and satayed that way for 100s of yours, and then, suddently, breaken away again. I think that there should be a difference between whether the pop of a city is satisfied with being a part of your civ, and therefor not needing extra unit garrisoned in the city, and whether the pop of the city is actually assimilated into your civ.

The first would mean, that the city would work normally in your civ, and would happend pretty fast (like 10-20 turns, again determined by your actions), but if sometime your civ is attacked by a powerful enemy, is facing a large scale civil war or such, the cities could revolt against you, and try to optain independance. There could also be an organization for liberty, which could make terrorist actions against your cities (kill people or destroy improvements) and negotiate with your enemies to make a combined war against you. In modern times it could try to get the support from the UN, which could force you to give them independance. These are all just exambles. In many cases the conquored cities would be peaceful towards you and give you no problems. If, however, it gave you a lot of problems, you could make the cities into a protectorate. You would have the ultimate control, but it would build it's own units etc. Unless the cities affected had a very large population they would normally be satisfied with being a protectorate, and therefor not give you further problems.

The second would take much longer (100+ turns) and would mean that the assimilated pop would be just like another part of your civ.

I also think it should be possible for a far away colony (5 cities close to each other on the other side of the globe) to begin getting their own distinct nationality. I think this should often happend, and would therefor be something that you would have to spend a lot of ressources on, if you didn't want this. This concept could work like the liberty bells of Colonization, and would allow for wars for independance in your colonies. Again this colony would often be satisfied with being a protectorate, if you chose to make it one.

[Az]

I think it should also depend on the regime it was in before the occupation ... religious factors could also prove useful...
[This message has been edited by Dalgetti (edited April 29, 2000).]

[C0ckney]

Great ideas but I would stand by my Original time of 30-40 (1 generation) for asssimalation
I say this because there is a great example of this in my country.
When Britains former colonlies gained independence many imigrents came over to Britain between 1950-1965.
Now their children and grandchildren are British citizens and consider themselfs British.

------------------
Cockney used to be schizophereic but we'er ok now