Civ3 the Movie: It's Called "Thirteen Days"

raingoon · January 16, 2001, 03:46

Watching this movie about the US "quarantine" (read "blockade") of Cuba in 1962, I was struck by how HUGE an act this was.

In many a Civ2 game I "quarantined" a rival nation, which meant simply attacking any ships that went where I didn't want them to go with the result being war. Either starting it or continuing it. Watching the story of the Cuban Missile Crisis today got me thinking --

a) Blockades add drama and fun to the game; therefore

b) I'd like to see the AI in Civ 3 know what a blockade is; and

c) I'd like an option for diplomatic negotiation; war is not always the invevitable result of a blockade -- Blockades often are about forcing your rival to capitulate to your demands WITHOUT spilling blood.

I hope everyone on the design team at Firaxis sees this movie and continues to think about not just what new features can be added to ALLOW players to do new things, but what features (like official BLOCKADES) can be added to PREVENT things from being done.

Bluevoss · January 16, 2001, 10:56

Well, then, you would want to have sieges, too. Its always felt a little strange that I would have a town surrounded with units, and they are still farming behind my lines and feeding the city.

You should be able to attempt to starve a population into submission.

------------------
Bluevoss-

Sirotnikov · January 16, 2001, 18:48

You can if you put units on the mega-food producing squares (assuming not all 21 squares have farms and are plains).

But I do agree that units sneaking out to the external squares seems inappropriate. I mean, it is realistic but not in such an extent

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 18, 2001, 15:10

I saw thirteen days last weekend, not to get off the subject, but it followed the true account pretty well. getting back to civ3...Blockades are a great idea, I've never seen or thought of this before. I also want sieges implemented, so you can knock down city walls and such with catapults, while your troops starve the surrounding country side for food.

great ideas.

raingoon · January 18, 2001, 15:36

Sieges and Blockades definitely go together, and I think both should be implemented functionally into the AI of Civ3.

Because of course we already can implement a siege in Civ2 simply by denying the use of food land and surrounding a city with your military -- what I'm suggesting is that the AI be taught to identify a siege (or a blockade) and negotiate with other players to end them. More importantly, to understand the threat of them and negotiate with other players to prevent them in the first place.

So to clarify, and borrow from a word from a great scene in "Thirteen Days" -- In addition to nifty new features, a new "vocabulary" to USE those features is required, so that we can communicate with the AI on a deeper level. Sieges and blockades would amount to new vocabulary words -- that is, any condition requiring action or reaction from another player.

Henrik · January 19, 2001, 11:26

Great Ideas!
Although a blockade would have to do some good to:
When you move a ship into a city you should get a dialog asking you wheter you want to blockade or bombard the city. Incase of a blockade the trade of the city should be reduced and half of the trade arrows (or whatever they will be called in civ3) that is whitdrawn from the blockaded city should be added to the homecity of the blockading unit/units (this is to reflect the amount of trade ships that are either sunk (lost trade arrows) or captured (in which case the cargo goes to the blockader)). The ship would then be in blockade duty (not being able to move until you click on it, which will also end the blockade). The blockaded civ might very well send a few ships to take care of the blockading force.
This way blockades will get the effect they had in reallity (possibly bringing a nations economy to it's knees).
[This message has been edited by Henrik (edited January 19, 2001).]

January 19, 2001, 12:55

Yes, I agree. Blockades and seiges would add realism to the game.

Henrik · January 20, 2001, 11:52

Certainly!

ajli@home · January 21, 2001, 21:56

Actually, trading by sea would have very little effect if you rewe to blockade (considering that sea tiles are useless unless you have a harbor). Let's say that sea tiles get like +7 trade or something like that (whatever) that they make much, much more than land trade, so that blockades are much more effective. Rather than having the arrows halved, no food or trade may be produced there at all.

Also we should have besieging too. The zones will be blocked out like zones of control. Any space adjacent to an enemy unit cannot be "harvested" from if they are besieging or blockading you.