Alternatives to Rioting

Wormwood · August 21, 2002, 15:46

Are the massive riots that occur so often in the game really that accurate to history? I mean, just because half the city is unhappy it's overcrowded it would not in my mind, spark a massive riot. LA and NYC are overcrowded, as is Tokyo and many other cities in the world, but they don't go into these full-blown events. I think an interesting possible change would be for the happiness level of citizens to affect gold/shields/science production in a city. Unhappiness would lower these in much the same way as corruption; citizens would not work as hard, make as much money, or be willing to attend universities. Likewise, happy citizens would work better, etc. This would balance it out a bit. Just a suggestion, riots just seem a little unrealistic to me. Feel free to flail away at my argument

Jaybe · August 21, 2002, 16:00

City Production is not all concentrated on one object for many years in real life, either. It's just part of the game abstraction. If you only lost a percentage of output due to rioting, it would lessen your desire to avoid it.

In the game, city output is improved by WLTKD.

Augustus Ceaser · August 21, 2002, 16:48

I tend to just let the governer (sp?) handle the mood of my citizens. This prevents riots through the majority of the game. However that is about the only thing I let the gov. handle, other than that I tend to micromanage everything else.

Theseus · August 21, 2002, 17:33

WW, both Jaybe and Augustus make good points... I use the governor too.

Anyway, as to the abstraction part, you could also look at this way:

How many RL civs have endured...
* thousands of years of non-stop oscillating war
* a ruler who will sacrifice population to build something or to draft troops, at the drop of a hat
* that damn music!

Jaybe · August 21, 2002, 17:50

Quote:

All Originally posted by Theseus
* thousands of years of non-stop oscillating war

Ya gotta remember the great abstraction of time in the game. As far as that goes, the 100 Years War wasn't continuous warfare, was it?

Quote:

* a ruler who will sacrifice population to build something or to draft troops, at the drop of a hat

Ditto. That "drop of a hat" seemed much longer (months/years) to the cits (citizens).

Quote:

* that damn music!

Turn It OFF!! Actually, during the first few months of playing the game, I quite enjoyed it. It DID get old though.

Coracle · August 21, 2002, 19:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Wormwood
Are the massive riots that occur so often in the game really that accurate to history? I mean, just because half the city is unhappy it's overcrowded it would not in my mind, spark a massive riot. . .

No. They are not accurate to history. But neither is culture flipping, crazy levels of settler expansion, ICS strategies, and a lot of other things.

You should realize something I have come to know on this site and after playing Civ 3 at length. Much of the game is very unrealistic and non-historical, much more so than Civ 2. It is filled with off the wall crazy ideas that are pure fantasy, not history. Realize also that a lot of people playing it just don't care as they don't give a damn about realism or history.

BTW, your deprecating remarks about NYC are also not accurate.

Carver · August 21, 2002, 20:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle

BTW, your deprecating remarks about NYC are also not accurate.

Wow.

Who says its deprecating? And how is it not accurate?

Wormwood · August 21, 2002, 21:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle

No. They are not accurate to history. But neither is culture flipping, crazy levels of settler expansion, ICS strategies, and a lot of other things.

You should realize something I have come to know on this site and after playing Civ 3 at length. Much of the game is very unrealistic and non-historical, much more so than Civ 2. It is filled with off the wall crazy ideas that are pure fantasy, not history. Realize also that a lot of people playing it just don't care as they don't give a damn about realism or history.

BTW, your deprecating remarks about NYC are also not accurate.

I agree, I too have found it rather unrealistic. I enjoy the game greatly none the less; I will simply have to continue on my quest for total realism.

I intended no insult to NYC, but I find most of these major metropolises to be unclean, overcrowded, unpleasant places with nothing but steel and concrete everywhere. But then again, I live on an island of 200 (plus 1000 inmates), so any city seems overcrowded to me.

Carver · August 21, 2002, 22:04

You better hope those prison gates hold...

Zachriel · August 21, 2002, 22:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Wormwood
LA and NYC are overcrowded, as is Tokyo and many other cities in the world, but they don't go into these full-blown events.

Los Angeles, riots in 1965 and 1992
New York, riots in 1863 and 1969
Tokyo, riots in 1918 and 1923

Wormwood · August 21, 2002, 22:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Carver
You better hope those prison gates hold...

If they ever do, you'll see a post with this subject: How do I fight a war in the modern age when outnumbered 5 to 1?

GeneralTacticus · August 22, 2002, 02:54

Quote:

No. They are not accurate to history. But neither is culture flipping, crazy levels of settler expansion, ICS strategies, and a lot of other things.

*SIGH* Are you ever going to address this list?

"The Ionian Greeks flipped from Persia. Ancient Israel flipped from the Romans. The West Bank and Gaza have been trying to culture-flip from Israel for years. Israel itself flipped from the Arabs. Persia flipped from the empire of the Medes. Kosovo attempted to flip from Serbia to Albania. Slovenia flipped out of Yugoslavia. America flipped away from Britain. Various tribes in the Aztec empire flipped to Spain when the invasion began. Texas flipped from Mexico. Both Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 flipped out of the Soviet sphere, and the Soviets sent in troops to reclaim them. Care to elaborate on how these are NOT historical examples of culture-flipping?"

Galvatron · August 22, 2002, 04:15

Yeahh but in all those cases the whole state was in a mess and they rebelled against bad conditions and oppression but it took a long time and often it failed but in Civ III a culture flip occurs for nothing it's a constant thread and it destroys the whole game as you don't have time to do anything else because you always have to look at these little, annoying, bothering citizens. And in the real world there isn’t a problem which you can’t solve with military power just station some tanks in a city and the people will be quiet. Should be in Civ III too just say 6 armoured divisions and everything is in order.

GeneralTacticus · August 22, 2002, 04:23

Quote:

Should be in Civ III too just say 6 armoured divisions and everything is in order.

Tanks alone in a big city aren't all that hard to fight. Even if you can't take them all on and win, you can still escape into areas too narrow for them to follow you, and the only way for them to force you out is destroy most of the city.

Zachriel · August 22, 2002, 07:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Galvatron
Should be in Civ III too just say 6 armoured divisions and everything is in order.

That is exactly how the game works. You need to have twice the sum of foreign nationals and tile overlap. If you have this, you will never experience a flip.

Jerusalem flipped away from Rome because the garrison was too small. The rebels destroyed the garrison and declared independence. Rome made war and razed the city. As far as the suddenness of the action:

"Caesar, there is an urgent message."
"What can be so important at this hour? Well send the messenger in."
"Radicals in Jerusalem have rebelled and killed the garrison."
"But the Legions?"
"Sorry Sire, they were on campaign in nearby Syria."
"Well send them back then and retake the city."
"Sorry Sire, they have returned to Palestine, but they have no siege equipment. An assault would be folly."
"Summon the Italian Legions. We will teach the rebels a lesson that will echo through time."

Zachriel · August 22, 2002, 08:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Galvatron
you always have to look at these little, annoying, bothering citizens. And in the real world there isn’t a problem which you can’t solve with military power just station some tanks in a city and the people will be quiet.

"little, annoying bothering citizens"

That might be your problem right there.

Look at current-day Israel in the West Bank. With complete and absolute military superiority, they cannot control the native population. The Palestinian people will continue to sap Israel's strength until either peace is achieved or something gives.

Deathwalker · August 22, 2002, 09:02

Though I aggree that riot's could be changed. The one thing I would like to see a a part of a civ break off and declare indipendance e.g. America