I haven't thought this to an end and it probably has some side-effects I wouldn't want, butbut I simply have to tell you the idea:

How would it be to have a low cost card called "Slavery" which allows to keep killed enemy units after a successful attack. They could be used like value "1" cards (i.e. having 2 slave tokens=4, 3=9 etc.) and one would be allowed to store up to, say, 6 tokens before returning them. Of course, slave tokens could be subject of trade too, to acumulate slaves or to free own tokens. Keeping the tokens instead of just having cards you draw for a victory would keep players from agreeing to pointless wars just for the sake of exchanging slave tokens...

Opinions?

An interesting option.
Mostly because of slaves exchange.
It encourages trading between "enemies".
I wouldn't allow changing slaves for Civ cards.

Raffaele

Well...

The basic idea is sound... most ancient empires got thier slaves from conquried enemies. However as Civlizaion doen't really delve into actual war but rather loose conflict and cultrual migration I'm leaning to the fact that such a change would be a little too detailed for this.

On another front I'd be very reluctant to include a "slavery" advance. I like to think of Slavery as the ancient human default that should be overcome and does not require any special thinking. Every civlizaion comes default using slavery - its just an ancient norm. In addition quite a few people might be offended and the result might distact people from the project as a whole. I'm not offended by it mind you, but unless it brings a signifiticant historical/game-play benifit I'd rather not make it an integral part of the game.

It surely would make the game more conflictive.


Right



Always those poor people who can't live with the hard reality. I once got almost kicked from a Civ3-forum because I was making a sarcastic sidenote about the stupidity that a wine bomus resource gives additional food in the game while the horse resource doesn't...

Hah!

Hi I am new here:)

I like htis idea though. But I also see it as being a 'bad' thing about a civilization. Although their should be minimal penilty.

It could be as simple as the card not counting for points.

But the thing is slavery would be very powerful. Therefore most would go for it so I think making it a card would be wasteful.

Instead, I think after a civ is out of the stone age it should be able to take slaves from other civs out of the stone age. In this way, it will not be a extreme hurtfull factor in the begining when those few guys may be important (I have played as Illeria and let my pop grow to 55 before building cities... I ofcourse through a few guys at my border civs to show them where I stood:D .. So I had 28 rather than 32 and hten popped up to 55).

Anyways, I think it could add a new spunk to the game if needed. Here is how I would see it:

AQUIRING SLAVES
(as stated above) Slaves can only be acquired by a civ who is past the stone age and from a civ past the stone age.

Conflict is done as normal however, for every 3 nationals (meaning one specofic civ type) 1 is flipped over. After coonflict is resolved (their is enough food for the non flipped pieces) check for possible slavery.

Slavery check:
Only one civ can claim slaves. If their are multiple civs in a space where slaves are to be claimed they are removed from the board. A civ can not claim its own slaves.

NOTE:
I thought about this number (3) and it seems the most logical. 2 is far to small as there are plenty of 2 tiles and slaves would be taken far too often because it would be so tempting. 3 however is just enough to make it only worth it in sometimes and enough to sack a city occasionaly.

SLAVERY USAGE

1. Hold back opponents growth and economy
2. Civ acheivment cards
3. conflict
4. City support

1. This one is an inderect effect of having slaves but a very good bonus. However, this needs to be limited. 6 is probably good but should be play tested with some other numbers.

2. This usage should be called 'Overworking':twisted:. It makes the most sence I think. I think they should have the same value as a 2 card but be limited to a turn in of 4. Having 6 though they could of course turn in for 32 (4) and 8 (2) for a total of 40. Help but I think not enough to really make it worth it to have slaves leing around in your territory.

3. Slaves can fight off your enemies for you. However, since they are slaves they will not fight very willingly and not be as effective. So slaves and any units stacked with slaves in combat fight without METALWORKING. If the civ does not have Metalworking this does not have much effect..... But if the civ is running around capturing his opponents people he will likely be investing in metalworking soon[:p]

Slaves can fight alone however. EVEN against their own people! Slave dominence remains as long as the group of slaves is next to a city or unit of the controlling civ. The controlling civ can be marked by making a couple colored tiles pieces of paper before hand (any marker will do). IF AT ANYTIME, a group of slaves is no longer next to its controlling civ, the slaves are immeadiately freed by turning them right side up (civ owner resumes full control).

4. This is the best part I think and makes the slaves all worth it. Should at good slaves wars too:D Slaves can support a city as normal units do. IN ADDITION, slaves require less food. Therefore two slaves can fit where one free unit lives.

In addition to this 2 Civ Cards shoudl be added.

Slave Plantation Pre-Req MetalWorking, Minning
cost 100 (DOES NOT COUNT TOWARDS ADVANCEMENT)
OVERWORKED slaves now produce one higher value but can be no higher than the max of 4 (same as minning but for slaves).
Aggitates Slave Revolt

Equality Rights Pre-Req Philosphy
Cost 220
Civ with this advancement can not enlsave or be enslaved. All slaves within this civs empire and all slaves of this civ are now freed
Slave Revolt has no effect

In addtion Slave Revolt must be reconsidered. Rather than not counting normal units for city support, that amount of slaves are freed (chosen by the victim). So it will have a simular effect but also the effect of the slaves then being torked and possibly trying to enslave yoru people.

SLAVE TRADING:
Slaves can be given freely for anything. This means you can add slaves to a deal but they CAN NOT replace a card (still must have atleast 3 cards etc. etc) Slaves can be traded for other slaves (match those nationals up) or for military support ("I'll give you three prime Egyptian slaves if you send a couple guys in to stop the invasion of my city" type trade). Anything is allowable for the trading. HOWEVER, they can not be teleported across the board. They are where they are and you have to move them if you want them somewhere else. This may mean shipping them or it may mean an attempt at going through the land of their ancestors... But that in itself will make things interesting.
I picture ships of slaves travling the Med dropping 'em off at various places. Would be cool.

Oh and I would say for a rule of trading slaves while trading cards, the agreed amount and type of slaves MUST be kept

Well keep me informed if you try it out8)

Hello Oni, welcome here with your ideas.
I just read them and I mostly like them, but:

I do not agree about slaves fighting for their "owners". I don't know of populations using slaves to fight in wars. They were used to transport weapons or to cook, but never to fight, that I know.

Slave revolt, when slaves are in, could be changed to be like Barbarian hordes: Slaves turns on their original side and fight their owners. This could even bring interesting results.

Raffaele
Goblin's lair

I like the idea of slaves, fits right in with the times.

IMO it should not be made part of the base game, but rather as a variant for those who enjoy an aggressive game.

The way I would think about slaves is as a commodity that rewards aggressive play, although NOT one that you can get dealt from the commodity deck. The slave commodity cards would be kept separate and the only way to get one would be to successfully sack a city, thus you would receive a commodity card from the cities previous owner AND a slave card from the deck.

I would probably start with a trade value of 5 or 6 (along with Cloth & Silver), but only allow 2 or 3 to be cashed in at any one time for Civ cards. These two values would have to be determined by experiment as the danger would be that it would turn into a wargame as opposed to just an aggressive variant.