Option idea: honoring geneva conventions?

[zwzsg]

The point of war is to damage the enemy in every way possible.

Not true. The point of war is to replace the governement of a country with another. Hurting the population is only a mean to an end. Whenever possible, you'll want the keep the country in a good shape for when you'll rule over it.

How the hell do you govern that with rules?

Following Geneva's convention can give you a strategic edge: During WWII, many germans surrendered to the US because they knew they'd be treated well.

its retarded srsly. [..] it just doesnt appeal to my moral integrity, but rather offends it.

Even Hitler agreed to not kill prisoners and to not use gas on the battlefield, despite how it was the most effective weapon of the time, and how he had the best chemist and chemical plant. You are more vile than Hitler!

[CarRepairer]

So you win, by tricking your opponent into bombing your human shield- great idea, i like it, finally some humanism shielding my dragons teeths.

Much like the real world of today - the pc war for hearts & minds matters more than pure strength.

and Astrum Gallina would, of course, eat them

Of course.

"laws of war" is one of the most retarded ideas ever conceived. The point of war is to damage the enemy in every way possible. How the hell do you govern that with rules? its retarded srsly. If you say something about justice just know its always the losing sides fault.

I do believe that's the most insightful post you've ever made.


Re: Civilians
CA:K (as yet unreleased) and The Cursed both have critters a la *craft style. The only related sufferring you'll feel is guilt over hurting the cute little piggies. And now a screenie...

[Tribulex]

Remorse? i just smelled bbq. hax


Yeah and car thanks for agreeing we are true dickbrothers

and zwzsg hitler being "vile" is rather harsh considering he was one of the greatest leaders of his day. While some of his motives and actions could be said to be vile, ultimately it was where he held back and fought "according to the rules" that i believe prevented him from taking over europe. That and america figuring out that the rules sucked and that nukes pretty much could fix any country.

[Google_Frog]

Ever played KP? These games are not meant to replicate war, they are meant to be fun. If you can implement civilians in a fun way go ahead. Don't do it just for the realism as chances are it will not be fun.

Overmind would gain some minor resources from killing them

its the "decapitor"bot:
an autonomous warcrim unit(agreed for genocide & etnic cleaning)

[Gota]

Brilliant

[Tribulex]

Ever played KP? These games are not meant to replicate war, they are meant to be fun. If you can implement civilians in a fun way go ahead. Don't do it just for the realism as chances are it will not be fun.

Overmind would gain some minor resources from killing them

its the "decapitor"bot:
an autonomous warcrim unit(agreed for genocide & etnic cleaning)

remind me why was someone of this skill and lucidity of mind banned? Neddie please fix

[PicassoCT]

we should honor the geneva convention by bringing some human sacrifices to the gods!

[Sefidel]

Not true. War can only exist in civilised species, and there aren't many of those on earth.

Are you kidding me?

A) There is no such thing as a civilized species.

B) Every single species has war. Insects for example, but even horses kill each other in battle.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wartech/transform.html

[Tribulex]

i vote we kill off all the mods. then lets go for god and jesus


REPENT NOW EVIL RED TEXTS!!!

[zwzsg]

A) There is no such thing as a civilized species.

Humans, ants, termites, blesmols, ...

B) Every single species has war.

Then you'd be serioulsy overstrechting the meaning of war, like, oh yeah, that tree totally cast shadow over this bush, what a glorious warrior!

even horses kill each other in battle

Maybe, but I never heard of a horse kind recruiting ten thousands horses to go attack the neighbouring horseland. Horse fight are 1v1, or at the very most would involve two herds. That's still far from the scale needed to qualify as war. If I wait for you at your door and punch you in the face to steal your food and girls, that's not war, even if you die under my blows. If me and my gang meet you and your gang tonigh at the parking lot to decided who's gonna rule over the block, that's still not war, no matter how many will be left cold. You need to have organisation the size of states, using regular armies, for it to be a war.

[Licho]

In most species "fights" are highly ritualised and serve just for mate selection. Deaths are avoided and result from accidents.

People are remarkably cooperative species. Very aggressive individuals show small reproductive success and are usually put aside by majority of peaceful and cooperating society.

There is very clear cultural evolution towards less violent and less warlike society. As I said, violent deaths % are going consistently down and most people show altruistic tendencies.

(That does not mean most people on these forums as they seem to be distinct socio-economic group, perhaps it includes many of those marginalised by others? :)

[Tribulex]

this is a very kinky thread.

[Regret]

Those carebears writing these articles shouldn't write stuff about things they have no idea about.

War is war and my hope is that one day we will get away with this idiotic political correctness and depict war games as actual war.

Kill, murder, rape, loot, exterminate. Nothing to add.

Humanity was like that always ... they will ban everything they don't seem appropriate for their current 'political meta'. I remember the times when books would get banned, let alone films for showing the truth and not another made-up patriotic bullshit or pro-government pamphlets.

Books, films, games. They are all part of culture, many of them are even art in itself. I seriously can't stand some people talking with so much moral authority on war games, but completely ignoring the fact what their own government does and how the media filter every bit of information. So much for hypocrisy these days I guess.

The idiots which wrote this article should ask themselves if they don't type things 180 degrees from the actual truth. The reality is that many war games depict acts of inhuman violence because they want to show the people what it's all about and it's form of moral protest against war itself as well, in it's own way. You don't criticise the war by showing bunnies punching cats or dogs, you show all of it's atrocities and without any authoritative moral voice allow the actual players judge on their own, how inhuman, cruel and horrible the war is. Not to mention that depicting any kind of heroism in such games is impossible without tragedy of each life lost, be it soldier or civilian. There is no dramaturgy here without the grey moral area, where white isn't white and black isn't black. Unlike those low-budget pseudo films with no plot, random chicken to rescue and lots of violence/blood/explosions, you need to cater to much more demanding and usually (but not always) better educated audience.

Claiming that war games shouldn't show too much violence or killing civilians is like drawing the landscape without the sky, or forest without the trees. There is no landscape and no forest anymore. There is made-up fable tale showing how war is good, that nobody dies and that wars are made for fun.

It's like pretending human greed, arrogance and hate throughout centuries weren't the driving force beyond conflicts, but the war activity was like a sport ; the arena was bigger and more of the gladiators, everyone felt exalted to die an honourable death ... for nothing. Because the war started for nothing, yes?

The same people which shout games are too violent/should be banned/should be supervised by government/carebears/parents council or whatever funny bullshit you can think of, are usually the same shouting no history should be taught in school, because it's perfectly normal when kids think that Hitler was a sportsman, Auschwitz was holiday hotel with luxuries and that the great Soviet army 'liberated' Eastern Europe and everyone lived long and happy there.

Quoting for much wisdom displayed.

[Gota]

Horse fights are 1v1

That's pro.

[Lolsquad_Steven]

Adding human rights and treaties you sign (like not using victim detonated mines) would make ta just that lil more gay. I fully support this idea.

[bartvbl]

Sure they are. There are mod options to allow for a king of the hill mode, why couln't one make a one mod option that causes defeat after you have accidentally killed a certain number of forbidden targets, for instance?

Have you ever playrd spring before? Then you perhaps know that commanders and heavy tanks drovr over trees, and there will always some shots that missed. I can see no way that a unit could try to avoid an object in the first place, and even less that such an option would make a game more fun.
Just forget about it.

[Forboding Angel]

How the hell do you govern that with rules?

Following Geneva's convention can give you a strategic edge: During WWII, many germans surrendered to the US because they knew they'd be treated well.

Only the French would consider surrender as a strategic advantage.
(I'm only kidding Z, don't get mad ;p )

[PicassoCT]

How the hell do you govern that with rules?

Following Geneva's convention can give you a strategic edge: During WWII, many germans surrendered to the US because they knew they'd be treated well.

Only the French would consider surrender as a strategic advantage.
(I'm only kidding Z, don't get mad ;p )

Yeah, nam, rac and ghan - you showed us how its done. Reallife can be so short if it comes in tinboxxes. Cant wait to see the day, the Quaida hacks your drones remote.

[smoth]

Yeah, nam, rac and ghan - you showed us how its done. Reallife can be so short if it comes in tinboxxes. Cant wait to see the day, the Quaida hacks your drones remote.

just because people like forb have objectionable political views does not mean you should condemn the soldiers of my country.

[PicassoCT]

never blame the tool, always the - yeah understood. srsly, i dont want to turn this into another amerigobash thread, but you┬┤ve got to admit the success rate of sumed up military operations is small to say the least.