One Button Dictator

February 2, 2010 9:23 PM

War and Peace is a simplified version of the Civilization games. How simple? One button switches your civilization's focus between war and peace. That's it. (PC only)
posted by CrunchyFrog (36 comments total)

Lame.
posted by Meatbomb at 9:25 PM on February 2, 2010

There's a peace option in Civ?
posted by pompomtom at 9:25 PM on February 2, 2010

I might have clicked on a web version. is there a reason this needs to be a PC specific executable program rather than some javascript or flash?
posted by mrgoldenbrown at 9:31 PM on February 2, 2010

Sounds like the kind of game that everybody feels like they should have on their shelf, but few have ever bothered to play it; fewer still have made it to the end.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:36 PM on February 2, 2010 [1 favorite]

OH GOD MADAGASCAR HAVE CLOSED THEIR PORT I CAN'T WIN
posted by turgid dahlia at 9:44 PM on February 2, 2010 [9 favorites]

SPOILER:





War, peace, peace, war, war, peace, war, war, war, peace, war, peace, war, war, war, peace, peace, peace, peace, war, war, peace, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, win!
posted by TwelveTwo at 9:48 PM on February 2, 2010 [2 favorites]

One aspect of the Civilization games that always tweaks me a little is that the higher the difficulty level you are playing on, the more of a ruthless warmonger you have to be to win. It's a little depressing when you think about it.

So perhaps this is just the natural evolution of the form.
posted by Justinian at 9:56 PM on February 2, 2010 [1 favorite]

I'm waiting for the sequel, guns and butter.
posted by jedicus at 9:58 PM on February 2, 2010

Where's the version where you keep starting new games until you're on an island to yourself and just leave it on 'peace' mode?
posted by battlebison at 10:02 PM on February 2, 2010 [3 favorites]

Hey, at least it doesn't require Silverlight, amirite?
posted by FuManchu at 10:41 PM on February 2, 2010

The Global Dilemma: Guns or Butter came out in 1990.
posted by lumensimus at 10:46 PM on February 2, 2010 [2 favorites]

A strange game. The only way to win is not to play.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:54 PM on February 2, 2010 [1 favorite]

MetaFilter: War, peace, peace, war, war, peace, war, war, war, peace, war, peace, war, war, war, peace, peace, peace, peace, war, war, peace, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, war, win!
posted by brundlefly at 10:59 PM on February 2, 2010

Joe in Australia: I found it quite the opposite. The only way to play is not to win.

:(
posted by aubilenon at 11:16 PM on February 2, 2010

One aspect of the Civilization games that always tweaks me a little is that the higher the difficulty level you are playing on, the more of a ruthless warmonger you have to be to win. It's a little depressing when you think about it.

Have you tried the new Civilization Revolutions for the Xbox 360? They've done a great job not only of streamlining the game, but also balancing out the different paths to victory (Economic, Space Race, Domination, and Culture). It's much easier than the PC versions - and usually shorter. I've managed to beat it on deity for each victory type... and often just playing defense. By contrast, the PC versions were trouble enough to beat even on middle difficulty levels (and often the PC game versions weren't even worth finishing, as you would sometimes need to invest many hours of play just to achieve the foregone conclusion).

If you're a fan of the series, it's worth picking up.
posted by Davenhill at 11:21 PM on February 2, 2010 [1 favorite]

Have you tried the new Civilization Revolutions for the Xbox 360? They've done a great job not only of streamlining the game ... It's much easier than the PC versions - and usually shorter.

HERESY. BURN HIM.
posted by Justinian at 11:23 PM on February 2, 2010 [9 favorites]

Justinian: So perhaps this is just the natural evolution of the form.

Kumis, Curds, and Cheese: The Fates of Vegetarian Societies
posted by Pinback at 11:42 PM on February 2, 2010

It never took me more than one button to go from peace to war in Civ. Granted, I had to carefully set up massive amounts of troops next to my "ally"s most strategic cities but then BAM WAR RIGHT IN YOUR FACE.


I was never very good at Civilization, but it was fun.
posted by graventy at 11:54 PM on February 2, 2010 [1 favorite]

I always liked the utopian aspect of Civs 1 and 2 where if you took over a city of some vile autocracy with your rich, cultured and free democracy then all the people immediately became your happy, free, prosperous people. People were basically fungible.

Then later versions had ethnicity and people were your people or they were the other guy's people. So it became Nazi race war: if you want to take over an area with a major city you first raze it to the ground and kill everyone in it. Genocide becomes a sensible planning option.

Slightly less cheering!
posted by alasdair at 12:44 AM on February 3, 2010

I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a joke, but it IS possible to lose. (I tried my usual Civ strategy, which is to basically be "Cash and Carry" Davis and immediately make fast friends with everyone and then work on making awesome music and radio and culture-bombing their little homelands into MTV-junkie media whores.

"Peace" gets you et in this game. Be forewarned.
posted by Scattercat at 2:42 AM on February 3, 2010

A strange game. The only way to win is not to play.

War! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing!
posted by fairmettle at 4:00 AM on February 3, 2010

It's curious that this game supports Xbox controllers.
posted by mikepaco at 4:16 AM on February 3, 2010

There's a peace option in Civ?
posted by pompomtom at 5:25 AM on February 3 [+] [!]

Sure there is! You make friends with all your neighbours, adopt the same religion, and spread it to everyone in the world. Then you become Pope, and table a motion to declare yourself diplomatically victorious... but someone stands in your way, and must be weakened, so you commence a blockade, but it achieves nothing, and you discover no one likes you anymore because you refused to join in any wars... oh the hell with it! War it is!
posted by Acey at 4:51 AM on February 3, 2010

I was never very good at Civilization, but it was fun.

I think you'll find that's been true for most people throughout history.
posted by Naberius at 5:58 AM on February 3, 2010 [6 favorites]

For a second reading the description I thought that this was a kinda comparison between the BOOK War and Peace and the Civ games.

Someone should do that.
posted by festivemanb at 7:04 AM on February 3, 2010

I found that switching from war to peace and back every tech advance gave me a pretty much instant victory.

And yeah, this seems like it could/should have been done in Flash, not as a standalone executable.

Kind of interesting though.
posted by sotonohito at 7:11 AM on February 3, 2010

Brilliant game. The only thing that would make it better is if they could eliminate that one button from the UI. Progress Quest managed to be fun with no buttons at all, so I think it could be possible with a Civ clone, too.
posted by Nelson at 7:40 AM on February 3, 2010

I was hoping this would open with French.
posted by Football Bat at 8:24 AM on February 3, 2010

Then later versions had ethnicity and people were your people or they were the other guy's people. So it became Nazi race war: if you want to take over an area with a major city you first raze it to the ground and kill everyone in it. Genocide becomes a sensible planning option.
posted by alasdair

In Civ 4 if your culture is strong enough the people convert a lot quicker. So you only have to raze and kill everyone if your Nazi culture isn't Nazi awesome.
posted by haveanicesummer at 9:37 AM on February 3, 2010

Peaceful strategies can win in Civ4. In the CivFanatics forums, someone details a game won at a higher difficulty level than I ever played (Emperor, if I recall correctly) in which the player literally didn't build any military units all game long. The player inadvertently acquired one military unit when a nearby city culture-flipped to the player's civ, so the player gifted it to another civ.
posted by Zed at 10:15 AM on February 3, 2010

Nice! I was always more focused on city-building and infrastructure when I played Civ 2, and as a result found my shining cities on hills constantly beset by rival powers (or Barbarians) with little more than a Phalanx to defend them. This simplified game casts the foolishness of that strategy in a clearer light.

PS: If you liked this but want something a little more complex, I recommend Hex Empire, which adds basic diplomacy, economics, and better graphics to the mix.
posted by Rhaomi at 4:28 PM on February 3, 2010

swords/plowshares?
posted by neuron at 8:11 PM on February 3, 2010

I always thought the point of Civ was to reach the point of attacking longbowmen with panzers (well, and nuking people, obviously...)
posted by pompomtom at 8:24 PM on February 3, 2010

If I saw a longbowman with a panzer I'd probably run the other way, but I guess I'm just a bit of a coward in situations like that.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:52 PM on February 3, 2010

The hilarious part of Longbowmen/Panzer combat in Civ 4, is that in the right situation, especially if the Longbowmen unit has been around forever and gotten lots of upgrades, they sometimes BEAT the Panzers (or helicopters, if you like your Civ James Cameron style).
posted by haveanicesummer at 9:25 AM on February 4, 2010

Davenhill: Have you tried the new Civilization Revolutions for the Xbox 360? They've done a great job not only of streamlining the game ... It's much easier than the PC versions - and usually shorter.

Justinian: HERESY. BURN HIM.

Hey, sometimes you have 30-50 hours to kill for a single game, sometimes you only have 8-12 hours. :)
posted by Davenhill at 4:25 PM on February 4, 2010