Health in Civ 4?

[Optimizer]

Public health has been an important issue for all rulers, especially since cities grew really large, and epidemics have changed history several times, but none of the Civ games has a proper health or disease model.

Health has been represented by city population caps that could be lifted by aqueducts, sewer systems and hospitals. Plague used to be a random event in Civ 1. In Civ 3 it was back with a vengeance, decimating the population of most cities near jungles. And of course we have the Cure for Cancer and Longevity...

A simple disease model could be split between two parts - one simulating common diseases, and one modelling plague and other epidemics.

High population, pollution and tropical terrain would make some citizens sick, so that they eat without working. Certain city improvements and techs would decrease the number of sick citizens.

Extreme sickness would trigger a plague. The plague would spread to other cities with many sick citizens, killing some of them. The plague would strike harder against low-tech civilizations, and the ones that have experienced few plagues before. (Compare native Americans.)

[Trifna]

I would also add that all types of epidemies are closely linked to human movement. Like wars, trading or planes in modern times.

[rendelnep]

yeah, various dieases could cut into your food supply (say X/X reduction in food production for x turns) and/or hurt production (sick leave or reduction in army recruitment) and commerce (similar to production).

Another idea would include diease resistance. probably on a similar model to pollution after you discover medicine diseases slowly become more sever again i.e each time a plague hits after medicine is discovered the resistance couter increases and plagues become more likely to occur.

Such a system might require some new techs like vaccination, chemical pest control (dunno?),hygiene , molecular imaging techniques (1920's- 1953 onwards), DNA analysis and others to better represent the population exploison during the modern era

[Xorbon]

I'd like to see a more realistic city growth system. There'd be rural and urban populations (instead of just urban, as it is now). City growth would be affected by birth rates, death rates, immigration, emigration, and rural <--> urban migration. Disease would simply be a part of the death rate. A plague would cause a big increase in the death rate. Of course, such a 'realistic' system could complicate the game unnecesarily...

[Kuciwalker]

The C3 system - or rather the C3C system, with the plague (though slightly more refined in the way it spreads).

[Optimizer]

How do plagues work in C3C?

I would prefer a health model that contains few or no random factors, but still allowed for severe epidemics.

Here is an example:
* Each population point and each worked marsh/jungle/floodplain would add 2% to the disease ratio in the city. A number of citizens proportional to the sickness ratio will be sick, eating but not working (so a city with 8 citizens and 4 floodplains would have 24% disease = 2 sick citizens). Fresh water, hospitals and certain resources would decrease sickness.

* As soon as the number of sick citizens in a city (or a civilization, or the world) reaches a certain cap, an epidemic breaks out in the city with the most sick citizens. All sick citizens die, and production and trade is halted for (at least) one turn. Military units are weakened, too.

* This epidemic then spreads to all neighbouring cities - faster if there are roads. The only things that can stop an epidemic is a gap of neutral territory, or a high-tech hospital.

* If a civilization has never had a certain level epidemic, it will get hit as soon as they get a territorial border with a civilization that has had it. (Each city could have a log of all diseases that have past.)

* The epidemic could be named by the civilization or the city where it started.

[Kuciwalker]

Plagues break out semi-randomly, and kill pop points. Cities with walls are affected worse by the plague, and cities integrated in the trade network (with harbors and airports increasing this) are more likely to get it. I would like a little refinement with the spreading, but otherwise it's pretty good.

This isn't in the epic game btw - you have to enable it (it is in the Middle Ages conquest, though).

[Optimizer]

High concentration of livestock should increase the risk of plagues breaking out.

[Optimizer]

So, most voters are interested in a complex disease model.

One problem is that complex game concepts should introduce strategic choices. What choices would diseases add?

[Kuciwalker]

Nothing, but it would be an intersting background. It would also provide a consequence for being some uber-trading empire.

[Fosse]

I agree. I don't think people want disease in because they want to pour over more decisions, but instead because history is filled with disease. It's flavor, really.

If the disease model takes into effect trade, crowding, and health improvments it will add the most basic of choices (barely... who would choose not to trade because it increases your disease chance?!), but mostly ensure that disease makes sense. Random penalties are painful, not fun.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

I think that what diseases adds to the game is exactly what revolutions and Civil Wars would add-namely to act as a reminder that there is no such thing as 'Perpetual Growth'! In Civ2 and, for a while, Civ3 this was how things worked! Real history is a series of Booms and Busts, growth and collapse! The game needs to be more dynamic to reflect these facts. If you encourage rapid growth in your core cities, then there should be a greater chance of epidemic. Of course, there should be methods to counter this-like population controls, good health care and some kind of 'quarantine model'. Equally, if you build/conquer your way to a huge empire, then there is a good chance that some of those far-flung cities will want to become independant!
Anyway, it's stuff like this which I'd like to see taken into account in future Civ games!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[Xorbon]

I have to agree with Aussie-Lurker's last post. Another reason to have diseases and epidemics is to add to the feeling that you're running a civilization, and not just playing a game. The game has always been addictive, but rarely have I felt like I'm moving through history and shaping a society. I want to be able to get totally immersed in the game in such a way that it doesn't feel like I'm playing a game anymore. I want to get so immersed that I stay up until 6am instead of just 2am. (I have to apologize. My idealistic side has taken control of me tonight. )

Oh yeah, my point is, disease helps add flavour to the game!

[Sandman]

I'd like to see various randomly generated diseases. They have a series of traits that affects their killing power and spreading power. For example, they could be infectious, contagious, airborne, waterbourne, animal-transmitted, tropical, etc. A waterborne disease would be more likely to spread in a city on or near a river, and would need to be countered with a sewage system and piped water. A tropical disease would be confined to the jungle areas, hindering exploration and colonisation there.

They could also have interesting randomly generated names, like 'Corinth Green Fever', or 'Yellow Cow Blight'.

Some more health-related techs would be nice as well, for example: vaccination, public health, germ theory, virus theory, DNA, etc.

[Roman]

I would like to see a two pronged disease model.

1) Persistent diseases - something akin to the unhappinness model - can be reduced through investing in health care and building sanitation & medical city improvements (and wonders).

2) Epidemics - these hit suddenly last for a while and then disappear - can be prevented (see above)