Paradigm Shifts

[Trifna]

What I meant is that you can lump some precision in your management and still include all factors in a gross generalization. There are many ways to include all these things, and still not divide everything in an infinity of elements (which is what reality is: the more elements, the more exact you portray it).

You can catch general phenomenons which includes all the micro-phenomenons within them, and this in simple BUT WELL DONE models.

[Padmewan]

Another idea I was kicking around today was some idea of "resetting" upon hitting a new era. I was thinking specifically of cultural resetting -- that your cultural points take a big hit when you advance to the next era. After all, the fact that Egypt had one of the most ancient civilizations / temples / etc. doesn't give it latter-day cultural "points" -- for better or for worse, the U.S. dominates culturally today. Yet in Civ3 it's impossible for this to happen, since culture accrues continuously and even logrithmically.

The closest analogy to this in Civ3 are GW's that expire upon discovery of a certain tech -- in particular, the Great Library. If you have the GL, you try hard not to research Education. Imagine that on a larger scale -- you must decide whether to advance to the next era or hold on to your advantages of the current era. You could decide to hold on to the past and thus either a quick victory or eventual stagnation. Or you could opt to take a big hit but be better off in the long run.

I like giving the player these kinds of tough choices. It also happens to coincide somewhat with "reality."

[star mouse]

Re: Paradigm Shifts

Originally posted by Padmewan For example, Civ cities depend on food found within the city's radius. This isn't realistic in the modern era -- how much food is in the "radius" of New York City, London, or Tokyo? Thanks to modern transportation systems, the very rules of how to feed a city have changed, and the rules of the game should reflect that. For example, maybe after a certain set of tech's have been discovered, food is simply pooled across an entire civ, or traded across civ's.

This is a good idea. Here's my ideas on this:
* If any 2 cities are connected by a railway, then the cities pool their food resources such that no city can starve if other connected cities can provide the extra food.
* If a tile is in your civ but not in a city radius, its extra production can be utilised by any city to which it is connected by rail.
* These abilities could also be conferred by a city improvement. If a city improvement is used, then all cities with that improvement can be considered "connected". It's fairly obvious that such an improvement would require a granary as a prerequisite.

[Addled Platypus]

Re: Re: Paradigm Shifts

Originally posted by star mouse

This is a good idea. Here's my ideas on this:
* If any 2 cities are connected by a railway, then the cities pool their food resources such that no city can starve if other connected cities can provide the extra food.
* If a tile is in your civ but not in a city radius, its extra production can be utilised by any city to which it is connected by rail.
* These abilities could also be conferred by a city improvement. If a city improvement is used, then all cities with that improvement can be considered "connected". It's fairly obvious that such an improvement would require a granary as a prerequisite.

So how about those large island cities, in need of food.

the basic needs
1. harbor
2. grainary

depending on the erra, would be spoilage
and the longer the trip, more spoilage

trieme
carrack
etc, etc

[realpolitic]

Food - modern cities have the food coming to them as a matter of course, not because the leader orders food to city X. Food caravans are not a real concept. However, charging the civ for the cost of transporting the food automatically so the socierty redistributes food proportonate to population with a small modifier for the good produced in each city (Rich cities eat better and more?) With today's societies importing from around the world, there should be a substantial charge for importation, too.

Culture - as a civ builds more and more cultural buildings the past culture automaticatically becomes less revelvent. So I'd just dump the 1000 year bonus.

[realpolitic]

If you want to model population more accurately, factor in the effect of technology and birth control. The population worldwide countries increased superexponetially through about 1970. Exponential increase means the doubling time is constant, superexponentially means the doubling time for the population decreases. Europe & Russia's population IIRC has been almost constant since 1930, America's growth rate started to decline in 1960. Average per capita income has alot to do with it. So when the computer decides that a nation has reached a certain level of technology, and wealth, the program decides that population increase slows. This would also give backward nations time to catch up. South America has the greatest rate of population increase, so theocratic governments (especially in poor countries) should have greater rates of increase. The fertility in Third World countries is starting to decrease too, so maybe the slowing of popution growth when it happens in modern civs should be reflected in 3rd World civs over time too. In the real world, global warming is reflected in loss of fertility, not minied tiles, as Africa's desert is enlarging. Also AIDS, is easier to spread because of airplanes, and population density. So maybe population increase should be limited by transportation systems and global population, too.

I'm not sure what these changes would do to gameplay, but these are more realistic ways of dealing with population.

[lajzar]

South America has the greatest rate of population increase, so theocratic governments (especially in poor countries) should have greater rates of increase.

South America is full of theocracies?

[Max Sinister]

No... but they are very religious, and if the pope says that contraception and abortion are sins, they do what he commands. Unfortunately, because else there wasn't so much poverty there. :-(

[Brent]

Maybe the game could have a struggle for power between church and state?

[Nikolai]

Religion is in, so depending on how they implement it, it might be possible. But that struggle is a Christian phenomenon; in Islam for example, such a power struggle is more or less impossible because of the way the religion is made up.

[Dauphin]

You mean that the religion is the state?

[Nikolai]

You know what I mean...

[Addled Platypus]

religon is the bureacracy that gets in the way of one's faith

[Paddy]

Originally posted by joncnunn
I think it would be cool if cities that were at least pop 19 could work a slightly larger city radius and if abandoning a city that was close enough to other cities in your empire relocated the population into them.

these do sound great

along these lines, what of cities merging to become a metropolis with several city centres merging

[Addled Platypus]

Paddy the Scot and joncnunn

I like what you to are coming up with


Food for thought

1. Happiness averaged out
2. Corruption worse, riots more frequent
Maybe an option to declare curfews/martial law
3. requires supplies from other cities (less tiles to work)



keep the evil juices flowing