no transfer of production!

[LDiCesare]

Keeping fro more than one turn would make for a great way to prepare and launch hidden alpha strikes:
Build a cavalry in every city. Stop when there's one turn left.
Build an infantry in every city but stop when there's one turn left.
Build and artillery everywhere and stop again.
Build something else.
When you need your units, you may have them in 3 turns, without having paid maintenance cost for them in the meanwhile.
Look, my neighbour is weak. Let's attack him.
Next turn: How's that, one infantry in every city?
Next turn: Where do these artilleries come from?
Next turn: He's actually striking back with cavalry?
We'll see if that can be pulled off. Maybe you can use conscription at the same time to augment the size of the army even more.

[DeathByTheSword]

on conscription:

i loved the idea in civ3 but the problem was that i always had enough infantry in the game already....so maybe to make conscription work better they should

a) raise the cost of infantry

b) also have the possiblity to make something like light concript cavalry

and just like LDiCesare and I already said...keeping your upkeep low and have a lot of almost finished units might work great especially in MP...

[Adagio]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Why not? Civ has been around for about two decades now, it's about time for something new.

I don't mind to see something new, but often people complain that the new game has too many new features so they complain that the game is not Civ anymore

To see how bad it can get just take a look at The Settlers series. In the 5th game they wanted to try out a lot of "new" stuff, but the end result was 0% Settlers. Some people did like that new game, but it pissed of most Settlers fans. You can't say that because you liked previous Settlers games there's a high chance you'll like this one. At the moment this is not the case with Civ and I hope it'll never be.

Please don't read this as I hate changes because I don't. Personally I wouldn't mind if Firaxis made some dramatic changes to the game, but I assume a lot of veterans wont like the changes if there's too many huge changes. Losing the support of the civ veterans is not a good idea

[Alex]

I suppose that this new rule regarding great wonders is going to produce lots of unhappy faces in the community as much as the culture flips in Civ3 have produced...

[Nikolai]

I think I'll like this.

BTW, have people noticed the last sentence in that quote in the first post?

(This rule also covers production of regular buildings and units as well, though in those cases, if you suddenly switch from producing, say, a settler to an archer, you simply save the production that's been made for the settler and start the archer from scratch. And when you go back to producing the settler, you'll pick up where you left off.)

That sounds like a good solution to me.

[patcon]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by LDiCesare
Keeping fro more than one turn would make for a great way to prepare and launch hidden alpha strikes:
Build a cavalry in every city. Stop when there's one turn left.
Build an infantry in every city but stop when there's one turn left.
Build and artillery everywhere and stop again.
Build something else.
[QUOTE]

Holding previous production for more than one turn is necessary since most new projects would take more than one turn to complete. But each city should be limited to one project "on hold" to prevent the exploit quoted. I can see the populace saying "OK, we'll stop working on the marketplace to build a spearman to defend us now." But wouldn't they balk at a leader who keeps changing his mind and wanted to have a slew of unfinished projects sitting on the shelf? If you want to change again, you must choose which unfinished project remains on hold, while the other is lost.

An unfinished project should immediately go back into production when the replacement project is completed "OK we gave you your spearman, now let's get back to that temple." Delaying that project again should cause some loss of production, maybe 1/2 each time it's re-delayed. A cathedral with 40 shields (OK, hammers) already allocated would still have 40 shields if restarted at first opportunity, but if delayed again you lose 20 shield, and if delayed still again lose 10, then 5, etc.

[Lambiorix_be]

Originally posted by General Ludd
How is this more realistic? Why would the mayans stop building their pyramids because one was built in Egypt? Why would america give up it's space program because russia beat them to it?

It is more realistic because in the real world if you spent many turns to build a light tower you cannot change it overnight into a pyramid. It is true that you can continue to build it but it wouldn't be the same. Once the Americans where on the moon, the soviet union no longer bothered because being the first and show off greatness was the main pûrpose....

[patcon]

Originally posted by Lambiorix_be


It is more realistic because in the real world if you spent many turns to build a light tower you cannot change it overnight into a pyramid. It is true that you can continue to build it but it wouldn't be the same. Once the Americans where on the moon, the soviet union no longer bothered because being the first and show off greatness was the main pûrpose....

No one (I think) is suggesting that production on a Great Lighthouse should be converted to a Great Pyramid, as is now the case. I agree that if you continue to build the Great Wall after another civ completes it, it wouldn't be the same. It wouldn't have the same cultural value, as it would be viewed (incorrectly, BTW, if you had already started it before the other one was started, as is quite possible) as a "cheap knock-off" of the original. But wouldn't the benefits derived from building it (better defensive technology in the case of the GW) still benefit your civ?

Perhaps a compromise could be that the first civ to complete a wonder reaps the full cultural reward, civs which had started a wonder before anyone else completed it could still get a fractional cultural reward, and civs which start a wonder after it has already been completed by someone else would get no cultural reward. But any civ completing a wonder at any time gets the other benefits such as free walls, temples, etc.

[sophist]

Far simpler would be to make accumulated production decay at some rate. Let's say you're 55 hammers into your 60 shield temple and you decide to switch to something else. After 5 turns, you only have 50 hammers for your temple. After 25 turns, you only have 30.

Alternately, you might have to pay some cost in gold for delayed production. That could be a fraction of the item's normal maintenance, some percentage of the number of hammers accumulated so far, or a fixed amount.

[Dis]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
hmz or this could mean that you build some of your defense units only for 90%...(keeping upkeep down by not building them completely) then start building other stuff...then when a war comes you can build really quickly (all one 1 turn) a lot of defenders... my first strategy i am going to try in civ4

, we are already finding exploits for this game. sad really.

but I suppose any game, no matter how well made can be exploited.

[Dis]

Originally posted by sophist
Far simpler would be to make accumulated production decay at some rate. Let's say you're 55 hammers into your 60 shield temple and you decide to switch to something else. After 5 turns, you only have 50 hammers for your temple. After 25 turns, you only have 30.

Alternately, you might have to pay some cost in gold for delayed production. That could be a fraction of the item's normal maintenance, some percentage of the number of hammers accumulated so far, or a fixed amount.

I don't know if it's simpler from a coding/programming standpoint. but realistically, this is great. As unfinished buildings do decay (more rapidly than finished buildings in fact). Vandalism, weather- they all play havoc.

[Mahdimael]

There's nothing that makes me want to hurl my monitor off a building more than when the computer constructs a wonder 2 turns ahead of me.

I really like the idea of primary and secondary wonders.

If you're building a wonder and someone else completes it, you can finish it and get the secondary ability. Nobody could start the wonder, however, once it has been completed.

So if the A and B are both building the Pyramids (free granaries), and A finishes first, they get the Wonder's effect. C wants to start the wonder now, but it's too late. B finishes the wonder and gets a secondary effect (half-price upkeep or whatever).

This way, the person who's behind doesn't get totally boned, but it does prevent the wonders from just becoming another city improvement.

[Dis]

some people should just learn to accept it.

I thought Civ3 taught us all this.

In civ2, I used to reload if someone built a wonder before me (and I missed the message), and then hurry it with gold.

In civ3 I learned I can't get every single wonder (even on chieftan it's difficult). I just go for a select few (like Hoover Dam). Of course in that game I could prebuild palaces. I will have to learn not to do that.

Not that the secondary wonder characteristics are a bad idea. They are a great idea. But I fear the game development may be too far along to impliment these ideas.

[patcon]

Originally posted by Dis
Not that the secondary wonder characteristics are a bad idea. They are a great idea. But I fear the game development may be too far along to impliment these ideas.

May be too late for initial release inclusion, but what about patches or mods? Will we at least get a warning that another civ has started a wonder?

Here's an evil plan, assuming that you'll get a warning message that another civ is about to finish a wonder and that there will still be a way to rush wonders. Stockpile your scientific leaders (or whatever it is that rushes wonders) and wait until they almost finish their wonder. In the meantime, build stuff. When they're almost done, start the wonder yourself, rush it with your scientific leader and laugh as your opponent wails over wasting almost 400 shields. Or dance with glee.

[sophist]

Originally posted by Dis

I don't know if it's simpler from a coding/programming standpoint. but realistically, this is great.

Any of the suggested penalties to delay would be simple to implement.

Originally posted by Mahdimael
There's nothing that makes me want to hurl my monitor off a building more than when the computer constructs a wonder 2 turns ahead of me.

....

This way, the person who's behind doesn't get totally boned, but it does prevent the wonders from just becoming another city improvement.

That's the point. In the game, there are some small risks and some big risks. Small risks have small payoffs and big risks have big payoffs. If a Wonder is so powerful that it makes or breaks your game, then it's probably too powerful.

Besides, giving everyone the ability to derive some fraction of a Wonder benefits erodes their purpose. I get Pyramids 1, so I get granaries in all my cities. You get Pyramids 2, so you get granaries in half your cities. Someone else gets Pyramids 3, so they get granaries in a third of their cities. etc. At the end, everyone has some number of free granaries. Might as well give free granaries to begin with and skip all the jumping through hoops.