Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Plauges & Pestilences

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Platypus Rex
    FYI
    there is a scenario in conquests with plague on

    I'll see you smallpox blankets and raise you ivory carvers' elephant anthrax.

    Seidemann, R. M. and Wheeler, H. M. Human anthrax from elephant's tusks. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 135, 837. 1947.
    Attached Files
    Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.

    ...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by molly bloom

      I'll see you smallpox blankets and raise you ivory carvers' elephant anthrax.
      And the obfuscating underdog agenda strikes again!
      It is an unarguable and self-evident fact that France has been responsible for all the major world conflicts of the last 200 years.

      Comment


      • #18
        I have to say that I never did understand why players were so hostile to plagues being introduced in Civ3. I never play the game without plagues being on-and when I do suffer from them, I just play on until I get over it! If I had a complaint about Civ3 plagues, it was that there felt like an 'all or nothing' approach to it. I reckon that with the health system they will have in Civ4, plagues can be given greater 'gradations' of intensity-where how quickly it spreads, and how long it lasts-or even whether it occurs or not-will depend on the overall health of your nation. This way, players can have a greater role to play in reducing the impacts of plagues-thus increasing the realism of the game, whilst at the same time making the whole thing a lot fairer.

        Yours,
        Aussie_Lurker

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by ArchdukeNewell


          And the obfuscating underdog agenda strikes again!

          What a purty mouth you have Elmer.
          Attached Files
          Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.

          ...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915

          Comment


          • #20
            I wouldn't be negative to plagues being in the game, as long as it's done properly. BTW, wasn't there a Black Plague event in Conquest? I don't know if it was well implemented, but at least the team has tried it in the last version of the game!
            Do not fear, for I am with you; Do not anxiously look about you, for I am your God.-Isaiah 41:10
            I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made - Psalms 139.14a
            Also active on WePlayCiv.

            Comment


            • #21
              I love the concept of having plagues in the game, but agree that a "realistic" implementation would ruin the fun for the player by being way overpowering. A more abstracted implementation like in C3C seems to be the way to go.

              Although, it didn't seem to follow a logical pattern of how cities were "infected." I'd like for it to be more of a progression where you can see the direction the epidemic is spreading. You should then have options to try and "quarantine" cities from it.
              Tutto nel mondo è burla

              Comment


              • #22
                I think an approach somewhere along the lines of Crusader Kings could do it: People die, the wealth of the area drops majorly, building things takes considerable longer time. The plague spreads rapidly, but after some time, province after province(here: city) gets immune. Untill another plague comes by. But in that game, only 2 plagues comes during the ca. 300 years it lasts, and both comes pretty near each other(the time of the Black Plague), so you have a hard time then, but only then.
                Do not fear, for I am with you; Do not anxiously look about you, for I am your God.-Isaiah 41:10
                I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made - Psalms 139.14a
                Also active on WePlayCiv.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Plagues are cool! But hard to implement. And human players would eventually take most of the advantage from it
                  I will never understand why some people on Apolyton find you so clever. You're predictable, mundane, and a google-whore and the most observant of us all know this. Your battles of "wits" rely on obscurity and whenever you fail to find something sufficiently obscure, like this, you just act like a 5 year old. Congratulations, molly.

                  Asher on molly bloom

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Implementing a system that would "replicate" what happened historically between the America's and Eurasia is unrealistic:

                    1. It would make the game less fun
                    2. That specific outcome is based on the specific realites of the planet earth- playing on some imagined map there is no reason to think this the inevitable event. This is compounded by the fact that the real life biological factors that lead to the disparity (ie. lack of close living between masses of humans and masses of domesticated animals) between the continents would not be assumed to be in effect in any civ game since that would mean the civs would have to be weaker and less productive in one continent than the other, when all civs are assume to begin equally.

                    What should be implemented though is the constant threat of both local pestilence and mass pandemics (like the Black plague) breaking out at large intervals but having devastating effects. Lets not forget that the Roman empire suffered greatly in the 3rd century from a series of massive plagues, thought to be the coming of smallpox to Europe from China and India for the first time.
                    If you don't like reality, change it! me
                    "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
                    "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
                    "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Boris Godunov


                      Although, it didn't seem to follow a logical pattern of how cities were "infected." I'd like for it to be more of a progression where you can see the direction the epidemic is spreading. You should then have options to try and "quarantine" cities from it.

                      Perhaps involving the (temporary) sacrifice of some trading routes- given that some epidemics have originated from goods (and their carriers) shipped long distance or overseas- like the plagues that struck early mediaeval Byzantium (thought to be connected with the ivory and gold trade with East and Central Africa) and the English ships that brought the Black Death to Norway in the 14th Century.

                      Or it could delay any ships in port, or the establishment of any new trade routes, for several turns- like the quarantines established in Venice and Ragusa in response to the Black Death.
                      Attached Files
                      Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.

                      ...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        In some ways, it might be better for game balance to extend and strengthen the current disease from flood plains and jungles. Civs that live there would hurt from it, but it would also provide a natural defense against invaders. Of course, that presupposes modelling immunities as well, but that shouldn't be hard. Instead of having one generic disease, perhaps they should have a number of them (say, seven?) that are prevalent in certain areas of the world. People who live there suffer, but eventually garner an immunity, but there is occasionally an outbreak that spreads along their trade routes to other areas.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I'd say one (potential) disease type per continent (the further the better) per epoch. Like in America, before the spaniards arrive, and with the Black Death, these diseases were carried from one continent to another by either a trade route or just exploration. Just assign a random number associated with "first contact" with a civilization overseas to unleash a epidemy. Also, in time to time, a random number can pop-up a disease that connect two civilizations that already have contact, like China and Europe.

                          Cities near jungles are a interesting thing: As a rule of thumb, I'd say for the city located near or in flood plains or jungles, if the civilization that founded the city is originary of the area, a certain immunity level is assigned (valid for the area only), if not, inmunity can be archived after many turns (say 20 generations). To keep things simple, just a immunity factor to continental diseases is set for each city at the time of the founding. Also another immunity factor is set for the entire specific civilization, based on the location of their original city and valid for the continent they are in. If that civilization starts spreading to other regions (i.e., other continents or portions far away) the immunity factor for new cities will be lower, and when this factor is compared against the terrain health hazard, and if lower, a smaller growing rate can be used there.
                          "However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results." - Winston Churchill

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Give each citizen of a city a degree of immunity (0-100, say) for each of the seven diseases. Then it's a die roll to see who dies if the disease appears in a city. Settlers and Workers are built using citizens, so they bring along whatever immunity the citizens have. New citizens and units constructed by a city have the average immunity of the city in which they appear. A citizen's immunity changes randomly over time (mutation). Certain scientific discoveries (Vaccination, for instance) increase citizens' immunity.

                            The spread of disease is a little trickier. Is the disease carried or does it spawn randomly from time to time? In the former case, anytime two foreign units come into contact (or a unit with a city), with contact being defined as being in neighboring tiles, any diseases carried by one will be transmitted to the other. Diseases should also spread along trade routes.

                            Edit: Also, I'm realizing that most people are assuming that the only outcome of plague is death. Even the worst plagues had "only" about a 33% fatality rate, and that only in some places. Many people didn't get infected, and many of those didn't die. So maybe what happens with a plague is that some number of citizens become sick. Sick citizens can't work. Then some number of them die and the rest recover.
                            Last edited by sophist; August 3, 2005, 10:22.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I realy dont think theirs much need to do disease and Imunity at any levele lower then Empire wide. If plauges jump from city to city then eventualy your whole empire will be effected anyway. Its just simpler to make a Plauge hit your whole empire at once over the course of several turns. The destruction can be spread out so no one city is ruined completly but the whole empire feels a big sting overall.

                              My thinking is for Plauges to be a bit like Religions (the irony) they spread from a place of origin and eventualy reach everyware. Your whole Empire gets imunity after a plauge so it dosn't need to be tracked for each city (which would add a lot of complexity). Rather its like the Chicken Pox, get it once and then your imune. Plauges could sprout up at regular intervals to keep populations in check durring the middle ages. Late game population growth would be greatly linked to the fact that new medicines alow you to treat diseses.
                              Companions the creator seeks, not corpses, not herds and believers. Fellow creators, the creator seeks - those who write new values on new tablets. Companions the creator seeks, and fellow harvesters; for everything about him is ripe for the harvest. - Thus spoke Zarathustra, Fredrick Nietzsche

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
                                I realy dont think theirs much need to do disease and Imunity at any levele lower then Empire wide. If plauges jump from city to city then eventualy your whole empire will be effected anyway. Its just simpler to make a Plauge hit your whole empire at once over the course of several turns. The destruction can be spread out so no one city is ruined completly but the whole empire feels a big sting overall.
                                You still need some reasoning about how the disease spreads and how hard it hits. This kind of mechanism also makes it clearer to the player what is happening, giving them the ability to manage it. I think players would find it frustrating if it was completely random, and they were completely powerless to do anything about it. The way I describe is mostly deterministic and suggests ways that a player could protect his/her civ from such an epidemic. A player should be able to make sense of it.

                                Candidates for diseases in the game:
                                Bubonic plague
                                Smallpox
                                Cholera
                                Typhus
                                Influenza

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X