(Firaxis, please read) RIDICULOUSLY EASY-TO-IMPLEMENT suggestions

[sophist]

I think some combination of health and a well chosen function relating city size number with an actual population would be better.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by LordShiva


And it's probably a lost cause trying to get them to not use Gandhi as a leader?

I hope not.

I do find it vaguely offensive (and funny too...) when the 20th Century's most famous popularizer of non-violence nukes one of my cities.

It would be interesting to see a non-Moghul leader, if only for variety, but I suppose if they're opting for male/female leaders we'll still have a Gandhi, but it won't be one in a dhoti.

It's not like they don't have an awful lot of leaders and Indian empires to choose from.


Try walking a mile in Kanishka's shoes...

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by molly bloom


Try walking a mile in Kanishka's shoes...

Kanishka was Parthian, though.

Ashoka is a good choice, and I wouldn't mind Nehru either. Akbar would be a decent choice, but in a game with religion, and two Indian religions, we probably need Hindu and/or Buddhist leaders.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by sophist
I think some combination of health and a well chosen function relating city size number with an actual population would be better.

It should definitely scale with time, I think. And since health affects city size, that's already accounted for. Or it could be used as an offset, like so:

population = f(health) + (number of turns) * (city size) * 1000

so a city of size 1, turn 1 would have 1000 inhabitants, city of size 12, turn 100 could have 1.2 million, city of size 20, turn 500 = 10 million, assuming f(health) = 0. Add an appropriate offset for the health function.

[sophist]

I don't understand why you want to have the actual population per pop point be variable over time. What's wrong with saying 12 people = 500,000 and 30 people = 9 million and structuring the game such that you were only able to get to 30 in the modern era?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by sophist
I don't understand why you want to have the actual population per pop point be variable over time. What's wrong with saying 12 people = 500,000 and 30 people = 9 million and structuring the game such that you were only able to get to 30 in the modern era?

Because the world population growth has been faster than the rate of city growth in civ. And, before sanitation, cities are stuck at 12 for a while - which isn't really realistic.

[sophist]

Is that true in Civ4? I hope not. I hope health has been implemented so that there are no hard caps like 6 and 12, so that it's more organic. It would just so happen that without certain improvements (which depend on certain technologies), you cannot improve the health of a city enough to sustain such high populations. i.e., you could force a city to have a population of 25 even in 1 BC by merging workers and settlers, but any citizens above, say, 8, would die off rapidly.

[LordShiva]

Yeah, that would be better.

I just hope that civ-world population and city pops reflect, reasonably well, historical populations. How this is managed doesn't matter.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Perhaps city populations could scale with time as well - a size 12 city in 1000 AD might hold 200,000 inhabitants, while in 2000 AD it would hole 5,000,000.

"Honey, suddendly our bed seems a little crowded today. There is anything you should tell to me?"

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by LordShiva




Kanishka was Parthian, though.

Akbar would be a decent choice, but in a game with religion, and two Indian religions, we probably need Hindu and/or Buddhist leaders.

Kanishka was Kushan, rather than Parthian. And Akbar was the descendant of other Central Asian nomads.

However both Akbar and Kanishka can be credited with syncretized forms of religion based on beliefs originating in India- and both can be credited with furthering Indian civilization. And of course, Kanishka did sponsor the travels and proselytizing endeavours of Buddhist missionaries.


A great southern Hindu leader might be a welcome change- Rajaraja of the Cholas, for instance.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by molly bloom



Kanishka was Kushan, rather than Parthian. And Akbar was the descendant of other Central Asian nomads.

Sorry, that's what I meant

Akbar was a 3rd generation immigrant , though, so that pretty much made him Indian. I wouldn't mind Krishnadevaraya for a south-Indian hindu king.

But in any case, I think Firaxis is set on Gandhi and Ashoka (please, not Asoka), with leaderheads and all. Oh well.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by LordShiva


But in any case, I think Firaxis is set on Gandhi and Ashoka (please, not Asoka), with leaderheads and all. Oh well.

Ugh.

Akbar was a 3rd generation immigrant , though, so that pretty much made him Indian.

Stretching a point, I know, it's a little known fact that India also had rulers who were sons of African slaves.

Re: Kanishka- I've just been looking at a coin of his that shows how diverse in terms of culture and religion and ethnicity the rulers of Indian empires were-

on one side is a portrait of the standing Buddha, clad in the sanghati, with the topknot/chignon, halo around the head, extended earlobes, a bodily halo and his right hand is blessing in the abhaya mudra gesture.

An inscription in Greek (!) says 'BODDO', and Kanishka's monogram is across from this, on the left hand side.

On the other side is a standing portrait of Kanishka, very dramatic, very martial. He's placing an offering on a fire altar, he's bearded, wears a crown, and holds a spear upright, and has the typical northern long baggy trousers, heavy calf length boots, and long tunic caught in at the waist by a belt, so that it flares out below.

As well as the Zoroastrian/Parthian fire altar, he also has Parthian style regal flames on his shoulders, identifying his kingship.

It's here:

http://www.bpmurphy.com/COTW/week2.htm

[LordShiva]

Bump for Locutus.

On another note, old threads are fun

I wonder where Boris, LordNuclear, Adm.Naismith, etc. have gone.

[Arrian]

LordShiva:

But in any case, I think Firaxis is set on Gandhi and Ashoka (please, not Asoka), with leaderheads and all. Oh well.

Molly Bloom:

Ugh.

Heh.

-Arrian