Civ4: Omega Expansion

[Alexander I]

Very interesting ideas here. Is there any way we can form a basic trade enhancement that would be 100% for addition in a Civ4 expansion?

[johnmcd]

I like the idea of military protection for trade routes through wilderness, perhaps the route goes from little value to huge value with protection. Of perhaps the maximum distance of a trade route is the maximum distance through fog and a military unit extends that by reducing the fog of war - there would be cost associated with a lot of soldiers out on trade routes, but the increased income should pay for that.

Also, trade should be almost the only source of wealth in the early game, not production. Producing gold in a gold mine is almost always going to be worth more than a civs collected trade routes for the first couple of thousand years.

The production should not be the wealth generator of a gold mine, it should be the trade routes from that city that see the value added. Over time, I feel that trade routes should go from few and valuable to many and low value.

The final thing I'd like to see in trade routes is cultural growth accelated along them in the early days. Every tile has a cost for movement, but not one for cultural growth. A mountain range does nothing to block cultural growth yet is wholly impassable. I think it should have a cost of '3' ie, it take three cultural expansions to pass it, whereas a trade route might have a cost of '0.5' so each expansion takes you two tiles down it.

[johnmcd]

Originally posted by Alexander01 I don't see a problem. Hinduism is inherently "India's religion," just like Judaism is Israel's. Hinduism has also sparked spinoff faiths that have spread across continents (eg Buddhism) just like Judaism has (Christianity). Also, the Judaism of the early Hebrews was different from the later Jews, as it revolved around the temple. Focusing exclusively on the Jews eliminates the other tribes that made a part of the earlier civ. David wasn't just king of the Jews, after all. But I don't mean to make this another religion debate thread.

Indians are not neccessarily Hindu at all, they can be Muslim, Buddhist, Jayne, whatever. Hinduism is the largest religion but they are not one and the same in the same way that to be Hebrew and to be a Jew is.

Religion is sufficiently abstracted in Civ that it may not matter, but it seems to open up a can of worms in their treatment of faith and race that they've otherwise sidestepped neatly.

[johnmcd]

On Civ Leader traits and different degrees of city razing it might be that only Aggressive leaders could raze, Imperial or Aggressive could pillage and anyone could take (for example, I don't think that would actually be the right balance but you see what I mean).

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by johnmcd

Indians are not neccessarily Hindu at all, they can be Muslim, Buddhist, Jain, whatever. Hinduism is the largest religion but they are not one and the same in the same way that to be Hebrew and to be a Jew is.

I never said that Indians were exclusively Hindu. I'm pointing out that Hinduism is to Indians as Judaism is to Jews by etymology alone. What do you think Hinduism means?

Of course not all Indians are "Hindus."
Of course not all Jews are "Jewish." I'm personally acquainted with several Christian Jews, as well as others with more eclectic choices of personal faiths.

And as I said before, I don't want to turn this into a religious debate.

[Qwertqwert]

Originally posted by Alexander01


I never said that Indians were exclusively Hindu. I'm pointing out that Hinduism is to Indians as Judaism is to Jews by etymology alone. What do you think Hinduism means?

Of course not all Indians are "Hindus."
Of course not all Jews are "Jewish." I'm personally acquainted with several Christian Jews, as well as others with more eclectic choices of personal faiths.

And as I said before, I don't want to turn this into a religious debate.

I'm confused, so I looked this up...

Jewish - of, relating to, or characteristic of the Jews

So a non Jewish Jew would be someone of the Jewish Faith but doesn't have other characteristics of Jews.

Though I don't understand how someone could be a Christian Jew. Maybe a Jewish Christian but that's as close as it can get as far as I can tell. Maybe you can explain it?

[Will9]

Alexander is using the words hebrew and jew interchangebly. Hebrew can mean the language or someone with a hebrew ansester. Sometimes the the word Jew is used to describe someone with a Hebrew ancester. (That is why so many Russian Christians were hilled in the holocost.) It is definitly possible that a Hebrew (Jew) could convert to Christianity.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Qwertqwert

I'm confused, so I looked this up...

Jewish - of, relating to, or characteristic of the Jews

So a non Jewish Jew would be someone of the Jewish Faith but doesn't have other characteristics of Jews.

Though I don't understand how someone could be a Christian Jew. Maybe a Jewish Christian but that's as close as it can get as far as I can tell. Maybe you can explain it?

Well, I have a friend who is a Messianic Jew -- he affiliated himself with the Syrian Orthodox Christians.

I have another friend who is ethnically Jewish but never belonged to the faith to begin with.

Also: I don't think I really mean to use Hebrew and Jew interchangeably; they're not exactly the same thing. Though I do consider it okay to refer to either a proponent of Judaism or a person of Jewish ancestry as a Jew or Jewish. One does not necessarily need to affiliate with a faith to belong to an ethnicity, granted the old Tribe of Judah has become quite diluted over the millenia (as all ethnicities do).

And now... back to the real topic of this thread...

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Alexander01
And now... back to the real topic of this thread...

If only it were that easy

[Alexander I]

Well, here's an idea for a new unit: the bombard.

An early medieval cannon, it would fit in between the trebuchet and cannnon.

Perhaps it could be very inaccurate but also extremely deadly.

[dregor]

I dunno, I think Catapult > Trebuchet > Cannon will be more than enough for artillery as is.

[LordShiva]

Yeah. Stop needless unit spam too



(Super Praetorians are excluded from the above remark)

[Willem]

Originally posted by Alexander01
On another note, does anyone have more suggestions for gameplay fixes?

Well if Warlords doesn't already have it, I'd like to see a button we could click so that the governor will never build a certain type of specialist. It's annoying to have all my Scientists in my science city become Engineers and Priests after a bout of unhappiness.

One new feature I'd like to see is having a choice of advisors, ala Masters of Orion. You can select from a list and each one has different aspects/abilities that they can offer your civ. And in time they die out/retire and you have to select new ones.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I have a 'trade' idea. A new trade screen, showing you what private businesses are importing and exporting (based on what resources you have in your borders). And also it lists the prices of those. You would have the option for a "state monopoly" whereupon you'd get all the value of an increased price multiplied by all the export goods, at the cost of one (or more) unhappy citizen per city.

The problem would be to create an economic model that would model these prices and account for supply and demand (if someone else you discover has a good in their markets, then the price for that good drops in yours because of the increased supply).

This would also allow you to sink another Civ's monopoly by 'subsidizing' your merchants to produce more goods, increasing supply.

You should also be able to put tariffs on goods (different levels for each good) to raise money or drive a monopoly value up (and unhappiness up as well!).

This may be WAAAY too ambitious, though.

[Qwertqwert]

Originally posted by Alexander01


Well, I have a friend who is a Messianic Jew -- he affiliated himself with the Syrian Orthodox Christians.

I have another friend who is ethnically Jewish but never belonged to the faith to begin with.

As far as I can tell, the Messianic Jew one would be a Jewish Christian (unless every Jewish charaistic skipped over him, then he'd just be Christian).

And the other guy would just be Jewish, and not a Jew.

I'm just going by the definitions to get this, but I'll stop posting about it.