Announcement

**DarkCloud** · September 4, 2001, 20:00

10. Civ Personalities

[Dark Cloud]
There should be 5 basic personality types-
-Warlike
-Expansionist
-Neutral
-Perfectionist
-Pacifist
And there should be 2 sub-personalities for each-
-Warlike has
1. Fight to the Death (Never gives up after being attacked, almost never gives
up when losing a war.)
2. Backstabber (Attacks when least expecting- attacks allies, etc)
-Expansionist has
1. Settler Type (Builds many cities)
2. War Type (Attacks others cities)
-Neutral has
1. Warlike (If insulted will attack - will only pay tribute sometimes)
2. Passifist (If attacked will attack- will pay tribute always)
-Perfectionist has
1. City Developer (Builds up cities)
2. Unit Developer (Builds up armies)
-Pacifist has
1. Researcher (Only builds the newest units and buildings)
2. Developer (Only builds the cheapest units and buildings)

[Travathian]
Each civilization should have a distinct personality. When playing on the Earth map,
the personalities should mirror the real world ones. However, on a random map, the
personalities should also be randomized.

[Mo]
Allow personalities to change over the course of the game.
A semi-warlike civilization can become a pacifist if they lose a big war.
The Babylonians can become warlike if their borders are threatened.

[Cartagia the Great]
It would be interesting to have different personalities for one country based on
whether the leader was male or female. Stalin would be more warlike, while Catherine
would be more enlightened

11. Government
[Cartagia the Great and Dark Cloud]
You should have a choice at the very beginning-
Tyranny (Highest- 60& Production Rate Impeded)
Tribal (Highest- 50% Luxury Rate Impeded)
Despotism (Highest- 60& Science Rate Impeded)

12. Minor Tribes

- Explanation:
These Tribes pop up as goody huts but are much like Colonization's native tribes,
the tribes follow and after them are ideas for implementation.

[Dark Cloud]
Canadians
Irish
Portugese
Mauryans (India in 250 BC)
Ugandans
Afghanistani
Pakistani
Marathans (India 1775 AD)
Timur (1400 AD)
Lydians (600 BC)
Medians (600 BC)
Parthians
Bohemians (1648 AD)
Siamese (Siam 1900 AD in Asia (Now Cambodia etc.))
Guptas (India in 400 A.D.)
Aboriginies
Lithuania (Once a mighty kingdom in the Ukraine 1360 AD)

[wernazuma]
Korea
Abbisinians

[Technophile]
Swahili
Visigoths
Ostrogoths
Magyars

[The List]
Argentines
Anatolians
Berbers
Brazilians
Scottish

[beyowulf]
Magyars

[Vitmore the Great]
Moroccans
Tibetans

[Yakopepper]
Minoan

[Snowfire]
Minor civs would have a different AI that would call for some initial growth at first, and
then very slow growth afterward. It would develop science mostly by trade and luck. It would
have its own special AI. And there would be lots of things to do to it (let's say Belgium)-
maybe sign a treaty guarenteeing its safety, like England did, saying that "A declaration of
war on Belgium is a declaration of war on me." And then trade with it and get lots of good
technology from it.

Of course, if a major civ is weakened enough (like Poland from 1600 onward), then it may become
a minor civ and an especially strong minor civ may become a major civ (like the Germans or the
Russians, who profitted at Poland and others expense).

[Technophile]
These are, well, minor civs. Like small civs. Why aren’t they large civs, you ask?
Because they’re small, ya moron. These would come about from things like a revolution
(like, the French Empire splits into the French Empire and the Flench Empire, with the
Flench Empire acting as a splinter civilization), from barbarians conquering a city
(or founding their own), or from exploring and discovering fifty unique civilizations per
square mile. Clearly the latter can become tedious if overdone.

[M@NI@C]
Minor civs shouldn’t be able to build wonders, except perhaps those with a one-city-only
or one-time-only effect like the Colossus or Darwin’s Voyage.

[Youngsun]
*The Goody/Goodie hut upgrade proposal*

This has been suggested by me a while ago in Korn469's ICS problem thread but I'd like to
bring it back again.

Assuming there are 8~9 slots available for major civs with additional 5~6 minor civs, just
adding more minor civs would be too much burden for our hardworking CPUs.

I'm pretty sure the designer's intention to create those huts were;

1.representation of Barbarian horde(military threat to civs)
2.representation of primitive natives(source of easy tribute/imperial military protection)
3.sort of bonus for an early explorer(money,knowledge,mercenaries,civilised nomad?)

Current problems
1.No diplomacy allowed to those huts(quite contradictory to history which is full of intense
interactions between civilisations and natives/the less-civilised)
2.There is no chance of those barbarians establish a civilisation either by force or
accumulation knowledge/culture.
3.The hut which may be the representation of groups of villages can be eliminated too easily
(Just one move...)
4.Getting a technology/discovery from the hut(totally unrealistic and can create a situation
that most advanced civ get a tech from primitive natives)
5.Those mercenaries are actually your army and have no hometown to return(against true
definition of mercenary)

Suggestions to solve the problems
1.Make the hut as a base for those natives and not so vulnerable from foreign invasion
(as resilient as the one of Colonisation)
2.If a civilised cities are conquered by barbarians, they should get a chance to begin new civ
(minor or major depends on how powerful they are also that should be up to availabilty of civ
slot)
3.Allows diplomacy with natives
*Demand tribute in exchange for military protection(Roman clients system)
*Recruit/pay/discharge mercenaries
*etc.
4.Each native tribe should have its own unique traits & chracteristics and for some cases
military speciality(light cavalry,javelineer,etc)
5.Random or periodic appearance of charismatic barbarian leader which brings unity to many
huts around his/her one and eventual assembling of the horde then invasion to neibouring civs.

[Dark Cloud]
Yes following colonizations model for minor civs should be a must.
1. Colonization with the indians/natives worked well you could
a. Trade
b. Fight
or
c. Convert them and gain more population

you should be able to do all those things and more in Civ III.

Such as-

a.Play them off against other leaders (Alliances)
and
b.Get them to vote you World Leader.

13. Special Abilities
[The Octopus]
-Have differentiated civilizations: Say, Mesopotamia has a start with a greater
emphasis on agriculture, but have them decide where they want to lead their civilization.
[Eggman]
-Special abilities should be optional - you can turn them on or off.
It also should play-balance. How about having civilizations "earning" advantages?
Over a period of time, you could acquire points which you could spend on whatever
particular advantage you want.
[Imran Siddiqui]
-Give them a technology in what they specialize at the beginning of the game.
[Snowfire]
-Give them 'focuses.'
[Dark Cloud]
-Focuses:
In addition to personalities there would be focuses for each civilization
that would determine which aspect of their civilization that they would develop.
-Two focuses per civilization

AGRICULTURE- They build excessive Irrigation/Farmland
TRANSPORT- They build excessive Roads/Railroads
EXPLORE- They send out explorers and try explore Earth
DISCOVER- They build excessive Science Improvements
TRADE- They trade everything they can with other civilizations (coupled with explore)
EXPANSION- They found many cities
DEVELOPING- They develope their cities
WAR- They will fight at the drop of a pin
ESPIONAGE- They like to send out many spies and diplomats

-There would be no disadvantages

[Diodorus Sicilus - CormacMacArt]
Have special abilities be assigned based on geographical starting positions.
For example, if your first city is near a desert, that civilization can get
Irrigation as their first free advance, or get +1 in farming. Build on that idea.

[Dark Cloud and Evil Capitalist]
Civ traits are abolished and this system is administered
All civs are given four choices at the beginning of the game
1.Choose a technology
-choose a tech
2.Receive an extra settler
-recieve an extra settler
3.Irrigation
-Start with all irrigated squares around your first city
4.Diplomacy
-Start already in diplomatic talks with another civ
(More trading/trade)

Militaristic culture- free warrior unit.

Fertile land: the first city produces +1 food.

Precious metal mines: +1 trade for 1st city

Naval culture: free outriger or similar unit.

13. Civ-Specific Advances and Wonders

[Evil Capitalist]
(There should be) Civ- specific wonders (and advances), which the computer won't
build if it doesn't need.

[Imran Siddiqui]
"Traits".

Now what are traits? Well, first of all, we must divide the tech tree into 4 (or 5) eras,
like the Wonders of the World were in Civ2. Then insert these "traits" into the tree. "Traits"
are a dead end on the Civ tree, but they are specializations. For example, a trait during
modern times might be -Advanced Armor-, which would increase movement and power of armored
units. Now, the main part of this arguement, is that Civs can ONLY CHOOSE ONE TRAIT PER ERA!
So they must make a choice between that -Advanced Seamanship- or -Advanced Infantry- depending
on what the player sees as the better choice for his civ, based on where he is and where he
wants to go.

This idea of "traits", dead end specializations that a civ can only chose one of per era,
would add this differentiation between civs. You could have your great naval powers and great
army powers by specialized picks. While an island nations choses -Advanced Seamanship-, a
landlocked nation can pick -Advanced Infantry-.

However, it isn't just relegated to military. Traits can also be under political or cultural.
You could have -Improved Fascism- or -True Socialism-, which could improve the benefits of a
particular government. Or You could pick -Greater Playwrights- to improve happiness inside
your empire. But remember only ONE Trait per era. You'd have to pick between military or
political or cultural traits, and of course you could only get traits when you get the
neccessary techs that the prereqs for the traits. This adds another element.
A civ could pick a trait early in the era to get a boost through the era, or
wait until the end of the era to get a more powerful trait, but be rendered weaker
in the era as the result.

This addition of "Traits" adds more strategy and creates interesting differentiations.
You could have civs that spend all 4 traits (one per each era) on naval upgrades, while
others spread their traits in different area (like creating the Perfect Fascism, while
having the best Infantry).

[Rashid]
it would be interesting if the differences between civilizations were somehow
the cumulative consequences of a lot of earlier decisions. For example, if the proportion
of trade arrows that you devote to taxes is higher than average (the average of all the
other civs perhaps), then eventually you will have more efficient tax collection. Or if you
spend more than the average number of shields on ships, or on cavalry, or on libraries,
then these start to get cheaper or more effective for you. There could be cross-effects too,
like if you keep building ships then eventually it gets easier to research naval technology.

By the same token, if you are spending much less than the average on land units, then your
land units will become less effective, or if you are devoting much less trade than average
to science, then your people will be less efficient researchers. If you happen to be near
the average in that particular category, nothing happens.

After all, the reason the English had great navies was ultimately because they had a long
tradition of seafaring. Allowing civilizations to pick a trait every once in a while would
still allow sudden changes (the Prussians suddenly decide to become a naval power and so
pick advanced seafaring), which seems odd.

Also, there should be some possibility for civilizations to be weaker in some areas, not
just stronger, and finally, it might be easier on the AI if it doesn't have to make an
explicit choice about what to be good (or bad) at.

To satisfy those (including me!) who want to see specialized units, how about adding some
dead-end technologies to the tree that would be mutually exclusive? Once you have knights,
for example, you could research crusaders, and once you have archers you could research
longbows, but if you have crusaders you couldn’t get longbows, and vice versa. Have each
of them make the other one obsolete, for example, or better yet, prevent a civilization
that has one from ever getting the other (through research or trade or conquest).

[Chatgr]
A wonder can be built by one civ.
Only one superwonder could be built by any oneciv.Superwonder would change available future
tech.For example sentiest computer and mars colony or living gaia.If mars colony superwonder
built first then people money and tech would go to space .

That would mean more space units less computer advances and final victory people going to stars.

If sentiest computer built first these space tech unavailable and people build more computer
tech wonders and units and final ending people uploadind personalities on computers and
achieving a kind of immortality.Or a living Gaia superwonder where final endind people one with
planet and in the meantime units and base facilities built that work against pollution.

Once you buit a superwonder no othersuperwonder can be built.
It adds variety to game and from civ perspective is a turning point in history.

14. Diplomacy

[Evil Capitalist]
There is more than one level of war- from the little colonial wars to world wars.
Similarly there are diffrent levels of peace.

Wars

Territorial conflict- Wars over little areas of territory, such as the Falklands.
No trade penalties (trade goes via a different route). So long as the war doesn't spread
the computer will only fight in the area attacked. Caused by an attack on a city of less
than size 5 or an isolated fort. No unhappiness effects in republics or democracies.

Border war- war for aquisition of a certain bit of territory, like the war of 1812. Enemy
will attack anywhere and all trade via land is stopped. Caused by an attack on a city equal
or above size 5, 2 or more below 5, or a fortress near a city or a major war on an ally.
Normal unhappiness effects.

Major war- war fought to damage a nation as well as take territory or to take large areas
of territory, such as the Franco-Prussian war. Caused by an attack on a city of size 10 or
above, or 3 or more cities of below that. It allows small air raids- no effects on
industry or population, just reduces happiness. No trade.

Total war- war aimed at the total destrution of the enemy, as WW2. Obviously no trade,
caused by an attack on a size 20 or higher city, or half your cities (if greater than 5).
Allows nuclear attacks, and obliteration bombing- hits industry and population, but
strengthens moral (blitz spirit). No unhappiness effect for troops away (propaganda).

Peacekeeping- intervention by 'good' nations. Only available to the owner of the UN and
their allies. Half unhappiness effects, and must be coupled with sanctions. If units are
lost there is an empire wide unhappiness effect.

You or the computer can raise war levels, to make the war more intense. You can only raise
war to one level above that the rules would allow (so the Falklands can't turn into Britain
nuking Argentina). Although you can escalate the conflict, you may not decrease the level.
This system allows the computer to prioritise the wars it is fighting, and sort out its
prodution accordingly. At the start of the game only border wars are possible, the rest
being developed by technology.

Peace

Cold war- Trade almost stopped, nations will not cooperate, may try serious espionage.

Detente- Trade reduced, nations will cooperate, and serious espionage is limited.
Exploration after 20 turns.

Ceasefire- As no contact. Exploration after 10 turns.

Recognition- Borders recognised, opens up other treaties. Exploration shared after 5 turns.

Cooperation- Trade bonus, can participate in joint research. Exploration shared after 2 turn
lag.

Alliance- Can't attack one another, can travel through opponant's cities, help repair units.
Ally respects borders when you arn't at war. If ally is declared war apon you must declare
war on attacker. If ally is attacker, there is no obligation. Trade bonus. All exploration
shared.

Coalition- As alliance, fellow members can station troops in your territory. If one is at
war at border level or above, all are at war. All negotiations are carried out together.
Research is carried out together and shared. Trade bonus. No diplomatic actions against
one another. You can see inside all cities in the coalition.

You need to research to get Cold War, detente, or coalition.

**DarkCloud** · September 4, 2001, 20:02

15. Tribe Info

[S. Kroeze with some editing by Dark Cloud]
List of how Civilization Civilizations Prospered

I Early Civilizations, 3000-1400BC
Sumer (Kish)
Egypt (Memphis)
Crete (Knossos)
Babylonia (Babylon)
Chinese
Hittites (Chattushash)

II Antiquity, 1400-450BC
Assyria (Ninive)
Phoenicia (Byblos)
Greek cities (Athenai)
Chinese
Carthago (Carthago)
Persian empire (Persepolis)

III Classical Antiquity, 450BC-300AD
Celts
Macedonia (Pella)
Magadha (Pataliputra)
Chinese (Han Dynasty)
Roman empire (Roma)
Maya (Tikal)

IV Early Middle Ages, 300-750AD
Guptas (Pataliputra)
Huns
Byzantine empire (Constantinople)
Chinese (T'ang Dynasty)

V High Middle Ages, 750-1300AD
Frankish empire (Reims)
Vikings
Japanese (Fujiwara Dynasty)
Holy Roman empire (Aachen)
Chinese (Song Dynasty)
Seljuks
Mongols

VI Renaissance, 1300-1550AD
Chinese (Ming Dynasty)
Inca empire (Cuzco)
Aztec empire (Tenochtitlán)
Ottoman empire (Istanbul)
Portugal (Lisboa)
Spanish empire (Madrid)

VII Modern, 1550-
Chinese (Manchus Dynasty)
Russian empire (Moskwa)
United Provinces (Amsterdam)
France (Paris)
British empire (London)
United States (Washington)
Japan (Tokyo)
German empire (Berlin)

[XarXo]
My idea is that th actual "civilization" system (we can see it in Ctp1 and Civ1/Civ2) is
totally obsolete. Better than a "civilization" or "tribe" selection we must select a
cultural-ethnic zone. For example, in the Spanish civilization we can build cities like
Barcelona or Madrid, but these two cities have an historial background totally diferent.
It's like germans can build Paris because a time this city was under their power during
the 2nd WW.

I preffer that when a player has to select the starting name it appears a map of the cultural
division based in the actually survivors (the ones that support the Test of Time ).
In each map that we do can perform this like a normal thing. So, in a Middle-Earth map we
can divide in Elves, Humans, Dwarves, Valar, etc... In the Earth will be:

Amerindian
Occidental
Desertians (Arabians, Israel, Egypt, Persia...)
Oriental (Altaïr, Siberia, China, Mongolia, Japan...)
Hindosiamese (India and Pacific Southeast)
African (under the Sahara zone)
Australian-Polynesian

Inside these groups (if we don't select the random cultural) we can found a second level of
divison according with the cultural base, in Occidental we can found:

Celts
Nordics
Gauls
Slavics
Mediterranean
Uralians

And inside it (if we don't try a random option) we found the ethnic group with (if is possible)
a list of names of nations that formed. Some of these etnics appears in other
cultural-base zones (like english) because they have conserved the base but they are too mixed.

Celts:
-Welsh (Wales)
-Scottish (Scotland)
-Irish (Eire,Man)
-Galic (Gallic,Portuguese,Brasilian)
-English
(England, United Kingdom, United States of America, Australia, South Africa, Canada)

Nordics:
-Teutons (Germany, Austria, Holland,Flemish,Belgium)
-Vikings (Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, England)
-Alpinians (Tirol, Retic, Friuli, Austria)

Gauls:
-Oïl (France, Belgium, Valonians, Luxemburguesians, Quebec)
-Oc (Occitane, Catars, Provence)

Slavics:
-Baltics (Bielorussians, Russians, Lituans, Estonians, Letonians, Poland)
-Carpatians (Ukranians, Bulgarians, Paennonians, Rumans, Slovaquians)
-Meridionals (Albanians, Bosnians, Slovenians, Croatians, Serbians)

Mediterranean:
-Hellenic (Greeks, Macedonians, Cyprus, Minoics)
-Italics (Italians, Romans, Etruscs)
-Iberians (Castillians, Catalans, Spanish, Argentinians, Chilenians, Colombians, Cubans,
Caribbeans)
-Isolated (Corsic, Sardinians)

Uralians:
-Caucasians (Georgians,Armenians)
-Scandinavians (Finnish, Carelians)
-Westerns (Magyar-Hungary, Chequian, Basquian-Euskaldun)

Wow, and these are "only" the occidentals!

Also, depending from the time when you start, the starting city will one or another.
For example, in Castillians (Occidental-> Meditarreans -> Iberians) the first city surely wull
be Logroño, Burgos or Valladolid. Not Madrid (these turned in to the capital during the XV).
The same for Teotihuacan->Tenochtitlán, Cusco->Quito, Trondheim-> Oslo, etc...

Also there is another important thing. Some countries (Mexico, India, Peru...) have an
important inavison from another countries, but they MUST don't be included in the invaders
group.

[Youngsun]
Old names/dynasties for Asian civilisations(generalised)

BC2000~100
Shang/Zhou/Qin/Han(China)
Choson(Korea)
Hung(Vietnam)

AD300~1000
Sui/Tang/Song(China)
Kokuryo/Shilla/Koryo(Korea)
Wa/Yamato/Fujiwara(Japan)
Annam/Ly(Vietnam)

AD1000~1800
Ming/Qing(China)
Choson(Korea)
Hojo/Tokugawa(Japan)
Nguyen(Vietnam)
Siam(Thailand)
Tibet(Tibet?)

16. Leader Bonuses

[Technophile]
Each civilization is given a choice of five or so leaders which are selected at the
beginning of the game, and may or may not change. These leader choices might affect
such things as

Unit offense, defense, hit points, firepower, and movement rating;

Effectiveness of administration (some leaders are more prone to corruption, some leaders
are predisposed towards a certain government style);

Effectiveness of leadership (if the leader is a famous general);

Predisposition towards certain types of research, taxation;

17. Schisms

[Technophile]
So let’s say that a Civ had a civil war. Would the French split into the French and the
Flench necessarily? Preferably they would split into the French and the Spanish, something
more historically accurate and feasible. Here’s a big list of civilizations that are related
to each other-if one has a civil war and the other didn’t exist at the start of the game,
then the other gets created.

Aztecs-Teotihuacans-Olmec
Inca-Tiahuacanos-Moche
English-Americans-Canadians
Russians-Polish-Mongols
Greeks-Romans-Minoans
Egyptians-Assyrians-Babylonians
French-German-Spanish
Sioux-Iroqoius-Navaho
Chinese-Japanese-Korean
Indians-Siamese-Khmer

[Tefu, Lonestar]
Americans: Confederates - Texans - Californians (Cajuns)
Germans: Prussians - Austrians - Swiss
English: Canadians - Australians - South Africans
Celts: Irish - Scots - Welsh
Russians: Ukrainians - Poles - Finns
Vikings: Swedes - Norwegians - Danes
Romans: Palmyrans - Byzantine - Bosphorans

NOTE: THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT MESSAGE IN THIS POST

Announcement

Tribes

Tribes

Comment

Comment