Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Disease

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

  • Disease

    I was just thinking about how disease has influenced civilization (I'm kinda in a sadistic mood ) and if it should be in Civ III. Maybe Lawrence of Arabia included this in his "Random Acts of Nature" thread (I especially like the drought disaster, with squares drying up, etc.), but I was just wondering. Disease has been (unfortunately) a big part of history, from the Plague to the Native Americans dying of European diseases to AIDS in the world today. Perhaps this should be implemented in Civ III with random breakouts in cities? Cities with more health improvements (Hospital, etc.) would be at less of a risk, and big, unhappy cities in impoverished, primitive nations would have a huge risk. Scientists could find cures and make their civ famous...I dunno, I won't be surprised if no one answers this .


    "Just a thought..."

  • #2
    Good idea

    Trade could also be a factor in spreading the plague.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes! I wanted to say that, because rats on ships from the Orient spread the Plague to Europe.
      Last edited by Andreiguy; May 23, 2001, 19:47.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yes! I wanted to say that, because rats on ships from the Orient spread the Plague to Europe.

        Comment


        • #5
          In ctp, if you poisened a city, any city with a trade route to it would have a chance of also being poisened. I don't have an opinion on the other ideas (yet )
          "Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini

          Comment


          • #6
            Yeah, but I mean something different, just random outbreaks. (Or at least usually random), and it would have a much more horrible effect. I mean, the Plague killed more than half of Europe! It would be devestating, but hey, its what you get when you put lots of people very close together in unsanitary conditions like Medieval cities!

            Comment


            • #7
              Actually, I must correct you... the plague killed approximately one third of Europe's population.

              But your idea... is a good one, as long as there are measures you can take to at least somewhat prevent them. What do you suggest a plague should do?
              Lime roots and treachery!
              "Eventually you're left with a bunch of unmemorable posters like Cyclotron, pretending that they actually know anything about who they're debating pointless crap with." - Drake Tungsten

              Comment


              • #8
                That is not a bad idea. But chances are slim that it will be implemented.

                I believe the isuue is related to the wider one whether there will be natural disaster in civIII. And it seems unlikely that there will be disasters in civIII.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Too complicated...

                  Too complicated. Keep this one out of CivIII, IMO.

                  Wouldn't really add any fun to the game. Just make it more complex.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Check The List...

                    If I remember right, disease was well modelled into a dedicated area of The List v.2
                    (download and check it at CIV III page http://apolyton.net/civ3).

                    It consider effects of Acqueduct, Sanitation, Hospital, Trade route, etc.

                    I think it could be added as Natural Disaster (not really random, but driven from some factors the human player can try to counteract). It will be frustrating to have your Civ hitten by a Plague, but life was (is) not a rosebed.
                    "We are reducing all the complexity of billions of people over 6000 years into a Civ box. Let me say: That's not only a PkZip effort....it's a real 'picture to Jpeg heavy loss in translation' kind of thing."
                    - Admiral Naismith

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I like the idea of keeping disease simple, as a preventable random event. Such as having sanitation eliminates the threat of the plague/typhoid/malaria. Although the idea of transfering disease to nearby towns is very intriguing, I think it should be a very simple system, such as only to nearby towns connected by roads and then only with a decreasing % chance with each tile from the infected city.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        no.

                        no plagues or disease in civ, please.

                        disease would first of all create a huge mess of code with would delay civ3

                        secondly, it would be hard to regulate/control.

                        thridly, an early plague would severally screw over a civ.

                        fourthly, its effects are too far ranging in possibility.
                        [list=1][*]would it kill citys population?[*]would it kill settlers / workers?[*]would it kill units?[*]would production be hindered?[*]would the plague spread via military units?[*]could you send infected units to enemy cities and give them the plague?[*]could you send a plagued caravan to an ally's city and give them the plague?[*]is that an act of war?[*]can the plague be cured? or does it just die out?[*]do special units / buildings cure the plague?[*]if you nuke a plagued city does it get cured? [*]does a city have the plague forever, with immune people living in it? if a civ that has not met them comes over, can they get the plague 1000 years after it died out?[/list=1]

                        its a huge mess of code and calls. i say don't bother.
                        "I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
                        - Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by UberKruX

                          disease would first of all create a huge mess of code with would delay civ3
                          It would probably use less code than your post.
                          secondly, it would be hard to regulate/control.
                          Well, that's kind of the point. Only the discovery of penicillin made medicine truly able to actually cure or control disease.
                          thridly, an early plague would severally screw over a civ.
                          Not necessarily, because it would be a purely percentile factor. Ex. If you have a three person city and each person has <30% chance of getting a new plague then you will likely only have 1 or less citizens killed.

                          1,2,3. Yes, up to ~30% max chance per population or unit, I'd say. Yes, I know Old World diseases killed over 75% of the Native American population, but that's too extreme a case for a game, way too unbalancing.
                          4,5,6,7. Yes.
                          8. No
                          9. Not until modern ages, yes.
                          10. Not until modern ages.
                          11. No.
                          12. I'd say yes, and yes.
                          A thing either is what it appears to be; or it is not, but yet appears to be; or it is, but does not appear to be; or it is not, and does not appear to be.--Epictitus

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Again... this adds a level of complexity (possible frustration) to the game without adding any fun. Reading the thoughts here, there are some good, simple ways to implement this.... maybe. But why? Yeah, disease had a definite effect on civilization throughout history. So, have about 16 million other things. Why focus on something as boring as disease?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Frugal_Gourmet
                              Again... this adds a level of complexity (possible frustration) to the game without adding any fun. Reading the thoughts here, there are some good, simple ways to implement this.... maybe. But why? Yeah, disease had a definite effect on civilization throughout history. So, have about 16 million other things. Why focus on something as boring as disease?
                              Well, I didn't actually say that I think 'disease' should be implemented into the game, b/c I don't. I was just saying that it would not be that hard or complicated to do so. Sorry for not adding that in the above post.
                              A thing either is what it appears to be; or it is not, but yet appears to be; or it is, but does not appear to be; or it is not, and does not appear to be.--Epictitus

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X