Disease

[Frugal_Gourmet]

Yeah... well I guess what I'm saying is that even though it doesn't make the game super complex, it does add one more thing that the Civ'er has to "take into consideration".

Players already have to manage happiness, science, luxuries, resources, buildings, land development, diplomacy, culture, trade, etc. Now, they'll have to make sure their empire is as disease-proof as possible by either researching the right techs or building the right improvements. For me, I'm thinking "why bother?".

There's already so many factors to take into consideration when playing Civ and they've just added a few more in culture and trade. These are bonuses which could boost the fun of the game significantly. I'm not so sure a disease-model (even in simple form) would do that.

IMO, then Civ design team is right on track with adding a couple of awesome new ideas in there and leaving out the ideas (like disease) which would not really make the game a heckuva lot more fun to play. There's a critical mass here in how bureaucratic this game could become before it becomes boring. We should try to avoid that critical mass as long as possible.

Just an opinion...

[SerapisIV]

Disease should be in the game, but not as some enormous game concept. Keep it simple, make it a random event, one which is preventable by sanitation or medice discovery. It wouldn't happen often. How many Civ1 games did you have where a "lose 1 pop" random event killed your early game? Random events have been shown to be wanted in Civ3 (see past threads) why not include disease?

[Quartz Dragon]

Originally posted by Frugal_Gourmet
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?

Plague is one of the largest events that occured in history, and believe it or not, the black plague virus is still arround.

Also, having a plague model would allow bio warfare like in CPT. Bio warfare would be an act of war as well as an atrocity.

As a natural occurance, the random factor could work just like the random events in SMAC.

[Inverse Icarus]

bio warfare? omfg.

seems were leaving civ here.

STICK TO YOUR ROOTS BIATCH.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by UberKruX
bio warfare? omfg.

seems were leaving civ here.

Not really, just depends on the scope of how you define bio warfare. Poisoning a city's water (Civ2 feature) is technically bio warfare. A feature that I think should remain in the game. Unleashing Anthrax and wiping out several cities connected by trade with one shot, I don't want that feature, too powerful and too SMAC/SciFi.

[K.J.H.]

I don't know. Maybe it is too complex. But diseases and civilization are and were like Romeo & Julliet, Fred & Barney, Adolf & Eva, Hillary & Bill, Tom Green & Glenn ...

This is my idea. When a city get overcrowded (like in CTP) the risk of having an epidemic increases. Then this happens:
- 2 pops die (you won't be afraid of total annihilation, because overcrowded cities have more pops then two!)
- the 50% of the content citizens become unhappy (the happy class have probably enough drugs and luxuries too be healthy)
- it can be spread by trade
- in eight turns the city is under control

when the disease reaches an other city by trade then:
- in overcrowding cities 1 pop dies, in non-overcrowding cites no-one dies (well, they die, but not as fast as in such stinky places as overcrowing cities)
- the 20% of the content citizens become unhappy
- it can be spread by trade
- in five turns the city is under control

when the disease reaches a third city then:
- no one dies
- the 20% of the content citizens become unhappy
- it can't be spread by trade anymore
- in two turns the city is under control

After Advances as Medieval Medicine, Pharmaceuticals, Genetic Engineering, Modern Surgery etc. etc. the chance of disease decreases
This also counts for Improviments as Sanatorium, Drug Store, Aquaduct, Hospital and maybe a WoW as Cure for AIDS, Flemming's Cure and The Pasteur Institute

I don't know
Please Reply

[Theben]

I hate to say it again, but Check the ListTM and you'll find a working disease model. Scroll down to the bottom and you'll see it with an example. But if Firaxis hasn't put it in yet, I doubt they will. Which is okay.

[Frugal_Gourmet]

Originally posted by Quartz Dragon


Plague is one of the largest events that occured in history, and believe it or not, the black plague virus is still arround.

Also, having a plague model would allow bio warfare like in CPT. Bio warfare would be an act of war as well as an atrocity.

As a natural occurance, the random factor could work just like the random events in SMAC.

Again, I'm not disputing that the plague didn't have an effect on real history. What I'm disputing is how much value it would add into the game.

No matter how simple you make then disease model (though if you make it too simple it will become stupid and unstoppable), it is still one more thing that a Civ player must take into consideration. One of the biggest problems of Civ is beauracracy and managing every part of your empire.

If you had to manage your own empire to prevent/stop things like disease, it would only add to the already existent micro-management/complexity of the game and make it less fun. Numerous things that a Civer must take into consideration have already been added. These features are ok because they're fun and give the player the since that he's really impacting a fictional history. Making all of your cities "disease-proof" or preventing/stopping disease in any way is just adding something the game doesn't need.

I stand firmly opposed to this.

[eNo]

I havn't read the disease model (I should be studying for a chem exam) but from what I know, disease/plagues were not that random. They were caused by either improper sanitation or being carried from one group to another. I think the Black Plague was carried by the Mongol Horde to Europe from Asia. Also when Europaons landed in North America, the native population suffered their own plague because they did not have the natural defences.

I'm not sure how the flu epedimic that happened around 1900's worked so I can't comment on that. Finally plagues generally hurt every nation, so its affect on gameplay is same as giving every team one point in a game of Pictionary so it really wouldn't add that much to gameplay.

[BigRich]

Originally posted by SerapisIV


Not really, just depends on the scope of how you define bio warfare. Poisoning a city's water (Civ2 feature) is technically bio warfare. A feature that I think should remain in the game. Unleashing Anthrax and wiping out several cities connected by trade with one shot, I don't want that feature, too powerful and too SMAC/SciFi.

Am I right in thinking that in medieval times, a sieging force would catapult carcasses of dead city defenders back into the sieged city, partly to demoralise the city defense and partly to spread disease?
If I'm right - wouldnt that count as bio warfare.
If I'm wrong - blame my over reading of fantasy type books and my shaky grasp on fiction/fact

Rich

[Frugal_Gourmet]

Originally posted by eNo
I havn't read the disease model (I should be studying for a chem exam) but from what I know, disease/plagues were not that random. They were caused by either improper sanitation or being carried from one group to another.

That's one of the things I worry about. If it's not random, that means the Civ'er must PLAN for it and attempt to prevent and/or cure it. If the Civ'er must take it into this kind of consideration, another level of complexity has been added to the game.

Finally plagues generally hurt every nation, so its affect on gameplay is same as giving every team one point in a game of Pictionary so it really wouldn't add that much to gameplay.

Agreed.