Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"real" pop city model

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

  • "real" pop city model

    I have been thinking about how to implement a city model that uses "real" population numbers instead of "heads". I think that "real" pop is better not just because it is more realistic (It would make the game seem more real to have a city of 230,000 than a city of 23 heads)but because it would in turn make combat a lot better. With "real" pop, you can have "real" armies. Instead of fighting with units that take damage, you could have a real army (for example, an army of 2000 infantry, 34 tanks)that would take casualties, or become prisoners.
    I think that I have come up with a city model that uses 'real" pop and does not have too much micromanagement.
    You would have a city view (it could be 3D or not, it does not matter) where you see each city improvement and the surrounding terrain. Next to the city view, there would be a box with the amount of ressources the city has stored (food, stone, gold, weapons, etc...), the number of unemployed, the number of idle citizens, total population and pop growth. New citizens and citizens that arived from somewhere (immigrants) would appear in the idle section. (you could have the computer automatically assign idle citizens to a certain task, to reduce micromanagement).

    -collecting resources
    To collect a certain ressource, you would simply click on the resource in the city view, a window would pop up letting you increase or decrease the amount of people working in that square. increasing pop in that square takes pop from the idle column and move them to the resource. Decreasing would transfer people from the resource to the idle column. The more people working a tile, the more of that resource would be stored each turn.

    -building city improvements
    To build a new city improvement, you would click on an empty square in the city view and select the city improvement and the amount of people to want to build it. The amount of people would be taken from the idle column and begin constucting the improvement (or wonder). You could have build queues: click a second time, third time etc on an empty square and set a city improvement but assign nobody to work there. After completing the first city improvement, the workers there would automatically move to the next build order.
    Unlike, the current civ city model, this model would allow you to build several improvements simultaneously. Click an empty square, pick improvement, assign workers, click a second square, pick improvement, assign workers, repeat as many time as you want (as long as you have enough workers) and each improvement would be constructed simultaneously. If one improvement were finished before the other, the workers would add to the next improvement being built. If that was the only build order, the workers would go to the idle column and the player would be prompted about it.

    -working city improvements
    Once city improvements are built, you would assign people to work in them, by clicking on the city improvement in the city view and assigning people from the idle column. Naturally, the more people assign to a city improvement, the faster it would do what it does. For example, a research lab would make reseach go faster the more people assigned to it. Each city improvement would have a maximum limit of pop that can be assigned to it. So for example, if a research lab reached the maximum amount of people it can hold, you would neeed to build a second research lab to increase your research further.

    -changing tasks
    The idle column would be used to transfer pop from one task to another. It would be a two step process. First decrease pop from task that you want to reduce. The pop would go to the idle column. Then increase pop of task that you want to increase and the pop in the idle column would go to that task: You've transfered people from one task to another.

    -resources
    At the end of each turn, the amount of each resource (like food, ressources to build city improvement or weapons,energy etc) that the city is consuming would be automatically deduced from the resources stockpiled. Note: the energy model could be implemented. Energy would be a resource that would have to be produced. Improvements like the nuclear plant would produce energy for example. Some improvements would need enegy to function.

    -Happiness
    Happiness would work on a group by group level. ie, the group assigned to produce food would have its own happiness level, the group working in research lab its own, etc...
    So, instead of the current civ model where the entire city riots and shuts down, this model each group would riot or throw a "we love ..." individually. If the group producing food rioted, the city would cease producing food but the rest of the city would function normally. If a group reached a "we love..." day, it would do its taks faster. If things were allowed to get really bad, and several goups rioted then they might try to overthrow the city and become independant. So it would be gradual. (Interesting note: you would not want the group that is your army to riot!)

    With the proper micromanagement help (I mentionned a few), this model would not be too hard to manage.

    This model also implements a lot of other ideas (recruitment, energy model, simultaneous build orders etc) that people have suggested into one model.

    Any questions? Comments? Please, don't hesitate.


    ------------------
    No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.
    'There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way. The war we fight is not against powers and principalities, it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.'"
    G'Kar - from Babylon 5 episode "Z'ha'dum"

  • #2
    Sounds good..

    One more thing.. Nukes and other weapons of mass destruction could kill off real numbers now..

    I'm not sure how these real number would be incorporated in military units though.. Any ideas?



    ------------------
    -Shiva
    Email: shiva@mailops.com
    Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
    ICQ: 17719980

    Comment


    • #3
      I have wanted more realism in cities and this would be a step in the right direction. It also would be better for military except for one major problem that I see. How do I know how many troops I am going up against?

      Of course in real life an army doesn't know exactly who they are fighting against and how many. But at the very least they have some idea as to how many troops are over the hill, even if it is simply counting the number of fires during the night. I do not want to start an attack if I have no idea who I am fighting.


      I think the best way to have military people would be to say the % of the population that you want in the military. The cities would then divide the military units between their military population in that city. Then it form units and keep them up to date. But again their needs to be a way to see the size of a unit so that I don't want to attack a stronger enemy.
      About 24,000 people die every day from hunger or hunger-related causes. With a simple click daily at the Hunger Site you can provide food for those who need it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks for the feedback! keep up the great discussion!

        In terms of detecting how many enemy troops there are. Here is one way of handling it: terrain, distance and number of troops would determine if the enemy is visible to you or not.
        -terrain: is the terrain easy to hide in? for example, forests would mask an army better than plains.
        -distance: the enemy has to be within range for you to detect it. You could build towers (and later in the game, satellites) to keep a coverage of you empire.
        - number of troops: it is harder to hide a large number of troops than a small number of troops. The smaller the number of troops the easier they can hide.

        With all these factors compiled, the computer would determine the visibility of a unit. if an enemy army were visible, you'd be able to click on them to find out their composition (how many are there). I think here, there is a need to simplify: if a unit is visible, you would always get accurate info on the enemy unit. Imagine thinking a unit is made up of 500 infantry and then when they attack, losing badly because there actually was 12,000 infantry. Uncertainty in the number of enemy troops would make the game too unfair.

        ------------------
        No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.
        'There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way. The war we fight is not against powers and principalities, it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.'"
        G'Kar - from Babylon 5 episode "Z'ha'dum"

        Comment


        • #5
          Not much discussion in this case. I love the idea, and have done so since, well, the first time I played Civ2. It is, if not a must (I do not dare making it a must, as the odds of it being implemented in Civ3 are pretty slim) then at least something that would make the game far, far better.
          "It is not enough to be alive. Sunshine, freedom and a little flower you have got to have."
          - Hans Christian Andersen

          GGS Website

          Comment


          • #6
            1 thing that irritated me with those head was how each head was worth a lot more of pop than the one before. Wich then mean that settlers units would cause a drop of population.

            Example : You have a 4 pop city (100000 person). Build a settler (3 pop, 60000 persons)
            Use the settler to start a new town and your empire will only have 70000 (1pop -10000 + 3pop -60000)habitants instead of 100000 - Where are all the others?

            That was something I did not like.

            Comment


            • #7
              sounds great ! especially that conscription idea ! ( what % of the pop. should be called ..) . and you could also choose between an army of mercenary pros and a conscript army of the people ... the pro army would cost more per soldier and would be hard to recruit , from ither civs maybe ( swiss guard? ) , but the conscipt would be less trained , though you could train them and this way then the army is well trained - even when they lose some soldiers , the more veteran soldiers could teach the others how to survive better in harsh conditions , if the casualties aren't too high , in this case the army's professional rate will drop from , lets say veteran to good ... like they are rookies but if you have mercenary pros you will be able to assign to train the "green" conscripts , like many new-born countries did in the 20th century .

              btw the conscription should be available almost immideatly , coz the first conscripts were the romans : all the men's duty was a military service !
              urgh.NSFW

              Comment

              Working...
              X