Migration

[OrangeSfwr]

How about economical reasons for migration...

E.G. Gold and Silver rushes
(Eastern Americans --> California)
(Europeans --> South Africa)

Japanese and Chinese migrating to Peru (1600s) to open businesses.

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~

[vanishpoint]

Population movement (this does not apply to war-induced movement) within a civilization really shouldn't impact the game until societies become fairly advanced -- say around the Industrial Revolution era. Unless, of course, we're just talking about the city just five squares down the road. After all, before the invention of the railroad, most people would be lucky if they visited the nearest "big city" once or two times a year. Sure, a few people were drawn by the larger cities' allure, but I doubt it reduced the population of outlying town by a full Civ population number. Maybe the larger towns, over a span of 25 years or so, draw an extra pop from all the cities within so many miles of it. Each of the cities that lose those people, in turn, suffer maybe an extra 4 turns before a new pop is created. Rather than taking a full Pop from one city, why not a percentage of a Pop from all the nearby cities?
As for post-IR societies, movement within a civilization should come into play, especially as monorails, superhighways, mass transit and airports are added to it.
Just as the iron curtain was suggested as a wonder to prevent people from leaving, how about modifying the statue of liberty's ability so that it draws people from all over the world to settle in your nation?

[Az]

I don't remember who , but some1 has mentioned tourism up there .
I don't know but I think this should be be Implemented in a way similar to Youngsun's Corporations thread , of tour ads taking money from cities , and giving happiness in return.

well about migration I think that goverments should be able to build an " Iron Curtain " and goverments should be able to spread behind enemy lines propoganda material to atract scientists and specialists . do you get my direction?



------------------
Prepare to Land !

[OrangeSfwr]

vanishpoint - I think that's a great idea (S.O.L.). I'm gonna go post that idea in the WoW thread. (I'll give you credit of course)

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~

[Father Beast]

it seems to me that migration would not affect the source cities too much, maybe slow them down a bit, but would affect the targets significantly. the desire for frontier pushed people to explore and even move several times within their lives, saying "this place has become too civilized". this might even be a way to release the pressure in cities which have become maxed out.
Tourism has been mentioned, but as someone else said, I don't think this will become much of a factor until large mass transportation systems come into play. the a city with a wonder will draw tourists, and draw additional population to work the jobs that serve the tourists, in a maddeningly self feeding growth cycle.
currently, we have reduction of your city pop to produce settlers which found new cities. I am curious as to what is wrong with that so we would want to replace it.

[OrangeSfwr]

quote: Originally posted by Father Beast on 05-28-2000 05:59 PM currently, we have reduction of your city pop to produce settlers which found new cities. I am curious as to what is wrong with that so we would want to replace it.

How about level 30 city builds settlers. The settlers built a new city. New city has population 10,000. Level 30 city drops nearly 300,000 people. Where did the other 290,000 people go?

Level 2 city builds settlers. Equivalent to 20,000 people. Can be destroyed by Archers.
Level 30 city build Engineers. Equivalent to 300,000 people. Can be destroyed by same archers (It's possible. Non-veteran too! About 1 out of every three times the attacking archers will defeat the "300,000" settlers.)

How unfair is that. Now is that a good enough reason for a change to be made?


------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~

[UltraSonix]

Yeah, I'd never even thought about it! This system should definitely be fixed up! It's another one of those things that you wonder why you hadn't realised before...

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

[Urban Ranger]

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat on 05-25-2000 11:33 AM I like the concept but we should be careful how it is implemented. If implemented wrong it could mess things up: When you built your second city it would have to have a greater desiriability rating or the pop would immediatly leave to go back to a better city.

This can be fixed by having population as a negative factor in the desirability formula. That is, people don't want to settle in a very crowned area unless there are many other things that overcomes this aversion.

[rremus]

How about he ancient migrations?
When you started in a bad area of the map, you could decide to migrate your whole civ to a better land. This option would transform all your citizens and resources/gold into settlers and attack units and you would invade the desired area. If is already occupied, you have a tremendous atack force, since all your resources were invested into it. If they're too weak to defend it, they would have to withdraw, eventually triggering another migration. Of course, you can also be the victim, other civ invading you teritory with countless units and forcing you to fight or retreat.
This would be a viable option only in the early stages of the game, as latter the cost of loosing all your cities would be to big.

[The Joker]

These are all great ideas, guys!

I especcially like rremus' idea. It could trigger a whole age of immigration like in the dark ages, where huge quantities of people moved, pushing other people away.

[rremus]

quote: Originally posted by The Joker on 05-30-2000 06:31 AM It could trigger a whole age of immigration like in the dark ages, where huge quantities of people moved, pushing other people away.

Maybe even a stage of the game, when computer could create brand new migrating civ's in unpopulated areas and urge them to invade territories.

[Tiberius]

Great ideas here

I like very much rremus' idea with migrating civs (like the Huns), which can easily move, are great warriors, but somewhere, sometimes they settle down.
Very nice also the stuff about the Statue of Liberty, which draws people from all over the world. Great.

There is one thing that I never saw in CIV2, but it happened to me in CIV1 (tell me if I'm wrong, it was a long time ago): sometimes, when my empire was very well developed, foreign cities JOINED my empire, because they admired so much our standard of living! I enjoyed it very much, and I'd like to see it again.

About tourism: I've just started a new topic with tourism and I used as starting point the EC3 list. If you have better ideas, please put them there.

[Sir Shiva]

Migration is a good idea..

To facilitate more migration, you could build road, rail, sea and air (I hope you read the post of mine about these) with other civs.. When it gets to be a problem, engineers could build border posts and/or customs houses on the port of entry (on the road or railway line on the border). These could be upgraded to enhance tourism.

They would control over-immigration and emigration.. Customs houses would bring in tax from trade (I hope you read my ExIm policy post )

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