More on Civs... More Specifity

[Sir Shiva]

I think that each civ should have its own directory with its own unique unit graphics and names, techs, flags, leaders and maybe even rules...

This way we won't have Arab (or Zulu!)Crusaders fighting against the English or French..

Also, each civ should have a country name.. This way, you would negotiate with Britain or declare war on, or denounce, Phoenicia, instead of The British and Phoenecians..
This name could change with change in govt. Russia could become the Soviet Union, India into the Republic of India etc..

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

[Par4]

Flags yaaaaayyyyyyyy!!! Civ3 must have Flags!!!!!

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand

[OrangeSfwr]

Instead of saying that zulus will never be christians with Crusaders, I would like to choose (and change) religion, culture, and other things. Kinda the way you choose your city style (Bronze Age Monolith, Far East Pavillian, etc.) That way you're not Christian just b/c you're Romans or Shinto because you're Japanese...etc.

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

[Sir Shiva]

OK, but even if you change your religion, you should still have units, techs, flags, leaders, governments unique to your civ..

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

[OrangeSfwr]

Definitely, maybe instead of a directory for each civ, a directory for each culture. Than you can choose your culture as an option that fits in with your city style.

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

[Sir Shiva]

Hmm.. culture.. Perhaps..

Yes, yes.. There should be directories for each culture, and then each civ should assigned to a culture.. The 'culture' files should serve as the base, while if any modifications are needed, the data in the 'civ' files would be used.. The directory structure could be like this:-

\Civ3\Culture\European
\Civ3\Culture\EastAsian
\Civ3\Culture\African
etc.
and
Civ3\Civs\Romans

and so on..


But what's important is that the civ data should be different and should overrule the culture data if there is a conflict..
One more thing:- Firaxis better not try and make the Indian civ Chinese: Indian buildings do NOT look like Chinese pagodas..


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

[Grier]

I agree in principle to most of the above ideas.

However, I would like to issue a word of caution. If each civs units all look different then it may be hard to work out which units which (is that a Chinese Phalanx or Warriors?). This could be a good thing, and each civ could have a different range of units and a varying tech-tree.

There is a whole can of worms in this area, some people would argue that you end up be forced to repeat history rather then recreating it. IMO the more variation the better.

[MidKnight Lament]

Grier - very true. They should certainly be customisable to have different units for different civs, but I don't think I want them for the main game. It could become hard to distinguish units, and it could also start to drain on the memory. It'd be very handy for scenarios though.

The forced history point is a good one too, and one that I heartily agree with. I want to shape my own civ, not have it pre-defined to me.

- MKL

[Father Beast]

urrr.. wasn't this in the EC3 list, under "each civ should have its own folder"?
or didn't that one make it?
I thought it was a good idea and would be simple to implement.

[CornMaster]

quote: Originally posted by OrangeSfwr on 06-10-2000 11:12 PM Instead of saying that zulus will never be christians with Crusaders, I would like to choose (and change) religion, culture, and other things. Kinda the way you choose your city style (Bronze Age Monolith, Far East Pavillian, etc.) That way you're not Christian just b/c you're Romans or Shinto because you're Japanese...etc.

I just don't get the whole religion idea. It is unrealistic to expect an entire nation to change religion in one turn. If this was gradual (Like a government change) like 10 or 20 years (turns) it would make more sense. But also the entire nation wouldn't follow one religion. So if you could change your religion you should be able to see a percentage breakdown of your kingdom to see what religions are being practised.

The religion of you kingdom should also be influenced by near by kingdoms.

But what I really don't get is what is the benefit of having religions? Trade, or science, or military because if these are the only advantages then I would make the government models more developed because they offer the same rewards.

Anyway I'm going to look through the archives for posts on religion to see if I can get a better understanding of the topic. Please if I've made any mistakes, point them out to me.

[OrangeSfwr]

I also dislike the "one civ - one religion" idea. And my quote wasn't suggesting that I do. I simply meant that you can't just say that Romans will have Crusaders that look like Christian crusaders, or that an Arab civ will have Crusaders that look like muslim crusaders. Otherwise we are just playing out the same history that humans have already experienced, and Civ should be different than that. Unfortunately the whole religion idea is going to have conflict so Firaxis will have to either bag the idea completely or not name the religions and have a percentage. For example: 67% of your citizens are of the A faith, 20% are of the B faith, and 13% are of the C faith. And than you could have missionaries (clerks?) that can alter that on a gradual scale in order to influence your citizens view toward another civ.

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

[CornMaster]

quote: Originally posted by OrangeSfwr on 06-25-2000 11:29 AM ..Unfortunately the whole religion idea is going to have conflict so Firaxis will have to either bag the idea completely or not name the religions and have a percentage. For example: 67% of your citizens are of the A faith, 20% are of the B faith, and 13% are of the C faith. And than you could have missionaries (clerks?) that can alter that on a gradual scale in order to influence your citizens view toward another civ.

That's what I meant to say and I think it would be a good idea but I also think it would raise too much fuss and would be too hard to implement. I would like to an all or nothing approach. Either this type of religion system or none at all.

[Tiberius]

quote: Firaxis will have to either bag the idea completely or not name the religions and have a percentage: 67% of your citizens are of the A faith, 20% are of the B faith, and 13% are of the C faith

I disagree with this approach. We are playing Civ, a game in which we are replaying the history of mankind, more or less. We have in the game real discoveries, government forms, units and so on. We have democracy, monarchy, philosophy, automobile, cavalry, etc. and not "A" goverment and "B" discoveries or "C" units. We should have real religions, too.

quote: I also dislike the "one civ - one religion" idea

How about one religion - many civs ?

And why shouldn't have an Arab civ Crusaders that look like muslim crusaders? You already have Crusaders that look like Crusaders! Just they are all the same. Why should we play reality just in some domains and fiction in others? And how could Firaxis decide what to make real and what fiction?

Anyway, tough job for (poor) Firaxis

[OrangeSfwr]

Tiberius - I agree, I would love to see religions in Civ 3 but I'm just afraid that Firaxis will run into debate and problems. For example - leaving religions out, not accurately representing religions, we've had debate just in these threads about religion and how it's not fair to say one thing about a certain religion. So imagine what Firaxis would have to deal with from dissatisfied customers. That's why I thought a non-named religion system may work better yet still give the element of religion in the game. I think your argument for the crusaders just goes with the argument for folders for each civ or culture. This way it doesn't look ridiculous that you're fighting crusader units that look just like yours (what are you crusading for?!?) That's all. I'd like to hear what Firaxis has to say about Religion though, I have heard nothing yet. Does anyone have any info on this?

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

[St Leo]

Arab (or Zulu!)Crusaders

I have nothing against this - the only problem are the badly picked unit names, CivII was really messed in that respect. Come on, Cavalry?!? You have to be kidding.

------------------
St. Leo
http://ziggurat.sidgames.com/
http://www.sidgames.com/forums/