Announcement

**Napoleon I** · July 20, 2000, 23:32

CornMaster:

There has been lots of talk on this forum about providing some sort of a model for rural and suburban population. What you wrote is another great reason to show that such a feature should be implemented.

However, personally I would disagree that such a feature should go into the game. After all, the effect that you are talking about can easily be duplicated by giving a unit defending a city a 10 or 15 % combat bonus (of course this would not apply to recently conquered cities). This would provide the same effect without adding the overhead of creating additional graphics and raising issues about gameplay. After all, if a certain thing is just a minor tweak, not a major new feature, why bother changing what is already there?

Anyway, that is just my opinion. Feel free to totally disregard it .

------------------
Napoleon I

**Napoleon I** · July 21, 2000, 13:44

Ok, ok maybe I was too swift at sweeping the idea away

Lets work with it a bit. How would the proccess of creating a non-city settlement be executed? Would it be something that could be created at will by the player? Would it be able to exist only with a city or independently?

Just some of the pertinent questions that you should answer

------------------
Napoleon I

**phunny pharmer** · July 21, 2000, 16:09

OK, Napoleon I, you asked for it...

Switch to a province-production model. A province would be a self-contained political unit. It would encompass both cities and towns, rural areas and wasteland. In short, a province would contain everything being talked about in this thread.

Now, what is the advantage of the province system? First, production isn't always centered in large cities. The province system would allow production in all areas of the province. The entire production of the province would be shown in a screen not unlike the city display.

Also, rural people trade too. A province should be able to trade both INTERNALLY and EXTERNALLY. Internal trade should depend upon the size of the province, the quality of transportation in the province, and the resources available in that specific province. External trade depends upon the respective sizes of the two trading provinces (a la civ2), the quality of roads traveling out of the province (more roads, more trade), the relation of the province to the other province, and whether the second province belongs to another empire. In short, you have a powerful trade route system!

Second, people in the countryside mainly produce food, while the people in the city produce goods and services. The people in the city will not produce food, but rural towns can be producers of goods and services. The provincial model will include production from these rural workers.

Third, provinces will help cut down ICS. Each province will need a capital, but you can't have a capital of an area until you have a sizeable population. Even if you order your people to build a city within a province, the city will disband if there isn't enough food production. It may be necessary to have two settler groups build farms before a city is built within a province.

Fourth, provinces could be changeable. If you have a large area with sparse population (eg, Wyoming), you could have a large province in the area. However, if another section of you empire is booming, and you want to increase efficiency, you can split the province into two smaller ones. This could potential provide more trade, efficiency, production, etc.

I think that a province system could be a good idea for Civ3. I know this list is not all inclusive, but I think that it would be better for the game than the current system.

Az · July 21, 2000, 16:30

well I agree with you ... maybe it can be incorporated with this one ....

quote:

My Military Model
Hi !

I thought about it alot . Ideas from the Civ 3 workshop .
all my examples are of the modern age . so plz post add-ons
for the ancient and the other ages .
I also took Ideas about military losses . about borders...
and this is what came out :

1 .Units names
Units will be called in their real names , like Brigade,
Division etc . Veteran Units will Have Nicks .

2 . Custom units
You'll be able to create your own Units .
you'll be able to determin how much Inf. how much APCs
and how much tanks and cannons are there .

3.Creating "Raw material" for unit assembly
You will build Tanks in Cities with Factories
You will build Infantry in any city ...
You will build Cannons in Cities with Factories ...etc. etc.

4.Assmebling a unit :
-you get into a city
-enter the military screen
-press assemble unit
-choose given unit or custom unit
( built in kind of workshop)
-when you choose it it will begin the creation of the Unit
first of all it will search for ( raw material ) in the home city
if not enough vehicles or personnel are in the city , it will
call the extras needed from the Neighbouring cities etc.

5."Raw material" - vehicles and personnel arriving to the home city ( where unit created )
they'll get to the host city through the roads . if such dont exist they'll
get through the fastest way possible.

6.numbers
-All numbers will be real numbers!
-if citizens are becoming military personell they are excluded from the citizen list , but they'll count as population . don't forget , also that reinforcements must arrive for soldiers and vehicles lost

7.Support Routes

units demand support . infantry demand food . vehicles demand oil ( yep. oil! )
the support routes will go from the home city ( originally the city where the unit
was assembled . could be changed though ) .

8.Air Units
Air Units will be assembled in airbases . the aircrat needed for that will be flown from the closest cities where Aircraft were built ( only cities with aerospace complex )
they will be assembled in Units called squadrons. fighters in squadrons of 10.
bombers in squadrons of 5 . the way they patroll is descibed by me in the Battle thread.

that's all for now but I'll improve it with time , I guess. post your comments,plz.

could these two be incorporated ?

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

**UltraSonix** · July 21, 2000, 23:24

I'm sorry for posting without reading the whole thread like I usually do, but I'm pressed for time and won't be back for a while .

But I think suggestions to alter the current unit building and contruction methods would result in too much micromanagement. So with changing the population/civ demographics model.

However, I think ther following can be addressed using a cheap method:

quote:

Let's face it. A civilization is not a collection of 12 large cities spread out over 2 islands. What I'm proprosing is that around cities minor settlements would form.

How about just havaen't non-functional settlements appears in the city radius of a large civ. The settlements are purely decorative and should alter the tile grphics so that it's unobtrusive. As the civ modernises, the settlements change graphix to become suburbs, and the main city square gets sky-scrapers and becomes the CBD. (I know it's not a very "sophisticated" method, but heh, it'll improve the visual quality of the game heaps!)

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

**CornMaster** · July 22, 2000, 00:21

You've got a point Napoleon. It would get a little complicated but would make the game more realistic. It would also help with the border issues. You could establish a country side border with other civs with out having a specific modual for borders in Civ 3.

------------------
"I'm too out of shape for a long fight so I'll have to kill you fast"
"If the great Emperors of Rome, Egypt and Greece were alive today, do you think they would prefer Coke or Pepsi?"

**CornMaster** · July 22, 2000, 01:14

quote:

Lets work with it a bit. How would the proccess of creating a non-city settlement be executed? Would it be something that could be created at will by the player? Would it be able to exist only with a city or independently?

Well I had planned the build up of these settlements to be based on the size of the major city that it is surrounding. As in real life. Therefore you have no really control. Of course this wouldn't be a constant but would be random, partly based on the government, economic system (if any), and attitude/personality of the civ.

The only really purpose I had planned was as a military resistance but the ideas by phunny pharmer are very intriguing.

------------------
"I'm too out of shape for a long fight so I'll have to kill you fast"
"If the great Emperors of Rome, Egypt and Greece were alive today, do you think they would prefer Coke or Pepsi?"

**Evil Capitalist** · July 22, 2000, 03:19

Phunny pharmer: There is a similar game to what you're talking about called Imperialism. It has a province system, which works well in a military sense. However it's academic to debate this, since they will never use a province system in civ 3. It's CIV, part of an epoch defining series. It would be like making the next Quake game a platform shooter.

**Father Beast** · July 22, 2000, 07:00

phunny pharmer - I have to agree with the evil capitalist. nice model, but that would make it a different game. maybe like freeciv.
Cornmaster - the ONLY effect of small towns is to slow invaders? doesn't seem like I would notice them there.

**DarkCloud** · July 30, 2000, 13:26

Minor damage as you wade through an enemy's Zone of Control is a great idea! the damage should be relative when you reach 5 squares of a city then every move you make going towards the city should take off 5% of your strength. However if you are stationed and sentry or fortify near their city then you shouldn't have any damage.

Announcement

Country Side and Towns

Country Side and Towns

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment