Native peoples

[Shadowstrike]

Historically, indigenous peoples have been everywhere explorers go (hospitable climate). This should be represented in Civ 3 by either:

a) lots of small barbarians (ununified) cities generating units

b) minor civs, around 50 or 60 of them worldwide

Comments? Suggestions? Post below.

[Christantine The Great]

Shadowstrike

Native people are the other civs you happen into while you explore the world. They are native.

------------------
"Adorare Christantine!!!"
Republican Decree #1

[Theben]

I don't think the question is whether or not there should be minor civs/ native people in civ3. The question is how simplified do you want them to be?

Option 1: Have many civs in game. Could be hard to play or program; create a slow game. But you'd have many interesting situations to deal with.

Option 2: Have a few civs and a monolithic "neutrals" civ, similar to Masters of Magic neutrals. Interaction will be simpler, but gameplay might be less entertaining.

Option 3: Somewhere between 1 and 2.

[Evil Capitalist]

A few ideas.

In 'barbarian' areas, such as north America, there could be a tribe unit, which, if you pass too near to, will spawn some units if yo pass too near, like the alarm level in colonisation.

These eventualy turn into proper cities, which form independant entities. They need land contact with a proper civ and a certain level of technical development of a near neighbour.

Later these will fight one another to form nations. (this is probably hard to implement).

If a civ is too backward and useless it can be replaced with the most powerful minor nation (think of Prussia).

[Shadowstrike]

O.K., consider the following:

When playing CivII on the Earth map as the Romans, who do you meet first. Most likely, it would be the French or the Greeks. Now, whaever happen to all of those other peoples living in Italy between Rome and France? What of the Etruscans or the Sabine or the Samnites, etc...

In reality when civilizations reached out, they didn't find vast tracts of unsettled fertile land. They found people living on those lands. They couldn't just build a city there, there was already a city (or tribe) there. Now, how do we represent these people?

[wernazuma]

I think the approach on natives in colonization wasn't bad.
With some modifications the system could be applicable:
1. those tribes closer to a "real" civ should be more advanced than others.
2. the cities should not work like those of players.
i.e.: city size should be 4 for all native cities in antiquity and have two defensive units, two improved city tiles, two buildings. Population increase means it gets an offensive unit. in renaissance et. al. accordingly more.

3. missionaries of course should not make natives flock to you one by one, converting a city would incorporate it to your civ. Missionaries would also make monotheism a more aggressive and valuable advance.
i'm sure there's more worth to change but i'm tired.

[Empress]

quote: Originally posted by wernazuma on 08-04-2000 06:40 PM 3. missionaries of course should not make natives flock to you one by one, converting a city would incorporate it to your civ. Missionaries would also make monotheism a more aggressive and valuable advance.

Hey, that idea sounds a bit like what they had in Colonization

------------------
Apolyton Empress

"Loving one who does not love you is loving the rain that falls in the forrest." (Kenya Proverb)
My first Web Page
Vacation Pics!

[Comrade Dan]

Well, there has to be at least some sort of nativeness in foreign lands.

When the Brits landed in Australia and New Zealand, there wasn't fertile plains, with no one around. There were the Aboridigines and the Maori.

They could be represented in the game as non city building settlers and warriors, or some other simple ancient unit.

[Youngsun]

Actually Colonisation gives us many clues how should we implement those natives.(how nice game is was..)

*The Goody/Goodie hut upgrade proposal*

This has been suggested by me a while ago in Korn469's ICS problem thread but I'd like to bring it back again.

Assuming there are 8~9 slots available for major civs with additional 5~6 minor civs, just adding more minor civs would be too much burden for our hardworking CPUs.

I'm pretty sure the designer's intention to create those huts were;

1.representation of Barbarian horde(military threat to civs)
2.representation of primitive natives(source of easy tribute/imperial military protection)
3.sort of bonus for an early explorer(money,knowledge,mercenaries,civilised nomad?)


Current problems
1.No diplomacy allowed to those huts(quite contradictory to history which is full of intense interactions between civilisations and natives/the less-civilised)
2.There is no chance of those barbarians establish a civilisation either by force or accumulation knowledge/culture.
3.The hut which may be the representation of groups of villages can be eliminated too easily(Just one move...)
4.Getting a technology/discovery from the hut(totally unrealistic and can create a situation that most advanced civ get a tech from primitive natives)
5.Those mercenaries are actually your army and have no hometown to return(against true definition of mercenary)

Suggestions to solve the problems
1.Make the hut as a base for those natives and not so vulnerable from foreign invasion(as resilient as the one of Colonisation)
2.If a civilised cities are conquered by barbarians, they should get a chance to begin new civ(minor or major depends on how powerful they are also that should be up to availabilty of civ slot)
3.Allows diplomacy with natives
*Demand tribute in exchange for military protection(Roman clients system)
*Recruit/pay/discharge mercenaries
*etc.
4.Each native tribe should have its own unique traits & chracteristics and for some cases military speciality(light cavalry,javelineer,etc)
5.Random or periodic appearance of charismatic barbarian leader which brings unity to many huts around his/her one and eventual assembling of the horde then invasion to neibouring civs.

Any other suggestion?
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 21, 2000).]

[DarkCloud]

Yes following colonizations model for minor civs should be a must.

1. Colonization with the indians/natives worked well you could
a. Trade
b. Fight
or
c. Convert them and gain more population

you should be able to do all those things and more in Civ III.

Such as-

a.Play them off against other leaders (Alliances)
and
b.Get them to vote you World Leader.