Tweet
Cities 0.1
This is a collection of all that I have found on the boards
on tribes so it is called Cities 0.1 This will hopefully be
improved upon and since it is all collected in a handy forum
file, be easier 'moved' to the List's ideas.
[Here's Cities {0.5} 21:01 10-7-00]
[Here's Cities {0.4} 11:01 8-26-00]
[Here's Cities {0.3} 14:21 8-23-00]
[Here's Cities {0.2b} 9:21 8-22-00]
[Here's Cities {0.2} 16:12 8-15-00]
[Here's Cities {0.1} 13:23 8-12-00]
Post # 1622
[Topics Checked- 1625-1569]
Feel free to add ideas or comment by responding to this message.
The Creator of the idea is in brackets above the ideas
Index:
--------------
1.City Name Length
-contributer(s); Dr. Oogkloot, Wazell, Evil Capitalist, Dark Cloud
2. Provinces, Countryside and Towns
-contributer(s); Shadowstrike, Dark Cloud, Gemini, The Diplomat, UltraSonix,
Tiberius, Christantine the Great, Par4, Phunny Pharmer, UltraSonix (Again)
3. Damages
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud and Cornmaster
4. City Production
-contributer(s); Nikethemutt, Shadowstrike, Mad Lord Snapcase, Wazell, Dark Cloud
UltraSonix
5. Armies In Field
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud
6. City Sizes
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud
7. City Names (Build List
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud, Jpk, Dark Cloud (Again)
8. Unhappiness
-contributer(s); The Diplomat, Dark Cloud
9. Settling
-contributer(s); S. Kroeze, Ralf
10. Cities (General)
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud, Shadowstrike
11. Cityview
-contributer(s); Shadowstrike, Shadowstrike (Again), Adm. Naismith, OrangeSfwr
--------------
1.City Name Length
[Dr. Oogkloot]
-At least 25 characters. How can I use nice names
like Prykarpattya Ivano-Frankivsk otherwise?
See also the "Favorit civ to play as" thread.
[Wazell]
-Of course we need longer city names. Minimum 60 characters so
we will no longer have any problems with that. Also remove all
those other stupid restrictions such as max 255 cities, 327
million population etc. and everyone's happy!
[Evil Capitalist]
-We need longer nation names too- how else can we put in long
official titles like "The United Kingdom of Great Britian and
Northern Ireland" (second in length only to the full name of Libya)
[Dark Cloud]
-I say all we need for cities is a 20 long character name so we can have names for
destroyed cities like New New Thebes or New New New New York.
City numbers- 300-400 per civ
-Population- Limitless
-Civilization names- 20 characters
2.Provinces, Countryside and Towns
[Shadowstrike]
There could be a shift from a city-based system (Civ2) to a province based system
(Civ3?) This would also simplify micromanagement. The entire province could build
a collective item, share trade routes and unit support and in time, generate local
militia to defend itself (like Imperialism)
Now, this wouldn't destroy the system of cities entirely. You would still build
cities, and the city radius would still count, but everything else is shared.
There should also be the option of staking out your own provincial boundaries.
A final point. Provinces should have limits to how many cities they can have.
Or else, some insane micromanagement maniac could ICS and lump his/her entire empire
into a single province and generate massive amounts of resources.
[Dark Cloud]
Perhaps if you can only build a province when you have 5-10 cities in a single area.
The cities would then 'merge' and become a 'province' where you could set production.
There would be 1/2 the amount of production tabs that you would see for the number of
cities. I.E. if there were 10 cities in the province the amount of different things
which you could build would be 5 at one time, except they would produce the things quicker.
These Provinces would eventually become your entire empire, eliminating the need for
countryside and towns. The provinces would be accessed by the largest city in the province's
screen. From that screen you can see the population of the entire province and their
production.
From that production/population screen you can allocate production to different building
choices.
If the province's major city is captured, the province is captured as all the defensive
units for the province would be in that major city. If the major city is destroyed, so is
the entire province.
[gemini]
You could maybe divide your empire into different provinces so your government
could have certain bonuses. The risk could be that over time some provinces may
think they are unique and want to break away into different countries.
It could lead to civil war amongst your former country members.
(It would) be like the war of independence. This has happened throughout history.
There is even several examples in the real world today in our modern age of provinces
that want to seperate(Quebec from Canada and the former Yugoslavia). Or maybe a better
idea is if you take over another countries cities they are added to your empire as another
province. After maybe you would have to lower their taxes or something else to keep this
province happy to stay with your empire or something.
Or you may have to keep extra units in cities to keep control over the newly added
populace until they are more "Romanized".
[The Diplomat]
Instead of pooling ressources in each province, I think all ressources produced
by all your cities should be pooled together on an empire level.
I think this would be simpler than provinces.
The player would have a "budget" screen showing the amount of each type of resource being
produced from cities, received from trade, received from tribute, etc and the grand total.
Then there would be the amount of each type of ressource being spent due to support,
building cost, maintenance cost etc and the grand total.
Last, the screen should show the net amount (ie surplus or deficit) and the reserves.
A surplus would add resources to the reserves, a deficit would deduct from the reserves.
Only when the reserves reached zero would units get disbanded.
The idea would eliminate the need to micromanage ressource for each city, since it would be
done on an empire level.
Cities would still be very important as they are the center of population and they produce
everything.
Each city would still have its own build queue but the ressources to produce the city
improvements would come from the national pool instead of each city.
[Ultra Sonix]
I think the national pool thing should instead be done continent by continent until you
discover a certain tech level (flight or something). This is because it's not easy for
cities on different continents to share resources. So it's sort of like provinces, just
it'll be continents, and only for a while.
[Tiberius]
Centralizing this way all shields production on empire level would be awesome for
micromanage, but what would be the (production) difference between two cities,
one with coal and iron mines, factory, hydro-plant and whatsoever and the other
based almost exclusively on agriculture, with very little industrial production.
How fast would produce the two city a tank division, for example?
[Christantine the Great]
3 to 5 cities = Provence x 4 = Region times X Regions = Empire
A city would be essentially the same.
A Provence would be what has been said above.
A Region would be a tool for administering extreamly large empire.
It should be used to administer oversees provences or to keep provences with
almost equal production ratings to work in harmony to benifit your empire.
I do not know programing so I do not know how to tell the AI this so someone with
experience in that field please tell me if it is possible.
An Empire is the same.
[Par 4]
2-5 cities merge into a province> all provinces in 1 terrain region merge into a region>
all regions that are either next to each other or can have a trade route ship or land air
can't move enough materials for the Civ empire level share their resources.
regions/provinces share resources and improvements but improvement maintence cost will rise
to if all cities or provinces don't have that improvement.
4 types of materials or whatever
food- consumed by people- processed becomes processed food X2 amount of people eat 1/2 as much
depends on how you look at it
consumable goods- consumed by people, big for trade- becomes consumer goods trade for
more and +50% amount
energy- used by units- only late game gas- needed late game adv energy used by nukes and
anti nuke stuff
raw materials(shields same as civ2)- builds improvements(if you build them) and units-
becomes compound materials late game for advanced unit construction and say +50% amount
I guess maybe
4 groups ,2 for people 1 for building 1 for units I've explained how globally stuff happens
now for a little more into provinces
Provinces/cities/regions can automatically get improvements if the economic lvl or industry
lvl are high enough. And sometimes the people just build them. Like a market place if you
are building a court system and it is taking 15 years a marketplace is just going to be built.
It happens the people can do stuff on their own.
economic lvl
-10<>+10
-=unemployed, emmigration, tax income lowers
+=lowers unemployed, immigration, tax income raises, possibility of getting commercial type
improvements automatically
determined by trade and some other stuff any ideas?
industry lvl
-10<>+10
-= unit/improvement construction time raises
+= unit/improvement construction time lowers and possibility of getting factory improvements
automatically
determined by amount of construction and advances any other ideas for affectors?
(is this a word??)
so to recap we have
city-province-region-empire
city-province-region share improvements and production and materials and industry/eco lvls.
regions share materials if they are next to each other or a trade route is available
(ie not blockaded or having enemy empire in the way)
4 resources
industry and economic lvl
unemployment
that's about it not very complicated, just 2 lvl indicators the old civ stuff and now energy
and consumables. modern units now need energy to be built and refilled or something.
edit: regions keep there own economic/industry lvl and improvements money is global always
trade arrows no more research not apply in this model
trade makes a lot of money from tariffs and can affect the economic lvl for like port cities
so having a city on the tip of the straight of Gibraltar will be very prosperous and big.
[Phunny Pharmer]
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.
[Ultra Sonix]
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!)
3.Damages
[Dark Cloud and CornMaster]
Minor damage as you wade through an enemy's Zone of Control would be 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 1-5% of your strength (This would simulate
real-life deserters or pesant uprisings [milita]). However if you are
stationed and sentry or fortify near their city then you shouldn't take any damage
(Because you are better organized and more alert).
4.City Production
[Nikethemutt]
I would like to see the ability, at the city level, to define a schedule of city
improvements for the city to undertake. For example, once a city is built, it would
be nice to schedule the next 5 improvements (e.g. --->
1. Phalanx
2. Phalanx
3. Granary
4. Settlers
5. Market Place)
Once #1 is built, the city would automatically start building #2, then #3 and so on.
[Shadowstrike, () Comment by Dark Cloud]
How about automatically set up build list (Like in Railroad Tycoon's Scenario Editor)?
I found it a nightmare in SMAC to be
seeting up 30 or 40 similar lists in 30 - 40 new cities 200 turns into the game.
[Mad Lord Snapcase]
How about just being able to save and load the list file?
[Wazell]
But what if we could have different build-up lists for different types of cities?
I mean, that there are agricultural cities, mining communities providing raw materials,
industrial cities, military cities and trade cities etc. in real world. Now these cities
serve for many uses and probably have non-similar improvements built into them. It'd be
good to have this in CivIII also. For example, you could tell a city go agricultural, so
it builds a lot of farmers to improve farmland and builds granaries and some minor buildings
to support them, also improving roads network around the city and training overpopulation to
soldiers. Similarly this works for creating science cities, this time it maybe creates trade
routes and attracts wise emigrants? Also there can be an option to make a city equally
powerful in all these areas.
[Shadowstrike and Dark Cloud]
How about a few different lists, as the user may want it so.
Such as you choose from a screen of five lists which you have created for each city's
'build' menu.
[UltraSonix]
How about having user-defined lists that are stored inside a text file.
And then the build queue would have a button that pops up all the available
pre-defined queue lists that you would be able to select. So there would be
one for a new city, one for a modern city going militaritic, etc. This feature
should be easy enough to implement into the game.
5.Armies In Field
[Dark Cloud]
When your army is destroyed a certain percentage of your
population dies, say .5 points, because the unit would have been recruited.
You could solve that problem by having city sizes 1.5, 2.0, 3.5, etc.
6.City Sizes
[Dark Cloud]
City sizes could be 1.5,2.0,2.5 etc. to help with the army recruitment aspect
of the game.
7.City Names (Build List)
[Dark Cloud]
The city name's build list should be longer. I mean, surely Firaxis could find
more Roman Cites and such!
[jpk]
I would like all duplicates removed. Hamburg should be either a
German city or on the extra names list but not both.
If memory serves me correctly Kazan is both a Russian city and a Mongol city.
Remove it from one of the lists.
The list of common names should be sufficiently long so that you do not
have two Moscow's or two Rome's as is currently possible.
[Dark Cloud]
If two cities with the same name are built by a civ the computer should recognize it
and name the second city Madrid II or something such as that.
8.Unhappiness
[The Diplomat]
I think that famine should create a certain amount of unhappiness. After all, if people
are dying of hunger, wouldn't the population get pretty angry at the government for the
situation?
So, I think it just makes sense to make famine be one of the factors that determines a city's
unhappiness.
[Dark Cloud]
How about if you have famine for 1 turn .5 people become unhappy and if famine continues
for 5 turns 1 person becomes unhappy. Every increment of 5 would cause .5 people to become
unhappy.
9.Settling
[S. Kroeze]
'I have always found the settler a rather artificial unit. Settlement organized by a
government has always been the exception, not the rule. And in 4000BC, when the current
CivII starts, almost the entire world was populated, except for some remote islands like
Madagascar, Iceland and New Zealand. I still hope CivIII (orCivV) will introduce a rural
population, living in villages. As soon as there are sufficient inhabitants in a particular
area, small towns will develop, provided they have an agricultural style of living. Further
growth should be caused by population growth, but most by migration. \
[Ralf]
You can easily "expand your way to success" by shoving out buckloads of city-founding
settlers i a row, early on in the game.
20+ settlers or more, founding just as many cities + another 20+ city-area settler-developers.
Effective, perhaps - but is it FUN?
Its certanly isnt very realistic in historic terms, thats for shure. Also, if the AI should
have the same early ultra-fast city-founding strategy for each of the (upto 7) computer-civs;
the game would probably grind to a halt, in later endgames.
I have the following four expanding-rules suggestions. They should enable a much more realistic
game, and allow the AI to compete more easily (i hope):
A/ Max two "empty" cities (= without any city-improvements) at any given time within that
empire, can be allowed. The AI/Human Player HAS to build temple in at least one of above
cities, in order to continue founding a new city.
B/ Any city NOT road-connected with some/all of the other cities, gets an proportionally stiff
corruption-penalty each turn.
Lack of road-connections to other cities should also give a more noticeable resource-/
science-penalty.
C/ A big sized empire of 25 cities or more should be an unstability-factor in itself -
increasingly prone to split-up federation-attempts. This should be especially true if
the large empire is far ahead in terms of science-/production-/economy- and military might,
then the other civs.
(It shouldnt matter if the empire is well maintained: these split-up tendencies should appear
anyway, if the empire is self-sufficient and powerful enough (to far ahead the other civs).
The split-ups federations should consist of min 20% - max 40% av the empires cities. A real
groundshaker, in other words).
D/ Also (important); the cities in small civilistic-perfectionist 8-12 city empires should
in return have less problems with building huge 20+ mega-cities.
Cities in large 20-30 city empires on the other hand, should have increasingly bigger problems
with developing indevidual mega-cities.
10.Food Screen
[Sikander]
On to other subjects. I really agree with the point made previously regarding food and
specialists. Food is really underrated in the current Civ game, at the expense of trade.
I would like to see a much more extensive use made of specialists, and have more types of
specialists available. I would use a more sophisticated city screen to assign the various
groups of people to their jobs. (Like Colonization) Here is a partial list of what I have
in mind:
Farmers: Assigned to a square in the city radius to grow food. No prerequisite.
Woodcutters / Miners: Assigned to a square to harvest resources. No prerequisite. Can work
the same square as a farmer if the square also produces resources.
Craftsmen: Assigned to the build queue area initially (later to factories etc.) Converts
resources into shields. No prerequisite.
Priests: Assigned to the temple. They produce a little bit of science, and the first priest
causes one unhappy person to be content. (Up to two priests with Mysticism) Prerequisite, a
temple.
Soldiers: Assigned to a Barracks. A segment of the population sufficient in size to man and
maintain one (professional) military unit, provided that the requisite weaponry has been
produced initially.
Sages: Assigned to Libraries. Produces knowledge.
Merchants: Assigned to Marketplaces. Produce taxes and luxeries, and increase productivity of
commodities through superior (market based) distribution.
Bureacrats / Magistrates: Assigned to Palace / Courthouses. Produce tax revenue, and
reduce corruption (inefficiency).
Slaves / Construction Teams: Assigned to squares within the city radius to improve the terrain
by building the usual mines, roads, irrigation, fortifications etc.
Anyway, you get the idea. Buildings don't provide anything (except upkeep costs) on their own,
they have to be manned by specialists. The more advanced the type of building, the more
productive the specialist working there. Population working squares advances in productivity
based on tech, as well as the presence of certain specialists.
The way to carry all of this out is to reduce the amount of food necessary to support one
person to 1. This will double the growth rate, and quickly provide the population necessary
to man the buildings in the city.
10. Cities (General)
[Shadowstrike]
The buildings should be time-appropriate, i.e. no skyscrapers in the Bronze Age, etc.
[Dark Cloud]
Some improvements should have to be upgraded- i.e. colosseum, temple, cathedral into
Arcades, Sports Stadiums, Churches
11. Cityview
[Shadowstrike]
They would represent your culture (i.e. buildings pertain to your civ) and would represent
your current state (i.e. if you are an agricultural nation, you get a lot of windmills, farms
and market squares, if you are industrial, you get a lot of factories and smog, etc.)
What would be really neat would be to have the city view as an extreme zoom in of the entire map.
When you click on a city, you should "zoom" into it. The city management should be super-imposed
on it, and you can take away those screens to see your city.
[Shadowstrike]
Furthermore, you should be able to see your citizens and the buildings should be
time-appropriate, i.e. no skyscrapers in the Bronze Age, etc.
(added: or coliseums in the industrial age.)
[Adm. Naismith]
Why don't simply change a bit their picture into city view, just to reflect their older age?
We have to add a bit of "tradition feeling" into oldest cities, they aren't all "glass and steel"
, are they?
[OrangeSfwr]
I think the general concensus was to take the Civ 1 - tight packed look and combine it
with Civ 2 and beyond graphics. I hated the Civ2 city view.
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 14, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 16, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 23, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 26, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited October 07, 2000).]
on tribes so it is called Cities 0.1 This will hopefully be
improved upon and since it is all collected in a handy forum
file, be easier 'moved' to the List's ideas.
[Here's Cities {0.5} 21:01 10-7-00]
[Here's Cities {0.4} 11:01 8-26-00]
[Here's Cities {0.3} 14:21 8-23-00]
[Here's Cities {0.2b} 9:21 8-22-00]
[Here's Cities {0.2} 16:12 8-15-00]
[Here's Cities {0.1} 13:23 8-12-00]
Post # 1622
[Topics Checked- 1625-1569]
Feel free to add ideas or comment by responding to this message.
The Creator of the idea is in brackets above the ideas
Index:
--------------
1.City Name Length
-contributer(s); Dr. Oogkloot, Wazell, Evil Capitalist, Dark Cloud
2. Provinces, Countryside and Towns
-contributer(s); Shadowstrike, Dark Cloud, Gemini, The Diplomat, UltraSonix,
Tiberius, Christantine the Great, Par4, Phunny Pharmer, UltraSonix (Again)
3. Damages
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud and Cornmaster
4. City Production
-contributer(s); Nikethemutt, Shadowstrike, Mad Lord Snapcase, Wazell, Dark Cloud
UltraSonix
5. Armies In Field
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud
6. City Sizes
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud
7. City Names (Build List
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud, Jpk, Dark Cloud (Again)
8. Unhappiness
-contributer(s); The Diplomat, Dark Cloud
9. Settling
-contributer(s); S. Kroeze, Ralf
10. Cities (General)
-contributer(s); Dark Cloud, Shadowstrike
11. Cityview
-contributer(s); Shadowstrike, Shadowstrike (Again), Adm. Naismith, OrangeSfwr
--------------
1.City Name Length
[Dr. Oogkloot]
-At least 25 characters. How can I use nice names
like Prykarpattya Ivano-Frankivsk otherwise?
See also the "Favorit civ to play as" thread.
[Wazell]
-Of course we need longer city names. Minimum 60 characters so
we will no longer have any problems with that. Also remove all
those other stupid restrictions such as max 255 cities, 327
million population etc. and everyone's happy!
[Evil Capitalist]
-We need longer nation names too- how else can we put in long
official titles like "The United Kingdom of Great Britian and
Northern Ireland" (second in length only to the full name of Libya)
[Dark Cloud]
-I say all we need for cities is a 20 long character name so we can have names for
destroyed cities like New New Thebes or New New New New York.
City numbers- 300-400 per civ
-Population- Limitless
-Civilization names- 20 characters
2.Provinces, Countryside and Towns
[Shadowstrike]
There could be a shift from a city-based system (Civ2) to a province based system
(Civ3?) This would also simplify micromanagement. The entire province could build
a collective item, share trade routes and unit support and in time, generate local
militia to defend itself (like Imperialism)
Now, this wouldn't destroy the system of cities entirely. You would still build
cities, and the city radius would still count, but everything else is shared.
There should also be the option of staking out your own provincial boundaries.
A final point. Provinces should have limits to how many cities they can have.
Or else, some insane micromanagement maniac could ICS and lump his/her entire empire
into a single province and generate massive amounts of resources.
[Dark Cloud]
Perhaps if you can only build a province when you have 5-10 cities in a single area.
The cities would then 'merge' and become a 'province' where you could set production.
There would be 1/2 the amount of production tabs that you would see for the number of
cities. I.E. if there were 10 cities in the province the amount of different things
which you could build would be 5 at one time, except they would produce the things quicker.
These Provinces would eventually become your entire empire, eliminating the need for
countryside and towns. The provinces would be accessed by the largest city in the province's
screen. From that screen you can see the population of the entire province and their
production.
From that production/population screen you can allocate production to different building
choices.
If the province's major city is captured, the province is captured as all the defensive
units for the province would be in that major city. If the major city is destroyed, so is
the entire province.
[gemini]
You could maybe divide your empire into different provinces so your government
could have certain bonuses. The risk could be that over time some provinces may
think they are unique and want to break away into different countries.
It could lead to civil war amongst your former country members.
(It would) be like the war of independence. This has happened throughout history.
There is even several examples in the real world today in our modern age of provinces
that want to seperate(Quebec from Canada and the former Yugoslavia). Or maybe a better
idea is if you take over another countries cities they are added to your empire as another
province. After maybe you would have to lower their taxes or something else to keep this
province happy to stay with your empire or something.
Or you may have to keep extra units in cities to keep control over the newly added
populace until they are more "Romanized".
[The Diplomat]
Instead of pooling ressources in each province, I think all ressources produced
by all your cities should be pooled together on an empire level.
I think this would be simpler than provinces.
The player would have a "budget" screen showing the amount of each type of resource being
produced from cities, received from trade, received from tribute, etc and the grand total.
Then there would be the amount of each type of ressource being spent due to support,
building cost, maintenance cost etc and the grand total.
Last, the screen should show the net amount (ie surplus or deficit) and the reserves.
A surplus would add resources to the reserves, a deficit would deduct from the reserves.
Only when the reserves reached zero would units get disbanded.
The idea would eliminate the need to micromanage ressource for each city, since it would be
done on an empire level.
Cities would still be very important as they are the center of population and they produce
everything.
Each city would still have its own build queue but the ressources to produce the city
improvements would come from the national pool instead of each city.
[Ultra Sonix]
I think the national pool thing should instead be done continent by continent until you
discover a certain tech level (flight or something). This is because it's not easy for
cities on different continents to share resources. So it's sort of like provinces, just
it'll be continents, and only for a while.
[Tiberius]
Centralizing this way all shields production on empire level would be awesome for
micromanage, but what would be the (production) difference between two cities,
one with coal and iron mines, factory, hydro-plant and whatsoever and the other
based almost exclusively on agriculture, with very little industrial production.
How fast would produce the two city a tank division, for example?
[Christantine the Great]
3 to 5 cities = Provence x 4 = Region times X Regions = Empire
A city would be essentially the same.
A Provence would be what has been said above.
A Region would be a tool for administering extreamly large empire.
It should be used to administer oversees provences or to keep provences with
almost equal production ratings to work in harmony to benifit your empire.
I do not know programing so I do not know how to tell the AI this so someone with
experience in that field please tell me if it is possible.
An Empire is the same.
[Par 4]
2-5 cities merge into a province> all provinces in 1 terrain region merge into a region>
all regions that are either next to each other or can have a trade route ship or land air
can't move enough materials for the Civ empire level share their resources.
regions/provinces share resources and improvements but improvement maintence cost will rise
to if all cities or provinces don't have that improvement.
4 types of materials or whatever
food- consumed by people- processed becomes processed food X2 amount of people eat 1/2 as much
depends on how you look at it
consumable goods- consumed by people, big for trade- becomes consumer goods trade for
more and +50% amount
energy- used by units- only late game gas- needed late game adv energy used by nukes and
anti nuke stuff
raw materials(shields same as civ2)- builds improvements(if you build them) and units-
becomes compound materials late game for advanced unit construction and say +50% amount
I guess maybe
4 groups ,2 for people 1 for building 1 for units I've explained how globally stuff happens
now for a little more into provinces
Provinces/cities/regions can automatically get improvements if the economic lvl or industry
lvl are high enough. And sometimes the people just build them. Like a market place if you
are building a court system and it is taking 15 years a marketplace is just going to be built.
It happens the people can do stuff on their own.
economic lvl
-10<>+10
-=unemployed, emmigration, tax income lowers
+=lowers unemployed, immigration, tax income raises, possibility of getting commercial type
improvements automatically
determined by trade and some other stuff any ideas?
industry lvl
-10<>+10
-= unit/improvement construction time raises
+= unit/improvement construction time lowers and possibility of getting factory improvements
automatically
determined by amount of construction and advances any other ideas for affectors?
(is this a word??)
so to recap we have
city-province-region-empire
city-province-region share improvements and production and materials and industry/eco lvls.
regions share materials if they are next to each other or a trade route is available
(ie not blockaded or having enemy empire in the way)
4 resources
industry and economic lvl
unemployment
that's about it not very complicated, just 2 lvl indicators the old civ stuff and now energy
and consumables. modern units now need energy to be built and refilled or something.
edit: regions keep there own economic/industry lvl and improvements money is global always
trade arrows no more research not apply in this model
trade makes a lot of money from tariffs and can affect the economic lvl for like port cities
so having a city on the tip of the straight of Gibraltar will be very prosperous and big.
[Phunny Pharmer]
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.
[Ultra Sonix]
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!)
3.Damages
[Dark Cloud and CornMaster]
Minor damage as you wade through an enemy's Zone of Control would be 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 1-5% of your strength (This would simulate
real-life deserters or pesant uprisings [milita]). However if you are
stationed and sentry or fortify near their city then you shouldn't take any damage
(Because you are better organized and more alert).
4.City Production
[Nikethemutt]
I would like to see the ability, at the city level, to define a schedule of city
improvements for the city to undertake. For example, once a city is built, it would
be nice to schedule the next 5 improvements (e.g. --->
1. Phalanx
2. Phalanx
3. Granary
4. Settlers
5. Market Place)
Once #1 is built, the city would automatically start building #2, then #3 and so on.
[Shadowstrike, () Comment by Dark Cloud]
How about automatically set up build list (Like in Railroad Tycoon's Scenario Editor)?
I found it a nightmare in SMAC to be
seeting up 30 or 40 similar lists in 30 - 40 new cities 200 turns into the game.
[Mad Lord Snapcase]
How about just being able to save and load the list file?
[Wazell]
But what if we could have different build-up lists for different types of cities?
I mean, that there are agricultural cities, mining communities providing raw materials,
industrial cities, military cities and trade cities etc. in real world. Now these cities
serve for many uses and probably have non-similar improvements built into them. It'd be
good to have this in CivIII also. For example, you could tell a city go agricultural, so
it builds a lot of farmers to improve farmland and builds granaries and some minor buildings
to support them, also improving roads network around the city and training overpopulation to
soldiers. Similarly this works for creating science cities, this time it maybe creates trade
routes and attracts wise emigrants? Also there can be an option to make a city equally
powerful in all these areas.
[Shadowstrike and Dark Cloud]
How about a few different lists, as the user may want it so.
Such as you choose from a screen of five lists which you have created for each city's
'build' menu.
[UltraSonix]
How about having user-defined lists that are stored inside a text file.
And then the build queue would have a button that pops up all the available
pre-defined queue lists that you would be able to select. So there would be
one for a new city, one for a modern city going militaritic, etc. This feature
should be easy enough to implement into the game.
5.Armies In Field
[Dark Cloud]
When your army is destroyed a certain percentage of your
population dies, say .5 points, because the unit would have been recruited.
You could solve that problem by having city sizes 1.5, 2.0, 3.5, etc.
6.City Sizes
[Dark Cloud]
City sizes could be 1.5,2.0,2.5 etc. to help with the army recruitment aspect
of the game.
7.City Names (Build List)
[Dark Cloud]
The city name's build list should be longer. I mean, surely Firaxis could find
more Roman Cites and such!
[jpk]
I would like all duplicates removed. Hamburg should be either a
German city or on the extra names list but not both.
If memory serves me correctly Kazan is both a Russian city and a Mongol city.
Remove it from one of the lists.
The list of common names should be sufficiently long so that you do not
have two Moscow's or two Rome's as is currently possible.
[Dark Cloud]
If two cities with the same name are built by a civ the computer should recognize it
and name the second city Madrid II or something such as that.
8.Unhappiness
[The Diplomat]
I think that famine should create a certain amount of unhappiness. After all, if people
are dying of hunger, wouldn't the population get pretty angry at the government for the
situation?
So, I think it just makes sense to make famine be one of the factors that determines a city's
unhappiness.
[Dark Cloud]
How about if you have famine for 1 turn .5 people become unhappy and if famine continues
for 5 turns 1 person becomes unhappy. Every increment of 5 would cause .5 people to become
unhappy.
9.Settling
[S. Kroeze]
'I have always found the settler a rather artificial unit. Settlement organized by a
government has always been the exception, not the rule. And in 4000BC, when the current
CivII starts, almost the entire world was populated, except for some remote islands like
Madagascar, Iceland and New Zealand. I still hope CivIII (orCivV) will introduce a rural
population, living in villages. As soon as there are sufficient inhabitants in a particular
area, small towns will develop, provided they have an agricultural style of living. Further
growth should be caused by population growth, but most by migration. \
[Ralf]
You can easily "expand your way to success" by shoving out buckloads of city-founding
settlers i a row, early on in the game.
20+ settlers or more, founding just as many cities + another 20+ city-area settler-developers.
Effective, perhaps - but is it FUN?
Its certanly isnt very realistic in historic terms, thats for shure. Also, if the AI should
have the same early ultra-fast city-founding strategy for each of the (upto 7) computer-civs;
the game would probably grind to a halt, in later endgames.
I have the following four expanding-rules suggestions. They should enable a much more realistic
game, and allow the AI to compete more easily (i hope):
A/ Max two "empty" cities (= without any city-improvements) at any given time within that
empire, can be allowed. The AI/Human Player HAS to build temple in at least one of above
cities, in order to continue founding a new city.
B/ Any city NOT road-connected with some/all of the other cities, gets an proportionally stiff
corruption-penalty each turn.
Lack of road-connections to other cities should also give a more noticeable resource-/
science-penalty.
C/ A big sized empire of 25 cities or more should be an unstability-factor in itself -
increasingly prone to split-up federation-attempts. This should be especially true if
the large empire is far ahead in terms of science-/production-/economy- and military might,
then the other civs.
(It shouldnt matter if the empire is well maintained: these split-up tendencies should appear
anyway, if the empire is self-sufficient and powerful enough (to far ahead the other civs).
The split-ups federations should consist of min 20% - max 40% av the empires cities. A real
groundshaker, in other words).
D/ Also (important); the cities in small civilistic-perfectionist 8-12 city empires should
in return have less problems with building huge 20+ mega-cities.
Cities in large 20-30 city empires on the other hand, should have increasingly bigger problems
with developing indevidual mega-cities.
10.Food Screen
[Sikander]
On to other subjects. I really agree with the point made previously regarding food and
specialists. Food is really underrated in the current Civ game, at the expense of trade.
I would like to see a much more extensive use made of specialists, and have more types of
specialists available. I would use a more sophisticated city screen to assign the various
groups of people to their jobs. (Like Colonization) Here is a partial list of what I have
in mind:
Farmers: Assigned to a square in the city radius to grow food. No prerequisite.
Woodcutters / Miners: Assigned to a square to harvest resources. No prerequisite. Can work
the same square as a farmer if the square also produces resources.
Craftsmen: Assigned to the build queue area initially (later to factories etc.) Converts
resources into shields. No prerequisite.
Priests: Assigned to the temple. They produce a little bit of science, and the first priest
causes one unhappy person to be content. (Up to two priests with Mysticism) Prerequisite, a
temple.
Soldiers: Assigned to a Barracks. A segment of the population sufficient in size to man and
maintain one (professional) military unit, provided that the requisite weaponry has been
produced initially.
Sages: Assigned to Libraries. Produces knowledge.
Merchants: Assigned to Marketplaces. Produce taxes and luxeries, and increase productivity of
commodities through superior (market based) distribution.
Bureacrats / Magistrates: Assigned to Palace / Courthouses. Produce tax revenue, and
reduce corruption (inefficiency).
Slaves / Construction Teams: Assigned to squares within the city radius to improve the terrain
by building the usual mines, roads, irrigation, fortifications etc.
Anyway, you get the idea. Buildings don't provide anything (except upkeep costs) on their own,
they have to be manned by specialists. The more advanced the type of building, the more
productive the specialist working there. Population working squares advances in productivity
based on tech, as well as the presence of certain specialists.
The way to carry all of this out is to reduce the amount of food necessary to support one
person to 1. This will double the growth rate, and quickly provide the population necessary
to man the buildings in the city.
10. Cities (General)
[Shadowstrike]
The buildings should be time-appropriate, i.e. no skyscrapers in the Bronze Age, etc.
[Dark Cloud]
Some improvements should have to be upgraded- i.e. colosseum, temple, cathedral into
Arcades, Sports Stadiums, Churches
11. Cityview
[Shadowstrike]
They would represent your culture (i.e. buildings pertain to your civ) and would represent
your current state (i.e. if you are an agricultural nation, you get a lot of windmills, farms
and market squares, if you are industrial, you get a lot of factories and smog, etc.)
What would be really neat would be to have the city view as an extreme zoom in of the entire map.
When you click on a city, you should "zoom" into it. The city management should be super-imposed
on it, and you can take away those screens to see your city.
[Shadowstrike]
Furthermore, you should be able to see your citizens and the buildings should be
time-appropriate, i.e. no skyscrapers in the Bronze Age, etc.
(added: or coliseums in the industrial age.)
[Adm. Naismith]
Why don't simply change a bit their picture into city view, just to reflect their older age?
We have to add a bit of "tradition feeling" into oldest cities, they aren't all "glass and steel"
, are they?
[OrangeSfwr]
I think the general concensus was to take the Civ 1 - tight packed look and combine it
with Civ 2 and beyond graphics. I hated the Civ2 city view.
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 14, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 16, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 23, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 26, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited October 07, 2000).]
You just added to it. 
Comment