Tweet
Terrain model for Civilization III
TERRAIN MODEL FOR CIVILIZATION III - ANDZ83, VERSION 1.0
1. INTRODUCTION
OK, now this is my first post in the Civ3 General forum after ages of not posting here...
I think this topic has been discussed several times, but I can't find a thread in our thread list about it nor is there an active topic on this issue on page 1
2. THE HISTORY OF A GAMEPLAY FEATURE
For a start I want to show you my general thoughts on the issue. The terrain model we could find in Sid Meier's Civilization by MPS was a very badic one. We had plains, grasslands, forests, deserts etc, and even a whole terrain type called river. In those days this model was quite satisfying as Civ was the first game to actually deal with such matters. Correct me if I'm wrong here. Now in Civ2 we had two major improvements concerning the terrains directly: Rivers became a property of a map tile and were no longer a terrain type, and there were finally two instead of one special ressource goods possible for each terrain, the grassland terrain not counted (tell me, why is this terrain type not treated like a standard terrain type :confused. Another very nice improvement in Civ2 was the customisability of the game via editing the *.txt files, but that affected the terrain model only indirectly.
But between those two games there was another great MPS hit - Colonization. In this great game () there were two types of rivers, different types of ocean squares and finally a certain amount of different basic terrain types, as well as an additional type of forest for each basic terrain. Now this idea was relly great and I do think we shouldn't forget it too fast.
I don't intend to talk about Civilization: Call to Power by Activision here, as this game is just a piece of crap and, in fact, still dealt with standard terrain type as in Civ2. But there was another successor of Civilization II - and that was Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri by Firaxis. This game was the first Civ-related game with improved unit and government models, and here we coudl find some innovations in terrain models too: it was the firts time that the height of a terrain square did actually make a contribution to the gameplay. And after all we learned one thing - we can create as many different types as we want - flexibility and customisability are the only things that will stand forever! Let's say BAH! to static units, government types... and terrain types!
...
3. "NOW WHAT IS THAT GUY ON ABOUT?" - THE ACTUAL TERRAIN MODEL IDEA
...So my conclusion is: We don't need static numbers, values or even names for the different terrains! We need properties, characteristics to make all squares of a map be different terrains! And you know, there's no place on earth that has the same characteristics as any other!
The core idea is the following: There are several characteristics to be set for each single terrain tile of a map (Memory
), and the combination of different settings will then affect the productivity, the trade possibilites (no trade arrow production without real trade done!), food production or even the possibilities for a defending army to gain advantages of the terrain - what we call "defense bonus" since CIV!!!
I already collected some of those characteristics. For each ground square there should be a figure for:
Height (in m/ft)
Structure (plateau/unregular)
Humidity (in levels)
Soil Type (rocky, desert, etc.)
Intensity of Vegetation (in levels)
Type of Vegetation (grassland/savannah/forests etc.)
Zoological Population (in levels) (?)
For sea squares there are of course other characteristics to be considered:
Depth (of the water, in m/ft))
Seaground: soil type and structure (later game, don't make too much sense in ancient era
)
Vegetation strength/type
Zool. Population strength/type (Whale/Fish etc. you know)
For ground and sea squares yet another important property: Resources. Is there coal to be found? Iron ore, gold, gems? If yes, how much of those resources can be found and consumed?
Agricultural aspects like the quality and quantity of wheat or crops in general can be grown there, are calculated of humidity, soil, height etc. Also, out of those figures, the resource production capability is calculated, although I do think that there should be a possibility to force the production values for scenarios.
There was also CLIMATE mentioned in threads before, but I think this should just be affected by geographical circumstances and not just written as a number into any rules.txt
So some of you might now say: hey, so we have to keep even more numbers in mind ! That's wrong however, as you just have to look at the tile/move the cursor there and then read the terrain name, just like "Fertile Hills" and then can figure out the appr. production of that tile... More information you can then get by reading the terrain informations more careful, and that's about it!
4. FINAL DESTINATION...
OK, I hope I won't be bombarded with links to older threads like this now
However, any comments, ideas and proposals welcomed! Just don't insult me, that's the only rule!
oh, and of course: no spam!
edit1: silly me, had to fix UBB code...
edit2: fixed more UBB... some people wanted to have it even easier to read...
[This message has been edited by Andz83 (edited November 09, 2000).]
1. INTRODUCTION
OK, now this is my first post in the Civ3 General forum after ages of not posting here...
I think this topic has been discussed several times, but I can't find a thread in our thread list about it nor is there an active topic on this issue on page 1
2. THE HISTORY OF A GAMEPLAY FEATURE
For a start I want to show you my general thoughts on the issue. The terrain model we could find in Sid Meier's Civilization by MPS was a very badic one. We had plains, grasslands, forests, deserts etc, and even a whole terrain type called river. In those days this model was quite satisfying as Civ was the first game to actually deal with such matters. Correct me if I'm wrong here. Now in Civ2 we had two major improvements concerning the terrains directly: Rivers became a property of a map tile and were no longer a terrain type, and there were finally two instead of one special ressource goods possible for each terrain, the grassland terrain not counted (tell me, why is this terrain type not treated like a standard terrain type :confused
. Another very nice improvement in Civ2 was the customisability of the game via editing the *.txt files, but that affected the terrain model only indirectly.But between those two games there was another great MPS hit - Colonization. In this great game (
) there were two types of rivers, different types of ocean squares and finally a certain amount of different basic terrain types, as well as an additional type of forest for each basic terrain. Now this idea was relly great and I do think we shouldn't forget it too fast.I don't intend to talk about Civilization: Call to Power by Activision here, as this game is just a piece of crap and, in fact, still dealt with standard terrain type as in Civ2. But there was another successor of Civilization II - and that was Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri by Firaxis. This game was the first Civ-related game with improved unit and government models, and here we coudl find some innovations in terrain models too: it was the firts time that the height of a terrain square did actually make a contribution to the gameplay. And after all we learned one thing - we can create as many different types as we want - flexibility and customisability are the only things that will stand forever! Let's say BAH! to static units, government types... and terrain types!
...
3. "NOW WHAT IS THAT GUY ON ABOUT?" - THE ACTUAL TERRAIN MODEL IDEA
...So my conclusion is: We don't need static numbers, values or even names for the different terrains! We need properties, characteristics to make all squares of a map be different terrains! And you know, there's no place on earth that has the same characteristics as any other
!The core idea is the following: There are several characteristics to be set for each single terrain tile of a map (Memory
), and the combination of different settings will then affect the productivity, the trade possibilites (no trade arrow production without real trade done!), food production or even the possibilities for a defending army to gain advantages of the terrain - what we call "defense bonus" since CIV!!! I already collected some of those characteristics. For each ground square there should be a figure for:
Height (in m/ft)
Structure (plateau/unregular)
Humidity (in levels)
Soil Type (rocky, desert, etc.)
Intensity of Vegetation (in levels)
Type of Vegetation (grassland/savannah/forests etc.)
Zoological Population (in levels) (?)
For sea squares there are of course other characteristics to be considered:
Depth (of the water, in m/ft))
Seaground: soil type and structure (later game, don't make too much sense in ancient era
)Vegetation strength/type
Zool. Population strength/type (Whale/Fish etc. you know
)For ground and sea squares yet another important property: Resources. Is there coal to be found? Iron ore, gold, gems? If yes, how much of those resources can be found and consumed?
Agricultural aspects like the quality and quantity of wheat or crops in general can be grown there, are calculated of humidity, soil, height etc. Also, out of those figures, the resource production capability is calculated, although I do think that there should be a possibility to force the production values for scenarios.
There was also CLIMATE mentioned in threads before, but I think this should just be affected by geographical circumstances and not just written as a number into any rules.txt
So some of you might now say: hey, so we have to keep even more numbers in mind
! That's wrong however, as you just have to look at the tile/move the cursor there and then read the terrain name, just like "Fertile Hills" and then can figure out the appr. production of that tile... More information you can then get by reading the terrain informations more careful, and that's about it! 4. FINAL DESTINATION...
OK, I hope I won't be bombarded with links to older threads like this now
However, any comments, ideas and proposals welcomed! Just don't insult me, that's the only rule!
oh, and of course: no spam!
edit1: silly me, had to fix UBB code...
edit2: fixed more UBB... some people wanted to have it even easier to read...
[This message has been edited by Andz83 (edited November 09, 2000).]
Comment