Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

immigration, and emigration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • immigration, and emigration

    these two things should be added to civ3.

    IF your civilization is struggling, and another civilization is thriving that lives near by, your people should be able emigrate to your neighboring civ. and likewise for other civs, their people should also be able to immigrate to your lands.

    iF immigrants want to live on your land, you can either refuse, and turn them down (doing this would damage your reputation), or you could accept them.

    When you rule with a military dictatorship, you could not let your people leave, naturally by placing patrol guards. and if any one of your citizens try to escape, they get shot.

    but of course there would a percentage of chance that they could escape your patrols, say with a small patrols, they have a 40% chance of escape. with medium size patrols, they have a 30% chance. when you place heavy patrols everywhere, they have a 20% chance.

    If immigrants arrive from another civ that has tech that you dont have, (depending on how far ahead in technology then you) then there is a 10% chance that those immigrants will bring that tech to you. the percentage of this would depend on what you are researching for the moment, here is an example:

    you are researching automoble, and immigrants arrive from a civilization that have mobile warfare, you have a better chance of recieving that tech (meaning mobile warfare) then you would if you were researching railroad, because your scientists are closer to descovering that technology.

    also, if immigrants arrive from a civ that is extrememly rich, then you have a 20-50% chance of getting gold of you recieve those immigrants. example:

    some immigrants arrive from a civ that has 30,000 gold. if you accept those immigrants you have a 60% chance of getting 300 gold or less. if that civ had 20,000 gold, then you would have a 40% chance of getting 200 gold or less. etc. etc.

  • #2
    This is an interesting concept. It could also tie in nicely with various suggestions regarding ethnicity, although a lot of folks tip-toe around this subject because it strays close to race issues.

    Also, in the Tins thread on this page, I have been debating with the thread's author, Bell about the pros and cons of increased complexity in civ. Is the migration issue so major a factor in the world that it has to go in civ III? As long as it is unobtrusive, and easily macro-managed, sure, put migration in. Otherwise, it may just prove unnecessary and confusing.

    ------------------
    Josef Given
    josefgiven@hotmail.com
    A fact, spinning alone through infospace. Without help, it could be lost forever, because only THIS can turn it into a News.

    Comment


    • #3
      quote:

      Originally posted by JosefGiven on 01-18-2001 02:16 PM
      This is an interesting concept. It could also tie in nicely with various suggestions regarding ethnicity, although a lot of folks tip-toe around this subject because it strays close to race issues.

      Also, in the Tins thread on this page, I have been debating with the thread's author, Bell about the pros and cons of increased complexity in civ. Is the migration issue so major a factor in the world that it has to go in civ III? As long as it is unobtrusive, and easily macro-managed, sure, put migration in. Otherwise, it may just prove unnecessary and confusing.




      Yes, I agree. dont make it too micro-managed. but I would like to see it in civ3.

      how does it come in with racial issues? are you talking about how alot of people stream to the United States more then other countries? Sorry if I'm putting americans above other nations again, it was just a question in case you are offended.

      Comment


      • #4
        Didn't we have rival cities (with unrest) willingly joining you, and vice versa, in Civ I?

        Suddenly, the cities would change color, and not necessarily the color of the nearest neighbor (I remember that a city joined me across the ocean)!

        That didn't require any micromanagement of any sort, and the immigration model in Civ III could be similar.
        'We note that your primitive civil-^
        ization has not even discovered^
        $RPLC1. Do you care^
        to exchange knowledge with us?'^
        _'No, we do not need $RPLC1.'^
        _'OK, let's exchange knowledge.'

        Comment


        • #5
          Migration would be a nice twist to the game

          Comment


          • #6
            How about you have 'lines' of immigration shown on the map, showing where people are moving in a demographic map selection.

            A UN idea would be to block movement of the immigrants to the areas, the UN would be angry at any nation which does this.
            -->Visit CGN!
            -->"Production! More Production! Production creates Wealth! Production creates more Jobs!"-Wendell Willkie -1944

            Comment


            • #7
              I like immigration and emmigration as an idea in Civ III.
              About 24,000 people die every day from hunger or hunger-related causes. With a simple click daily at the Hunger Site you can provide food for those who need it.

              Comment


              • #8
                quote:

                Originally posted by bagdar on 01-19-2001 10:37 AM
                Didn't we have rival cities (with unrest) willingly joining you, and vice versa, in Civ I?

                Suddenly, the cities would change color, and not necessarily the color of the nearest neighbor (I remember that a city joined me across the ocean)!

                That didn't require any micromanagement of any sort, and the immigration model in Civ III could be similar.


                I've never played civ1, just civ2. And the way you explain it, I would like it more advanced then that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  quote:

                  Originally posted by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto on 01-20-2001 10:57 PM
                  I've never played civ1, just civ2. And the way you explain it, I would like it more advanced then that.


                  It definetely needs to be more advanced than the Civ I model if included in Civ III. These ideas are all sound and it appears with Firaxis saying that they will include nationalities and such that they very well might make it into the final game.
                  About 24,000 people die every day from hunger or hunger-related causes. With a simple click daily at the Hunger Site you can provide food for those who need it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    A new voice here. I like the idea of immigration too. Without getting too much into micro-management, you could have settler units branch off from another nation's cities, moving towards your civ. Also the Civ I method with a city 'admiring the greatness' of one of your nearby cities would work too (perhaps both methods.)

                    I think one of the comments made by the team about culture would work well with an immigration system. Perhaps there would be a possibility of this immigrant settler group founding a city in your territory, joining your civ, but you have to win them over to your culture. There could be some interesting scenarios like when Rome accepted German immigrants but didn't 'Romanize' them, and that helped lead to the collapse of the Roman empire.

                    Mass immigration should both help or hinder your progress as it has in history, depending on how you treat your people.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Welcome Lord Spam.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X