Whats with these 'colonies'

[joseph1944]

Dan M. Thank you. You relize of couse that you are going to make all of us player, re-thing how we play the game.

[Steve Clark]

bump

Just bumping so everyone can see Dan's response.

[Gangerolf]

Just wondering: Can you name your colonies?
And if so, how?
E.g. if it's a colony producing iron, you could name it "Iron Hill" or something...

Another idea could be to use historical names: For example if I'm playing as the French my colonies could have names like Montreal, New Orleans or whatever.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS
7) Resources *do* deplete, depending on use. When this happens, you need to find a new source of iron/oil/uranium/whatever if you want to continue cranking out units that depend on that resource. You *can* find new resources inside your city radius as well.

This is good news - however, the default deplete-rate could (and should) also be Rules.txt tweakable - as always, then it comes to such minor, but pivotal implementations.

The reason this is good news, is because its yet another counter-acting measure against that HP-arrogant "splendid isolation" playing-style. Now, even if you (despite the unevenly distributed resources) nevertheless have managed to build yourself a completely self-sufficient setup of resource networks, that still only going to get you so far.

Also, one nice side-effect is the "resource deplete-factor" is that you cannot as before; quietly & easily crank out enormous quantitys of tanks, howitzers and mec.infantry units - then suddenly blitz-krieg yourself half the world, in one single turn anymore. If you try this - you stand the risk of depleting all your motherland-based special resources all together, which perhaps makes you very vulnerable to AI scorched earth-tactics.

By the way, is it possible to pillage, not just the harvested resource output, but also the special resources in itself? NOT forever of course, but for a certain number of turns - resembling "scorched earth" tactics. This would be a great AI-strategy agains blietz-krieg invading human players.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS
You can actually have many different subnetworks, for example, and each of them might be connected to the capitol in one way or another, but a crafty adversary could, for example, occupy your sole harbor city that links one subnet to another, effectively cutting off an entire continent's trade from the capitol city's continent. Dan

Well, reading this, cities can have their trade connected by harbors, but can colonies on seperate islands be connected to your civ without a harbored city on that island?

Can you block sea trade with naval units (never touching the diplomatic screen) and not declaring war?

[Ralf]

Originally posted by SerapisIV
,but can colonies on seperate islands be connected to your civ without a harbored city on that island?

Well, I only guess; but a coastal-city in both ends, seems to be the most logical assumption here.

Can you block sea trade with naval units (never touching the diplomatic screen) and not declaring war?

Of course you can block sea-trade! Then it comes to AI-diplomatic consequenses it probably resembles the reactions you get then you move a HP-unit within AI city-areas in Civ-2. In other words: Piss off!! - or else...

In Civ-2 one could easily more or less ignore building naval units for a large part of the game, because even if you had AI-ships patrolling directly outside your coastal cities, it didnt effect your economy/production-capacity that much at all. In Civ-3 such AI-ship patrolling outside your coastal-cities have more grave consequences.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by Ralf
Of course you can block sea-trade! Then it comes to AI-diplomatic consequenses it probably resembles the reactions you get then you move a HP-unit within AI city-areas in Civ-2. In other words: Piss off!! - or else...

I wouldn't be so quick to say so. My question is, lets say an enemy city is inside a bay. You blockade the bay with your navy, still outside of the enemy borders though. Is this new trade model robust enough to realize that no trade can get through those ships? Or does the model just check to see that there is both of your cities have harbors and there exists a water route between them, regardless of units in between? So the diplomacy screen was never used, but you just created a defacto embargo of that trade route.

Firaxis Dan only said that if you captured the city with the harbor that trade was broken, no mention was made of naval blockades.

I really hope the model is robust, that would be an awesome feature, especially for island hopping and incresing the importance of navies.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Dan Mahaga
but a crafty adversary could, for example, occupy your sole harbor city that links one subnet to another, effectively cutting off an entire continent's trade from the capitol city's continent

Well, if the AI-civ must occupy that HP coastal city (with land-units?), in order to blockade above trade-route, we are suddenly back to square one.
I sincerely hope that this isnt the case. It should be enough for the AI naval military-unit just being inside the HP coastal 21-square city-area, in order to establish a blockade against that city.

Originally posted by SerapisIV
I wouldn't be so quick to say so. My question is, lets say an enemy city is inside a bay. You blockade the bay with your navy, still outside of the enemy borders though.

Why complicate things? Why must the AI keep track of what foreign naval-units there is, outside its own culture-borders? Why should a blockade even be possible by patrolling naval units outside any 21-square coastal city-areas?

Why isnt it enough that a forreign naval battle-unit inside any fixed 21-square coastal city-area, automatically means blockading that particular city?

[SerapisIV]

Actions inside culture borders and intrusion of units into borders are acts of war or at least subject to complaints by the enemy which would require unit removal or a war decleration (firaxis has said that much about land units, seeing borders extend into the sea would make it only reasonable that it would be true for naval units as well).

I'm looking at an embargo without declaring war, without having to deal with diplomacy. Bays and ocean straits are ideal for this scenario.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by SerapisIV
Actions inside culture borders and intrusion of units into borders are acts of war or at least subject to complaints by the enemy which would require unit removal or a war decleration (firaxis has said that much about land units, seeing borders extend into the sea would make it only reasonable that it would be true for naval units as well).

Just being inside anyones ocean culture-borders should require unit removal or a war decleration - yes, I agree. But, to actually blockade the trade from a coastal city, should require that you place your naval combat-unit on an ocean-square inside the 21-square coastal city-area, I think.

I'm looking at an embargo without declaring war, without having to deal with diplomacy. Bays and ocean straits are ideal for this scenario.

Embargos are hostile act that results in diplomtic reactions. You said it yourself in this quote:
"Actions inside culture borders and intrusion of units into borders are acts of war or at least subject to complaints by the enemy which would require unit removal or a war decleration."

[aCa]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS
You *can* find new resources inside your city radius as well.

Dan

w00t! What you mean with finding new resources inside the city radius? Do you mean getting new resources when you get new technology, OR do you mean that you can find "old" resurces inside your city radius? If the last thing is correct, do the resource just suddenly appear or do you have to do some kind of exploring/digging inside your city radius.

[MrFun]

I'm not sure if I will like the limited resources concept.

Doesn't this mean that by the late stage of the game, civilizations will not be able to build a variety of units because there will be NO resources left on ANY tiles that have been used?

This would suck big time.

[Lord_Davinator]

heheheee

if Civ3 is an upgrade from civ2 then this is one upgrade thats makes the game totally worth its money


hehhehehee

[Pingu:]

Oh yes, resources that are depletable! That's such a good thing D. That'll give some sort of economic change over time, collapse of empires, and the need to expand! OH YES, this game just sounds better and better! (and better and better)...

Anyway, on a different tach, when a colony is consumed by the expanding city, I think it would be good if some sort of tile improvement was left. This is purely decorative, and should have no effect on the game whatsoever. I just think it enriches the feel of the game, when you look at the map, and can see that the current landscpe has been influenced by the History within the game, giving your civ a more epic sort of feel.

Similarly, when you win or lose a Major battle (lots of troops killed, or saves a major city nearby), then perhaps the map should be marked with a battlefield, with a little sighnpost saying 'Battle of Cambridge - 1345AD'. This should be nothing too big, or too ostentatious, just a little reminder, you can click on it to read the details....

I know it's eye candy, but it'll give the game a really epic feel to it...


Pingu:

[Sava]

I was just curious, WTF is ICS??

And you do realize you guys are arguing for the sake of arguing because none of you have a copy of Civ 3, so none of you no for sure if you're right or wrong.

Props to Dan M for taking the time to post on these forums.

"It says on here for interests, you put 'dabut'?"

"No. That's 'Da Butt'."

-The Ladies Man