RADICAL IDEAS (ver1.1): Hosted by Rong

[Trachmyr]

Removing the emphassis on cities

The position of CIV,CtP,SMAC, and other games of this genere, is that the CITY is the center of society, and the primary focus.

Instead, I counter, that it is the network of all human populaces, all structures (mines. roads, barracks, factories, ect.), and how they interact that decide if a nation is to succede or fail.

Regions
Regions, by their definition, is the combined character of a geographical location. To represent this, regions must be added to CIV3.
Various methods of creating regions has been discussed in other threads. I prefer computer generated, fixed regions. These would conform to terrain and natural boundries (rivers, mountains, Ocean). Regions would also have a maxinum size.
I do not believe that fixed regions would subtract from the game, since real-life regions have remained the same thoughout history, though their names have been changed, and they have been contested.
Regions would form the primary borders of a society, contested regions would have interior borders similar to SMAC.

Habitation and Population
Before cities were constructed, people were nomadic... or semi-nomadic. This needs to be represented in CIV3. My suggestion would be to treat NOMADIC POPULATIONS as a mobile city, but not "improvable".
Eventually settlements were built, which grew into towns, which grew into cities.
I believe settlements should be reprented with evolving grapichs which expand to additional tiles as the settlement expands.

The concept of city improvements is simply an abstract for the implementaion of new technology within a city. I believe CIV gamers can handle a more realistic aproach to city development:
1) Technology implementation- When new technology which can benifit a settlement (let's say an Aqueduct) is discovered, that tech must first be implemented. This cost revenue (an alternative name for GOLD), and is based upon the size of a city (It is harder to incorporate new tech into larger, more stable cities). This expenditure reprensts the cost of materials, the cost to educate engineers, and incentives to implement the technology. Once the technology is implemented, it provides it's benefits to the settlement (in this case a reduction in negative health modifiers due to overcrowding and allowing larger cities). Technology may be implemented on a city, regional or national level to reduce micromanegement.

2) City improvement. A city has many diffrent aeras in which to improve... Housing, Industry, Economy, Recreation and so on. I suggest abstract level to each aera. Thus a city with a level 4 Indusstry typically can produdue more than one with a Level 3 Industry. Improvement require Public Works, similar to CtP. To increase in an aera, a certain number of PW must be spent. Like-wise any nessacary tech must have been implemented. (In our example above, an aqueduct will allow habitation Level 4 & 5 to be reached. If the city was at Habitation 3, it would need x amount of public works to reach 4 now that Aqueducts have been implemented.)
Settlements improve semi-automatically... they only use PW to improve a level if that aera is becoming inefficient due to # of people using it. (# of factory workers for Industry, total population for Habitation). As inefficency rises, a larger percent of available PW will be used to enhance that aera. You may also set Priority numbers to the diffrent aeras. This allows a more "hands-off" approach and highly reduced micromanement (you simply choose what percent of PW to enhance the city, priorities are optional, the computer does the rest based upon your population and workforce). As city level in these aeras increase, the settlement will expand to empty tiles, become denser or expand upwards. If you run out of room, you city will stagnate.

Workforce
Your workforce is handled on a city or regional basis, depending on your "National Goverment Level" (Independant/Regional/Federal).

Workforce determines not only what you produce/build but how your cities develop as well (A city lith Level 8 Industry due to a lot of factory workers is much different than a city with Level 8 religion due to lots of clergy. Detroit vs. the Vatican)

All other projects utilize PW, from mines to roads to Wonders(which appear on the map)

Other conepts will be included, and i'll expand on them later (Goverment, Stockpiles (National vs. Regional) and army production to name a few).

The result will be a highly graphical representation of you NATION, not just cities. Also Micromanement of city improvement is eased, to allow for more detailed workforce, supply and economy.

One final note, tiles should be reduced in size to allow this to be effective. I suggest 1/4 size at maxinum.

[Goob]

Concerning The Rise and Fall of Civilizations: To answer Rong's stated question about "If I am a wise leader, why would my civilization fall?"

Unless we are actually portraying immortal leaders then that question doesn't really apply to the game. If we are portraying immortal leaders then we don't have to worry as much about modeling reality because from the get go we are way off base.

An Idea:
We are immortal advisors, we are assisting Kings/Queens/Emporers/Presidents/etc., the game behaves similarly to previous CIVs, except the abilities of the "factions" are modified additionally by the attributes of the Ruler. The ruler would have abilities in Warfare, Diplomacy, Economy, and maybe some other areas. Bonuses in the attributes will help you in those areas (as S.E. settings in SMAC do) while penalties will hurt you. Every set number of years The Ruler will die or lose office and an heir/replacement will come along, with random abilities. Sometimes you will get truly phenominal leaders with high bonuses - The Alexanders, Julius Ceasers, Saladins, of history, other times you can get the King Johns... and you must suffer through a period of penalties. (Note: This idea comes from an old game called Medieval Lords)

This idea falls into the category of a game modeling the rise and fall of empires throughout history. This would emphasize the Wargame aspect with some attention to resource management and the progression of ideas.

Goob
(this was held sometime before being sent- I actually did some work today... The idea needs ironing out before any real discussion, but feel free to tear it apart or ignore it as it is.)

[This message has been edited by Goob (edited May 24, 1999).]

[meowser]

At the start of a CIV type game, you choose a civ and a leader and whatever other game options you want and begin play and essentially "rewrite history".

This is what I propose. At the start of a game, when you choose the leader you want, you have the option of choosing from among several options that define the characteristics and abilities of your leader.
I haven't done an indepth analysis yet but for starters you could determine skill level on a point system of say 100 on the following attributes:

foreign diplomacy
domestic diplomacy
military strategy
political influence
tolerance to new ideas

the default would be to allocate 20 points to each attribute.

Thus when dealing in diplomacy, war, domestic, etc, you would have bonus modifiers or negatives depending on the traits of your leader. Thus if your leader is a military genius, you have a bonus modifier when fighting the enemy.

You can also gain/lose points based on several different things. For example, after the 5th "I love the king day" you gain a point in domestic diplomacy.


CIV III, like the CIVS before it will have different ages. Something like Ancient, Medieval, Renaissance, Modern, Post Modern.

Now here is where it gets interesting, when you enter a new age you have the option to choose from among five children to become the next ruler you control for your civ. Each of these children have different attributes that reflect your civilizations demographics and have been influenced by the type of game you have played to this point. While playing your civ game, you could also have the option to actively groom your successor, by deferring any points you may have accumulated to any one of your successors attributes instead of keeping it for your present leader (however any negative points you earn go solely to the current leader).

At any time in game play you should have the ability to see what your attributes look like and how your descendants attributes look like. With the exception of game start up, you cannot adjust these attributes manually unless their is a cheat mode. Grooming a successor would not be considered adjusting but training by deferring the point that would have went to your leader now going to your successor.

When you enter a new age there should be some other incentives other than the attributes that influence whether or not you keep the same ruler or choose a successor.

For example say that you committed a lot of attrocities as a ruler. It gets diminished or becomes non-existent if you name a new successor. Then again by keeping your current leader, you have the so called "experience factor"

At the end of the game, replay should be vastly enhanced. Not only do you have a map depicting how your civ grew and expanded but other features somewhat similar and seen in SMAC. For example:

Accomplishments of Ruler (such as Despot) George Washington of the Americans in the Ancient Age:

Conquered the following civ:
First to discover:
Wonders Created:
Demographic Rankings:

Accomplishments of King George Washington II of the Americans in the Modern Age:

Conquered the following civ:
First to discover:
Wonders Created:
Demographic Rankings:

and etc.

[Diodorus Sicilus]

- First Post in this Thread-

I want to be able to 'write' a history of the Civ I've played in the game.
This requires that I be have the option to name the ruler in addition to having a Default ruler (already in the CtP and CivII games) but also that the ruler occasionally changes because the government changes (Friedrich the Chieftain becomes King Friedrich I who is overthrown when Revolution turns me into a Republic and Prime Minister Friedrich takes over, etc).
This requires that terrain features be named, or capable of being named: rivers, bays and peninsulas, islands, mountain ranges, etc., so that the game can record when Discoveries are made.
This requires/provides that anytime a combat takes place that involves more than one unit on both sides, that is a Historic Battle and gets recorded (gimme a Default Name of the Battle, maybe after the nearest City and a field to enter my own Title if I was involved and Won).
Result: at the end of the game, or whenever exhaustion sets in, you hit Historical Summary and get a TimeLine history: Battles, Government Changes, Discoveries, Wonders, etc.
During the game, along this same line, your population could rename your ruler, or you could be given a chance to adopt a new Honorifc Title, based on game events:
Friedrich the Great
Ivan the Tolerable
Igor the Inconceivable

It's mostly 'Mind Candy', but I think these kinds of Bells & Whistles would add a lot to the enjoyment of the Game Process

[Alkis]

Civilization acting as a NATION.

From a certain date onwards, or from a certain discovery onwards, or after you switch to a certain goverment, I don't mind about that, your Civilization acts as a Nation.

This means:
Your whole production is summed up and you can build whatever you like, wherever you like.

Example:
You have 16 cities and a TOTAL of 226 shields per turn.
You can decide to build:
13 cities --- Nothing
New York --- 5 Musketeers (x30 = 150 shields). To appear there next turn.
Boston --- Univercity (allocate 60 shields)
Atlanta --- Library (allocate 16 shields)

This will reduce micromanagement considerably. Please note that you don't need this in the beginning of the game because micromanagement is easy.

About Trade.
Each city retains its own trade.

About Food.
Each city retains it's own food output for purposes of growing bigger, unless a nearby city is starving, in which case you have the option to send them food or let them starve.

[This message has been edited by Alkis (edited May 24, 1999).]

[Du_Chateau]

This is what irratates me. That the map is flat. Maybe the map should be a globe.

Example:
If the Americans wanted to invade the Russians they could go through the arctic circle. Unfortunately in Civ II you can not go across the artic circle.

I do not know if this idea is posted any where else

[Travathian]

I disagree Alkis, take the US for example.

Which cities are the big industry cities, and how is it they help out a little tiny town across the continent? Imagine El Paso TX is at war with Mexico. Do you think with all of the industry throughout the US that suddenly tanks will start popping up in El Paso? No . . . they are made elsewhere and shipped there. You cant just assume the whole industrial base can be manipulated in such an extreme manner.

Now, I do like the idea, and I do think it can work, but more along the lines of this:

A certain percentage of overal resources can be redistributed. Things which affect this percentage are certain techs, wonders, city improvments. Something like railroad, assembly line, diesel engines all affect the transportation and manufacturing of things. Possibly in the beginning of your 'nation' only 5-10% of your resources can be reallocated. Then certain techs will raise this, to a reasonable maximum, say 40-50%.
This can show how realistic it is that an entire nation can work on a Wonder, while the smaller cities dont sit idly by.

[Rong]

Du_Chateau,

Your idea is on the list. You can reach it by clicking <a href="#sphere">here</a>.

[Du_Chateau]

Thanks for pointing that out

[russellw]

Alkis, here's how your idea can work.

In your example, you decide to build 5 musketeers. You place one in New York. Now, New York has a red box around it and they can't produce units there for X turns.The rest of the units you have to place elsewhere. If the cities in an area are small, they all turn red, representing a combined effort. If the city (like New York) is large, it can produce more than one unit per turn, or it can get rid of that red box faster.

This method is the one used in Command HQ (by Dani Bunten Berry). Some other things from that game that may work well if you're abstracting Civ to the nation level:

- Planes attack instantly, up to their fuel limit radius. Planes also intercept automatically if it it is in their radius. This helps prevent the "cover your units with bombers" strategy.

- Planes do half damage to land units (but can't completely kill them)...unit strength goes from 10 then 5 then 2.5, etc. Planes do a third damage to naval units but can kill
them. This is to prevent air power from overwhelming like in SMAC.

- Spy satellites are positioned in geosynchronus orbit and view a certain part of the map (until the satellite killers get them).

[Alkis]

Well, actually I put the 5 Musketeers there just to emphasize. If the makers of the game want to keep the one unit per city/turn thing I don't mind. The general idea is to reduce micromanagement and also to outpicture a Civilization acting as a Nation.

[BigBopper]

first post in thread

a comment on leaders:

I think that each civilization should be able to recruit a number of diffrent leaders. Mayors/goveners for cities and generals to lead armies. Each leader would have diffrent attributes that bestow bonuses on his or her respective posts. Generals would add attack and/or defense bonuses to a stack. Mayors/Goveners would add food and/or production and/or happiness bounuses.

This adds a whole world of posabilities to Civ III. Civs trying to recruit/steal leaders , leaders that have a low loyalty rateing would have a greater chance of being recruited by another civ, and a greater chance of them revolting and takeing part of your civ. Thus leaders would add advantages but come with dangers (ie strings attached).
Leaders could improve with time/experince but as they get better would cost more to support.

P.S. for those that recognize it yes the basic idea is from MOO2, but hey I'm all for takeing the best ideas from one game and useing/expanding them in another.

[CormacMacArt]

Civ I & II do not even model China well. China was taken over by the Mongols; in Civ this is the end of the game. In the Firaxis forum (general) I listed the several other ways that a civ can fall, if those are used then a way must be allowed for my civ to be conquered or fall and return. Perhaps "Government in Exile"? The Hebrews are a great example of complete decimation and successful Return.

[Rong]

I just added a picture in the summary post. Fugi, now you can explain your idea more clearly.

[Ecce Homo]

New idea: CAPITALIST COMPANIES AS PLAYERS

One part of Civ that I regard as unreal is that everything in the world seems to be owned by the state! There are no private capitalist interests, which only would make sense in a communist society.

Imagine that there were a bunch of AI players that were not civs, but Companies.

The Companies start with an amount of gold and an office in a civ's city. They can employ citizens to build improvements in this city. They will likely start building Caravans (à la CtP) to earn more money, and found offices in nearby cities. As time goes on, they will be represented in many cities in different civs, where they will employ some citizens and own some land + city improvements, which can be traded with the civ leader. The leader taxes the companies at a set rate. If the civ leader feels threatened, he can confiscate a company's property in his cities.

In the ancient era, companies will not own many things else than caravans, ships and some land for production. In the Renaissance, they will get more growth potential through Banking. They could even be powerful enough to rebel and found city-states (like in northern Italy or the Netherlands). In the Industrial age they will own factories and make great profit, which they will re-invest to grow even more. Civ leaders will have to control the capitalist interests in their nations.

Each civ has got a common policy for companies - a SE choice.

Maybe companies could even be human?

I have got an equivalent idea for religion, but I want to see how they develop one by one.