CIVILIZATIONS (ver2.1): hosted by LordStone1

[Utrecht]

This may have been discussed before in more detail, and if so, I apologize.

I have been thinking more on the "minor" nation concepts and can see the "realism" need for it, but frankly, they would seem to get in the way and slow the game down.

I am a firm believer in letting the game decide who is a minor nation and who is not. Realisitcally there were two main reasons that a civ rose to the top.

1) Geography
2) Leadership

The map dictates 1 and we the gameplay/AI dictate the second.

What I would not mind seeing is that surrendering of a civ to another and that second civ beoming a minor. Again the game dictates this.

Additionally, the chance for revolution should be higher. This would make happiness techs more important and force reaserch away from a strict hard science approach.

[EnochF]

Theben mentioning multiple leaders has got me thinking about dynasties again.

It sounds tempting to give each tribe five leaders with a rudimentary personality of his or her own, but in the end this is going to end up being a lot of busywork for programmers. I mean, I can come up with five major leaders for America, England, France, Germany, Egypt, China, Rome, Greece, the Hebrews, probably Spain, probably the Arabs, maybe Japan... but that's about it. And some nations in the game will have only dictators as leaders. Who would be the ideal choice as "peaceful leader of Babylon"?

Back when I first suggested dynasties, I just figured there would be variations on a single name unless the player chose a new one. Maybe the leader would occasionally change from male to female, so Comrade Hatshepsut would take over from Consul Rameses, but I never considered that the democratic leader of Egypt would be Anwar Sadat.

So now I'm wondering whether I really thought about this enough... maybe dynasties would needlessly complicate things.

[Andy B]

A comment to the dynasty leaders discusion Why do they have to have real names. Cant they have the first the second... exampel(USA) Bill Clinton I, Bill Clinton II, Bill Clinton III, Bill Clinton IX... And when a new dynesty comes the can be called George Washington I... That way you don´t have to come up with so many names. You relly don´t have to pick the big leaders names.

[Ecce Homo]

I believe we should keep on with the "viking fuss" in the General forum.

One of my points was, as I have mentioned several times before, that there should not be a problem to include 100+ civs, as long as there are enough city and leader names.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Ecce Homo (edited July 02, 1999).]</font>

[Transcend]

Introducing dynasties will make the game too complicated; how about assigning each civlization different leaders for different ages? Then the ages could be divided up in Ancient, Middle, and Modern. Here are some examples:
Americans: George Washington - Abraham Lincoln - FDR
Babylonians: Akkad - Hammurabi - Nebukadnezar
British: William the Conqueror - Elizabeth I - Winston Churchill
Chinese: Ying Cheng(Shi Huang Di) - Li Shimin(Tang Tai Zung) - Mao Tsetung
Egyptian: Ramses II - Saladin - Nasser
Franks(French): Charlemagne -
Teutons(Germans): Frederik Barbarossa - Frederik the Great - Adolf Hitler
Greeks: Alexander - Basileios II - ?
Japanese: ? - Tokugawa - Hirohito
Persians: Darius I - ? - Ayatollah Khomeini
Romans: Romulus - Octavian - Constantine
Russians: Ivan the Grozny - Peter the Great - Vladimir Lenin
Turks: ? - Mehmed II - Kemal Ataturk

[Transcend]

My previous post actually reiterated the idea brought by EnochF. I also have a hard time to imagine Hitler in a democratic government. But what the heck, this is just a game, and game allows alternate history.

EnochF, what are the leaders for each civ you come up with?

[Theben]

I don't think dynasties would be too complicated; just tweak the leader "personalities" in the rules.txt for each one. It might be a headache for Firaxis to have to research enough leaders per civ, though.

[Cartagia the Great]

I have to agree, although I must say I do agree with the idea of giving a Civilization two or morel eaders of each gender, each with a slightly differant personality, it should shake things up a little bit.

Oh, for the person who ws giving a few of these names, the middle leader of Persia would have to be Shapur, the second leader of Sassanidian Persia and one of its strongest leader.

[Theben]

Few more Japanese leaders:
Hideyoshi (warlike expansionist)
Oda Nobunaga (warlike expansionist)
Ko Sanjo (female, perfectionist)
Tomoe Gozen (female, warlike, perfectionist)
Many others if requested.

[VaderTwo]

I like the idea of giving civs leader units but don't let it be based on ancient-medieval-modern basis.

Instead have a group (say 5) of choices of leaders that each civ can make. Each has different characteristics and personalities. By characteristics I mean:

- unit offense , defense and movement
- hit points and firepower
- effectiveness of administration (reduced corruption in cities around the leader)
- effectiveness of leadership - attack and/or defense bonus given to units within 2 squares of it
- tactics - increased or decreased viewing range

As the unit gets "older" , it would permanently lose hit points until it reached zero or was killed. When it declines to a few hit points, the civ would be given the option to build another to replace it and that unit would come into existance when the previous leader "dies".

However, if a leader is killed, there would be some turbulance and a civ would have to build a new leader from scratch and have no benefits as a civ would have no leader in the period between when the previous leader was killed and the new leader was built.

Sorry if I am repeating someone's else's ideas, I didn't read the entire thread yet.

[VaderTwo]

Continued idea...

Perhaps certain leaders wouldn't be available until a certain date or a certain technology is reached.

Certain techs would give all of the leaders additional bonuses to continue to make them useful as technologies advanced. For example, discovering leadership would give all leaders a +1 to their offense and defensive amounts (from eg. 4/2/1 to 5/3/1)

Maybe for some variety a civ would not be able to replace a recently deceased leader with the same unit it would have to be another leader unit.

Other possible bonuses:
+10% gold, +10% beakers, increased/decreased effectiveness of happiness, etc.

[The Ellimist]

Americans: George Washington (Adams, Jefferson, Nathaniel Greene, Madison)-Abe Lincoln (Grant, Johnson, Hayes)-Dwight Eisenhower (FDR, JFK, Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, Bill Clinton, Dick Nixon)
Babylonians: Sargon I-Hammurabi-Nebuchadnezzar II (Nabonidus)
British: William I-Elizabeth I-Tony Blair (Winston Churchill, Bernard Montgomery)
Chinese: Shi Huangdi-Tang Tai Zung-Deng Xiaoping (Mao Zedong, Jiang Zemin)
Egyptians: Ramesses II-Saladin-Anwar Sadat
French: Charlemagne-Louis XIV-Charles de Gaulle (Mitterand, Chirac)
Germans: Attila-Frederick-Helmut Kohl(Wilhelm II, Hitler, Doenitz)
Greeks: Pericles (Alexander, Leonidas, Socrates, Perseus...)-Baseilos II-Constantus something
Japanese: Yamato-Tokugawa-Akihito
Persians: Cyrus II-Shapur I-Ayatollah Khomeini
Romans (Italians): Romulus (Scipio, Caesar, Octavian, Hadrian, Constantine), - , Benito Mussolini
Russians: Ivan IV-Peter the Great-Josef Stalin

------------------

"Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries!" -- John Cleese, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"

[The Brain]

I think there should be ALIEN civs that would only appear sometimes when you achieve let's say the Atomic Bomb. Because then they would know that the human race has gotten high enough in technology that they should worry. If they come then they might do one of two things- Attack the whole human race in a "war of the worlds", or they will "come in peace" and grant you acces to a future technology not researchable by anyone else (but they can steal it or you can trade it). Maybe with this you can build a super unit or whatever. So, have an ALIEN CIVILIZATION!

------------------
Acctually I'm a genetically altered lab mouse plotting to take over the world!

[Eggman]

Brain: That idea is so utterly ridiculous that I think I like it.

Are you pondering what I'm pondering?

[Cartagia the Great]

Looks like brain has been reading HArry Turtledove's World War in the balance series