The Clash Forum Guestbook

[Richard Bruns]

Yes, please write up your ideas. I'd love to hear them. While we strive for accuracy, we want to model what could have happened rather than what did happen. The focus is not entirely historical.

[Westergaard]

I have removed this post. It can now be found in a new thread
[This message has been edited by Westergaard (edited October 09, 2000).]

[Richard Bruns]

I like the proposal, but I don't think this is the right forum to put it in. Westergaard, could you start a new thread titled "Endgame Ideas" or something similar and move your proposal there? Something that detailed in the guestbook thread might scare people away. Detailed ideas should be put in the model threads or their own threads so things don't get even more confusing than they already are.

But thanks for posting the idea. I'll discuss it fully when it gets its own thread.

[Xuenay]

quote: A) Clash population will be divided in social classes (the aristocracy, the clergy, etc). How many would you like to see in a typical game?

Not many but not too little either, something around 3-7.

quote: B) What social classes you think must be there in the typical whole-history game?

Must? I dunno.

quote: C) Being the ruler of your civ, do you want to have always a tight control of the civ's govt decisions or would you like to experience less control in regimes where the ruler isn't really all powerful in real life?

As much control as possible! I want to micro-manage everything!

quote: D) Do you find interesting/fun to play a "nomadic civ"? That is, a moving civ with no cities that could eventually settle down. For example, playing the germans as a nomadic tribe for a while and then settle at some point in history.

I'd be very interested about it.

quote: E) How internally stable you think empires should be along the thousands of years of play?

Internally stable? You mean like revolutions and stuff? Well, they should be that stable that the player doesnt have much problems keeping in control. The computer players, however, are a totally different thing...

quote: F) Do you think having disasters and deseases add fun to the game?

Yes, but dont forget to include positive random events, too.

quote: G) Do you find interesting/fun if the available techs aren't the same in each of your civ's provinces?

Not sure. It would probably get too bothersome.

quote: H) Do you like having population divided in ethnicities or you'd prefer the civ2-like approach where people is all homogeneous?

Homogeneous.

quote: I) Do you like having to deal with internal conflicts such as struggles between religions, between ethnicities, between social classes?

Sounds good for me.

quote: J) How much do you care about historical accuracy in a 0-10 scale? 0=doesn't care.

quote: K) How important you consider Clash being able to model non-historical scenarios such as fantasy games or sci-fi stuff?

Extremly important.

quote: L) Do you want to see pirates and the like in the game? If so, how detailed?

I definitely want them, but I'm not sure how detailed they should be.




------------------
"Now Lone Star, you will see that Evil will always triumph, because Good is Dumb!"
-- Dark Helmet

Moderator, Final Fantasy Alpha Boards

[Lord God Jinnai]

Can someone plz if you come on here answer my questions? Only Westerguard has answered anything related to mine at all!

[Xuenay]

LGJ, I didnt answer because I dont care what way those particular things are done.

------------------
"Now Lone Star, you will see that Evil will always triumph, because Good is Dumb!"
-- Dark Helmet

Moderator, Final Fantasy Alpha Boards

[Locutus]

Don't worry Lord God Jinnai, I'm a busy man But here are my answers to your questions:

quote: Originally posted by Lord God Jinnai on 10-04-2000 05:14 PM 1a. For the Wonders & Achievements what type of things would you like to see, espically in the use of achievements that don't have things to do with buildings such as crossing the world for the first time.

I don't know, but I think there shouldn't be too much of it. In CtP there's now a mod with 64 wonders (the plan was to have over 70 but 64 turned out to be the maximum) and after playing it for a while I came to the conclusion that that is simply too much: they loose their status of being special and make the game very unbalanced since often a wonder allows you to get ahead of your opponents and get more wonders before the other players which allows you to get even further ahead, etc. So I say keep them fairly rare and special. Sailing around the world, Pyramids, Apollo program, Age of Reason, Internet, Humane Genome Project, that sort of things. Have a good look at various mods and scenarios for CtP(II) and Civ2 and take only the best idea's from all those. IMHO you shouldn't have more than 50 or so wonders/achievements that have a large impact on the game (things with only a small inpact, e.g. only temporary effects, might still work if present in somewhat larger numbers).

quote: 1b. Also do plan to play a more abstract or more historical model?

I'd say go for history, it will add much more of a 'civvish' atmosphere to the game. One of the major disadvantages SMAC is IMHO that it lacks the atmosphere of reinacting history. Clash doesn't have to follow history exactly, it's not necessary that the Egyptians and no-one else will build the Great Library but if you just build 'an important library' then that will take away much of the atmosphere. A message like "One of the most talented writers in your nation, Homer, just finished writing the Ilias" is so much better than "One of the most talented writers in your nation just finished writing an important book.", even if the civ is Aztec.

quote: 2a. Do you like the idea of dynasties?

Well, it might work out as a nice feature, but don't make it too important.

quote: 2b. If so, do you want the player to have a historical dynasty for himself instead of necessarily being this immortal being as in Civ I/II? (note even if the dynasty collapsed and a new one took over, you'd be in control, but with differnt power political power level and structure maybe)

The problem with collapsing dynasties is that whenever a player doesn't like his/her current dynasty for some reason he/she can deliberately try to undermine it and make it collapse. A real dynasty will always try to keep itself intact. So I don't think it is realistic to let the player take the role of emperor but it should keep the role of being a immortal being.

quote: 2c. If you want dynasties, how would you like things to be handled in rebublics, democracies or other non-dynastical countries, esp. for ruling dynasties?

I would say, don't have dynasties at all in such situations.

quote: 2d. Again if you like dynasties, do you want them for every character possible? Only ones that have governmental jobs? Only specific types of jobs? Or something else?

Only for the most important postitions. Don't overdo it.

quote: 3a. How much do you want the character model to be apart of the model? I'm really asking how integrated you want it with the rest of the game. Do you see it as an add-on moreso or a intergral part of the game or sometwhere inbetween and if so, where?

Well, individuals have always played a role in history so they should somehow be modelled, but I wouldn't want to make them too important. I'd say that the leaders of important groups (social classes, religions, military) should be present as individuals and probably a handfull of other important people (artists, scientists, advisors, philosophers, rebellion/mercenary leaders, whatever) as well. I don't think there should be much more than 10 characters present in one nation at the same time. The influence of these characters should normally be fairly small, but every now and then someone with a exceptionally strong (or weak) character should arise and have a significant impact on the civ (in a positive or negative way).

quote: 3b. Finally, what characteristic should be used for characters? (Sorry, i'll take up some space listing what is currently used right now. Tell me if you like it and if not what you would change/delete/add: [skipping]

These sound fine to me, I wouldn't know what to change here.

quote: 3c. What type of skills should characters have considering the type of models? If you have ideas and post them please, also explain a little about what type of characters would use those skills.

I think you'd have to look at where you want to place characters and give them influence depending on what their role in the civ is. A few examples:
The personality of leaders of important (social/polical) groups should determine how much polical power those groups have, so a group with a strong leader should have more political power than the government-type prescribes and a group with a weak leader should have less power. Maybe you could also give the leaders their own agenda that (slightly) differs from that of the group they represent and hence when decission have to be made the desires of the group depend on the desires of the leader of that group as well (I hope this makes any sense, it's been a while since I read the government model ).
If there's a prominent scientist in a civ, then the science rate of that civ should be boosted, the presence of prominent artists/engineers could make it easier to create masterpieces or other wonders, military leaders could make the army fight better, increase morale and make people less wary to go to war. Strong religious leaders could keep happiness in the civ under control or incite revolts, depending on how their relation with the existing government is.

[Lord God Jinnai]

Thanks for the input. I think u misunderstood a few things though.

quote: I don't know, but I think there shouldn't be too much of it. In CtP there's now a mod with 64 wonders (the plan was to have over 70 but 64 turned out to be the maximum) and after playing it for a while I came to the conclusion that that is simply too much: they loose their status of being special and make the game very unbalanced since often a wonder allows you to get ahead of your opponents and get more wonders before the other players which allows you to get even further ahead, etc. So I say keep them fairly rare and special. Sailing around the world, Pyramids, Apollo program, Age of Reason, Internet, Humane Genome Project, that sort of things. Have a good look at various mods and scenarios for CtP(II) and Civ2 and take only the best idea's from all those. IMHO you shouldn't have more than 50 or so wonders/achievements that have a large impact on the game (things with only a small inpact, e.g. only temporary effects, might still work if present in somewhat larger numbers).

OK. I agree with that situation. But there's a big differnace between that model and the one for clash. For one thing there are differnt levels so there wouldn't be too many extremely important wonders like the Library of Alexandria, but there would be a lot lesser ones like say Big Ben in London.

Another thing is that these won't have effects like they did in those games. They will enhance things, but not break or bend any rules. Also the predictions aren't the same. So you build the Pyramids. Doesn't mean people will see them the same importance or in the long run the same way.

quote: I'd say go for history, it will add much more of a 'civvish' atmosphere to the game. One of the major disadvantages SMAC is IMHO that it lacks the atmosphere of reinacting history. Clash doesn't have to follow history exactly, it's not necessary that the Egyptians and no-one else will build the Great Library but if you just build 'an important library' then that will take away much of the atmosphere. A message like "One of the most talented writers in your nation, Homer, just finished writing the Ilias" is so much better than "One of the most talented writers in your nation just finished writing an important book.", even if the civ is Aztec.

Alright. That's fine. What about more modern ideas and such though.

quote: The problem with collapsing dynasties is that whenever a player doesn't like his/her current dynasty for some reason he/she can deliberately try to undermine it and make it collapse. A real dynasty will always try to keep itself intact. So I don't think it is realistic to let the player take the role of emperor but it should keep the role of being a immortal being.

Important thing about this that will nullify those players is that the fall of a dynasty will cause internal turmoil and will cause civil wars or wars of succession, etc. Everyone will haveto worry about that though and keeping thrones too long can also cause that to happen if the ruler isn't doing a good job as seen by others he rules.

quote: I would say, don't have dynasties at all in such situations.

Fair enough, though how would you represent the society today then where power does run in somewhat dynastical lines, although not traditional ones. Large companies who give control to there friends or relatives when they retire or in elections where the current ruler would nominate his succesor in political parties. I mean we can come up with new ideas and such and i was going to not have all dynasties by birth.

quote: Well, individuals have always played a role in history so they should somehow be modelled, but I wouldn't want to make them too important. I'd say that the leaders of important groups (social classes, religions, military) should be present as individuals and probably a handfull of other important people (artists, scientists, advisors, philosophers, rebellion/mercenary leaders, whatever) as well. I don't think there should be much more than 10 characters present in one nation at the same time. The influence of these characters should normally be fairly small, but every now and then someone with a exceptionally strong (or weak) character should arise and have a significant impact on the civ (in a positive or negative way).

Okay that makes sense. One thing though, Dynastical character won't be counted in this and not all dynasties will be under your control or anyones.

OK 1 question i forgot to ask. Do you want to see all the characters or just the ones under your control and those of great promiance, etc?

[Locutus]

quote: Originally posted by Lord God Jinnai on 10-21-2000 12:29 PM Thanks for the input. I think u misunderstood a few things though.

First of all, I apologize for replying so late, I've been very busy lately. It's not a habit of mine (although it seems to be becoming one )

quote: OK. I agree with that situation. But there's a big differnace between that model and the one for clash. For one thing there are differnt levels so there wouldn't be too many extremely important wonders like the Library of Alexandria, but there would be a lot lesser ones like say Big Ben in London. Another thing is that these won't have effects like they did in those games. They will enhance things, but not break or bend any rules. Also the predictions aren't the same. So you build the Pyramids. Doesn't mean people will see them the same importance or in the long run the same way.

Sure, I realize that Wonders will be different in Clash, but I was just trying to show that Wonders should IMHO be rare and special, else they ain't really Wonders anymore, even if they only have limited effects. Wonders that are more limited can be more numerous, but should IMHO you still be carefull not to overdo it.

Realisticly, the world is full of Wonders, every nation in the World has at least a couple, but in a game you should make Wonders rare so people will view them as special, for gameplay sake. The Big Ben really doesn't qualify as a Wonder, just about every major city in the world has something that could be compared to the Big Ben. I can image you want to model it somehow, but if you ask me, it shouldn't be a Wonder. All that the Big Ben does, other then telling the time (well, it did/does more than that, but you know what I mean), is make people feel slightly more proud of the fact they are part of the civ that owns it. But the French have the Notre Dame, the Germans the Brandenburger Gate, the Dutch the Euromast and the Americans the Empire State Building; it all cancels each other out. So basicly the Big Ben is just another city improvement (or whatever you want to call it in Clash), but it's a little bigger than average because it's located in a big city. The actual Wonders should only cover the creme de la creme of the Wonders.

IMHO, even the original 7 Wonders don't automaticly qualify to become a Wonder in a Civ game. I mean, what did the Colossus of Rhodes ever mean to the people of Rome? To them it was little more then some famous statue. Just like the Arc the Triomphe is just some famous arch to me, its existance doesn't change my live or anything. The same goes for the Euromast, it may be Dutch, just like me, but that still doesn't change anything for me.
The Internet on the other hand, profoundly changed my whole lifestyle. In the same way, the Oracle of Delphi influenced many peoples lifes in the Ancient Age, so even though it wasn't one of the seven I think it definately should be included as a Wonder in Clash (or any other Civ game for that matter). The same goes for the other projects I mentioned: Sailing around the world, Pyramids (though that could be questioned, I mainly included it because it has always had sort of a mythical influence on people, not really because it changed the life of people outside Egypt), Apollo Program, Age of Reason, Humane Genome Project. All are project that profoundly had/have an influence on the lifes of people, regardless of where they live(d) (even if they lived outside the nation that owned/built it). Anyway, that's just how I think about it.

quote: Alright. That's fine. What about more modern ideas and such though.

Well, for the Modern era there are still plenty of things that qualify as a Wonder (more than in any other time period of equal length, I would say). Next to the ones I mentioned earlier (Internet, Apollo Program, etc.) you could think of Olympic Games, Treaty of Maastricht (basicly marks the unification of the EU), UN, Fall of the Iron Curtain/Berlin Wall, Coca Cola Company/McDonalds (or some other representative of the 'Americanisation' of the world), Micrsoft (a wonder with only negative effects can still be wonder ), etc.
For the (near) future you might have a bit more of a problem, but you can use you're imagination here. You could start with things that solve present-day problems to start with, FE Cure for AIDS/Ebola/Cancer, World Peace, Ozone Hole Solution, Global E-Bank, etc. and move on to other things that are likely to happen (eventually) such as Mars Landing, Moon Colony, First Contact (with aliens that is), First Cloned Human, First Android, etc.

quote: Important thing about this that will nullify those players is that the fall of a dynasty will cause internal turmoil and will cause civil wars or wars of succession, etc. Everyone will haveto worry about that though and keeping thrones too long can also cause that to happen if the ruler isn't doing a good job as seen by others he rules.

Though I'm still reluctant about this (and will probably remain so until I actually see it in action), I agree that if effects are dramatic enough it could work.

quote: Fair enough, though how would you represent the society today then where power does run in somewhat dynastical lines, although not traditional ones. Large companies who give control to there friends or relatives when they retire or in elections where the current ruler would nominate his succesor in political parties. I mean we can come up with new ideas and such and i was going to not have all dynasties by birth.

Hadn't thought of that yet, I guess that would be possible. But often in those cases it's not as obvious who the successor will be so often this would result in a power struggle (classic example is still Alexander the Great), so chance of a power struggle happening should be larger in Clash as well in that case (though with less severe consequences or some other form of compansation to keep things in balance).

quote: Okay that makes sense. One thing though, Dynastical character won't be counted in this and not all dynasties will be under your control or anyones. OK 1 question i forgot to ask. Do you want to see all the characters or just the ones under your control and those of great promiance, etc?

Well, even though Hannibal wasn't Roman he's remembered (with fear) until today in Italy, so I guess the most important enemy/neutral characters should be known to everyone, but I don't think that under normal circumstances I should have to deal with the union leader or Prime Buracrat of one of my opponents.
[This message has been edited by Locutus (edited October 29, 2000).]

[Lord God Jinnai]

quote: Realisticly, the world is full of Wonders, every nation in the World has at least a couple, but in a game you should make Wonders rare so people will view them as special, for gameplay sake. The Big Ben really doesn't qualify as a Wonder, just about every major city in the world has something that could be compared to the Big Ben. I can image you want to model it somehow, but if you ask me, it shouldn't be a Wonder. All that the Big Ben does, other then telling the time (well, it did/does more than that, but you know what I mean), is make people feel slightly more proud of the fact they are part of the civ that owns it. But the French have the Notre Dame, the Germans the Brandenburger Gate, the Dutch the Euromast and the Americans the Empire State Building; it all cancels each other out. So basicly the Big Ben is just another city improvement (or whatever you want to call it in Clash), but it's a little bigger than average because it's located in a big city. The actual Wonders should only cover the creme de la creme of the Wonders. IMHO, even the original 7 Wonders don't automaticly qualify to become a Wonder in a Civ game. I mean, what did the Colossus of Rhodes ever mean to the people of Rome? To them it was little more then some famous statue. Just like the Arc the Triomphe is just some famous arch to me, its existance doesn't change my live or anything. The same goes for the Euromast, it may be Dutch, just like me, but that still doesn't change anything for me. The Internet on the other hand, profoundly changed my whole lifestyle. In the same way, the Oracle of Delphi influenced many peoples lifes in the Ancient Age, so even though it wasn't one of the seven I think it definately should be included as a Wonder in Clash (or any other Civ game for that matter). The same goes for the other projects I mentioned: Sailing around the world, Pyramids (though that could be questioned, I mainly included it because it has always had sort of a mythical influence on people, not really because it changed the life of people outside Egypt), Apollo Program, Age of Reason, Humane Genome Project. All are project that profoundly had/have an influence on the lifes of people, regardless of where they live(d) (even if they lived outside the nation that owned/built it). Anyway, that's just how I think about it.

quote: Well, for the Modern era there are still plenty of things that qualify as a Wonder (more than in any other time period of equal length, I would say). Next to the ones I mentioned earlier (Internet, Apollo Program, etc.) you could think of Olympic Games, Treaty of Maastricht (basicly marks the unification of the EU), UN, Fall of the Iron Curtain/Berlin Wall, Coca Cola Company/McDonalds (or some other representative of the 'Americanisation' of the world), Micrsoft (a wonder with only negative effects can still be wonder ), etc. For the (near) future you might have a bit more of a problem, but you can use you're imagination here. You could start with things that solve present-day problems to start with, FE Cure for AIDS/Ebola/Cancer, World Peace, Ozone Hole Solution, Global E-Bank, etc. and move on to other things that are likely to happen (eventually) such as Mars Landing, Moon Colony, First Contact (with aliens that is), First Cloned Human, First Android, etc.

Well here is why its good to have these pages. You see there is a differance in what i think you consider a wonder and what i do. A wonder must have physical attributes directly related to it, so Age of Reason and Cure for Cancer are out. Any "age" things are out because they are numerous and every place has them at differnt times. The disease cures may be possible as achievements, but then again maybe not. Maybe for the baterical diseases of the disease model.

Another differance is how you see a wonder. A wonder IMO doesn't haveto affect your daily life. Hey if that were the case, almost anything could be a wonder/achievement. The developement of coffee for many people (not me) would be one. The automobile another, etc. Wonders are structures or whatnot that as far as society is concerned stand above the rest for some reason, not ness. practical or everyday reasons. They act as symbols also and I think you forgot that, atleast it sounds that way.

As far as the things like Big Ben or whatever, the thing about building wonders is that it takes time and resources to build those magnificanet buildings, something you haveto put extra effort into, not just an oridnary building or wall. Whether or not it pays off and to how much is up to society and so that is the reason for having those Big Bens. Maybe that statue you built was enough to rally people of your nation for some pride, but isn't too important or even known outside your country. Soceity didn't allow it to be, but your time and effort weren't completely in vain. That is a balance feature most of all.

quote: Well, even though Hannibal wasn't Roman he's remembered (with fear) until today in Italy, so I guess the most important enemy/neutral characters should be known to everyone, but I don't think that under normal circumstances I should have to deal with the union leader or Prime Buracrat of one of my opponents.

Well that's true and why i wanted to know, but you haveto think though that you as a guiding force/leader of your civ should be slightly differnt that your average citizen. True you shouldn't deal with everyone, but if the president of another country is the 'spokeman' and/or ruler in any sence of that country, then i wonder why you think you shouldn't haveto deal with them.
[This message has been edited by Lord God Jinnai (edited October 31, 2000).]

[Locutus]

quote: Originally posted by Lord God Jinnai on 10-31-2000 12:05 PM Well here is why its good to have these pages.

Indeed. We have a different vision in this respect and this discussion will hopefully benefit both of us. I know I for one find it highly interesting and usefull

quote: You see there is a differance in what i think you consider a wonder and what i do. A wonder must have physical attributes directly related to it, so Age of Reason and Cure for Cancer are out. Any "age" things are out because they are numerous and every place has them at differnt times. The disease cures may be possible as achievements, but then again maybe not. Maybe for the baterical diseases of the disease model.

I can underdstand that Cure for Cancer wouldn't be suitable for Clash, I had forgotten about the Disease Model, you are right that that is more suitable for modelling cures and such. The Age of Reason was a mistake on my behalf, I apperently wasn't paying attention. Age of Reason in a advance in CtP and I accidentally referred to the advance and not the Wonder that comes available with it, as I intended to. What I meant to use was Emancipation Act (which puts an end to slavery), but I guess that's not suitable according to your definition either.

quote: Another differance is how you see a wonder. A wonder IMO doesn't haveto affect your daily life. Hey if that were the case, almost anything could be a wonder/achievement. The developement of coffee for many people (not me) would be one. The automobile another, etc. Wonders are structures or whatnot that as far as society is concerned stand above the rest for some reason, not ness. practical or everyday reasons. They act as symbols also and I think you forgot that, atleast it sounds that way.

You say everything could be called a Wonder by your definition, but by your definition the same is the case, I could probably come up with at least several dozen wonders that were built in my home country (the Netherlands) alone and the my country is one of the smallest countries in the world!

It's true that I didn't describe my definition of a wonder very clearly. That's mainly because I only came up with it very recently (partly because of this thread) and it obviously needs some more refining. Not only does a wonder have to have an impact on everyday life of a lot of people, it also needs to be one big project that had a specific goal in mind when it was started.
FE someone (J. F. Kennedy IIRC) one day decided that it was necessary for the man to go to the moon so a whole project was started up to go to realize this. Or some pharaoh one day decided he wanted to start building his tomb and for the next 30 or so years people worked on building his Pyramid. The same thing goes for the Great Wall, the Manhattan Project or the Internet.
This is however not the case with coffee. Noone ever said "we need a drink that can keep us awake and active even when it's better to get some rest, let us invent coffee!", it was more an accidental discovery and noone deliberately pumped any resources into it to make sure the goal would be reached (there was never a goal). The automobile or, yet better, the plane too, was not a undertaking with a specific goal in mind, it was more a process of trial and error with as goal something as general as to achieve 'some better means of transport' or 'some way to fly', it wasn't obvious in advance what the end result would be like and there were many dead ends.
I do agree with you when you say it's not necessary to pump a *lot* of resources in building/achieving a wonder, but it is necessary IMHO that people made a decission to build/achieve something and then put some or more effort and resources in it to ensure that their goal would be reached.

quote: As far as the things like Big Ben or whatever, the thing about building wonders is that it takes time and resources to build those magnificanet buildings, something you haveto put extra effort into, not just an oridnary building or wall. Whether or not it pays off and to how much is up to society and so that is the reason for having those Big Bens. Maybe that statue you built was enough to rally people of your nation for some pride, but isn't too important or even known outside your country. Soceity didn't allow it to be, but your time and effort weren't completely in vain. That is a balance feature most of all.

You say it needs to rally people for some pride, but I don't agree. FE the completion of the new mall and city hall in my home town of Hengelo (just as unimportant a town as the name suggests ) made me feel really, really proud to be a Hengelo-er and a Dutchman and I certainly wasn't the only one. By your definition, can you explain to me why our mall or city hall aren't wonders if the Big Ben is? ('cause they aren't, or shouldn't be, if you ask me) I bet the costs for building weren't that much lower and as you said, a statue could suffice as a wonder and that is a lot cheaper than our city hall. Let me add that the design of both the mall and the city hall are unique and by some even called revolutionary. The architects involved are supposed to be famous and have worldwide respect (though I never heard of them before ). And yes, a lot of effort was made to make sure these would both be special and not 'just another mall/city hall'.

But even if you want your wonder to have physical attributes, surely that would be possible in most cases following my definition. I already mentioned the Great Wall and Pyramids as well as the Internet, which have physical attributes already. And for the Apollo Program you could take the Kennedy Space Center or the Moon Lander or Lunar Base like that to represent it. For the Manhattan Project one could take Los Alamos Base or something like that. Sailing around the world could be represented by Magelhan's ship (I'm sure it had a name but I don't know it), the Human Genome Project by some important research institute that worked on it, etc.

quote: Well that's true and why i wanted to know, but you haveto think though that you as a guiding force/leader of your civ should be slightly differnt that your average citizen. True you shouldn't deal with everyone, but if the president of another country is the 'spokeman' and/or ruler in any sence of that country, then i wonder why you think you shouldn't haveto deal with them.

I agree that a player would have to interact with the leaders of an entire (rival) civ, but what I meant was more that I don't think it should be necessary that a player needs to interact with important priests or union leaders or aristocrats of other civs than his own.

[Lord God Jinnai]

quote: I can underdstand that Cure for Cancer wouldn't be suitable for Clash, I had forgotten about the Disease Model, you are right that that is more suitable for modelling cures and such. The Age of Reason was a mistake on my behalf, I apperently wasn't paying attention. Age of Reason in a advance in CtP and I accidentally referred to the advance and not the Wonder that comes available with it, as I intended to. What I meant to use was Emancipation Act (which puts an end to slavery), but I guess that's not suitable according to your definition either.

Ok, yea the Emancipation Proclamation was an important step in that it changed life for most of the world with how slavery is delt. Therefore it might be able to make it to an achievement, however, not as broad-range one as say the Internet. The reason is, each country has to have there own E.P.. Not only that, but many countries went their entire civilization almost without slavery so we'd be punishing them by not allowing them to have access to this wonder because they ended slavery long ago. Also an E.P. is only good for that civ, not ness. the one that is formed if that civ turns to dust. I think something can be done with it, but not like CtP, maybe similar, but more-or-less up to each country to decide to end it or not.

quote: You say everything could be called a Wonder by your definition, but by your definition the same is the case, I could probably come up with at least several dozen wonders that were built in my home country (the Netherlands) alone and the my country is one of the smallest countries in the world! It's true that I didn't describe my definition of a wonder very clearly. That's mainly because I only came up with it very recently (partly because of this thread) and it obviously needs some more refining. Not only does a wonder have to have an impact on everyday life of a lot of people, it also needs to be one big project that had a specific goal in mind when it was started. FE someone (J. F. Kennedy IIRC) one day decided that it was necessary for the man to go to the moon so a whole project was started up to go to realize this. Or some pharaoh one day decided he wanted to start building his tomb and for the next 30 or so years people worked on building his Pyramid. The same thing goes for the Great Wall, the Manhattan Project or the Internet. This is however not the case with coffee. Noone ever said "we need a drink that can keep us awake and active even when it's better to get some rest, let us invent coffee!", it was more an accidental discovery and noone deliberately pumped any resources into it to make sure the goal would be reached (there was never a goal). The automobile or, yet better, the plane too, was not a undertaking with a specific goal in mind, it was more a process of trial and error with as goal something as general as to achieve 'some better means of transport' or 'some way to fly', it wasn't obvious in advance what the end result would be like and there were many dead ends.

I hear what you say and I haveto agree with you that it should have some reason for building it in the first place to be called a wonder, but those results aren't always what the person intended. 2 examples, one acient, one modern.

The Great Wall of China wasn't even built as an intended wonder, it was built to protect their seemingly only weak border and they wanted to make it strong (their are conflicting stories as to whether is was intended to keep the mongols out or the treasure they attempted to steal still inside china). Anyway, history has shown it failed at either purpose, but that doesn't make it any less grand. It then took on a new meaning, esp when the Europeans came.

In modern times, the Internet is my example. The internet was orginally used only for military purposes, then later for large corperations and nations and finally became fully public. No one at the time it became public (which is i assume the internet you're talking about), even thought it would change the world like it has done so today. They saw it as a fun place to post stuff (and still do) and a place to advertise for businesses, but they didn't consider too much that even small businesses could become global easily. Thus, the intent differs from the actual result, but it is still grand in its achievement (probably the only one i can think of that would get the highest level since many historians say it will reshape the world so much that it hasn't been seen since the invention of agriculture).

As to your netherlands point, again that is totally possible in my game, however, the effects of such won't last for too long and will simply for game mechanic purposes be 'deleted' after X years. I mean can you name every such thing thoughout your countries history? yet they still had an impact perhaps.

quote: I agree with you when you say it's not necessary to pump a *lot* of resources in building/achieving a wonder, but it is necessary IMHO that people made a decission to build/achieve something and then put some or more effort and resources in it to ensure that their goal would be reached.

I never said otherwise, just that stastically, the more put in the better result you should have, though not guaranteed. This is to make things fair for the balance sake so even low budget ecomoies have a 'chance' at something grand.

quote: You say it needs to rally people for some pride, but I don't agree. FE the completion of the new mall and city hall in my home town of Hengelo (just as unimportant a town as the name suggests ) made me feel really, really proud to be a Hengelo-er and a Dutchman and I certainly wasn't the only one. By your definition, can you explain to me why our mall or city hall aren't wonders if the Big Ben is? ('cause they aren't, or shouldn't be, if you ask me) I bet the costs for building weren't that much lower and as you said, a statue could suffice as a wonder and that is a lot cheaper than our city hall. Let me add that the design of both the mall and the city hall are unique and by some even called revolutionary. The architects involved are supposed to be famous and have worldwide respect (though I never heard of them before ). And yes, a lot of effort was made to make sure these would both be special and not 'just another mall/city hall'.[quote] True, what you said, but such 'wonders' would be of the lowest scale, city or square pride and admoration. The city hall isn't ness one because almost every city has one, the same for the mall. The differance would be 1>as you mentioned they have unique archieture and 2> the size of the mall might count (not sure of this yet, but the Great Wall and the Pyramid that's a wonder (there's only on that is) were both wonders because they were the biggest as was Collusus) 3> The amount of resources put into it may affect it, if it was more than enough to spend on the minimum cost of constuction (minimum cost buildings and whatnot never can be wonders, the player hasto take some risk). [quote[But even if you want your wonder to have physical attributes, surely that would be possible in most cases following my definition. I already mentioned the Great Wall and Pyramids as well as the Internet, which have physical attributes already. And for the Apollo Program you could take the Kennedy Space Center or the Moon Lander or Lunar Base like that to represent it. For the Manhattan Project one could take Los Alamos Base or something like that. Sailing around the world could be represented by Magelhan's ship (I'm sure it had a name but I don't know it), the Human Genome Project by some important research institute that worked on it, etc.

Ok the physical part I thought might get clouded in its definition and it did. The physical part means the basis of the wonder is its physical aspect, like the Great Wall or The Pyramid of Giza, not is meta-physical aspects. And this is time related also of course (its much easier to build a pyramid like that now than it was then). The internet although has physical attributes isn't a wonder cuz of a server or many.

Think of it this way, you can be anatomically correct and therefore be a homo-sapian, but if your brain is blank and you can't comprehend the world around you, then you're not really human.

[Mikel]

Hi
I've been lurking I guess since this project began on Apolyton though I've missed a lot (or at least it seems that way when I try to follow some of these posts). I will get around to answering the original questions but will need to do some extensive research into some of the other threads and posts before I can give constructive answers. What I would really like to know is where is the Clash project at the moment. Is there a new Demo available soon, and has the website moved (it seems pretty out of date)? I also noticed elsewhere that the Thread conveners may be writing monthly updates to be included as part of a magazine column. I think if this is being done then newbies and lurkers like me should be pointed to it because there is a lot of material to read through and I'm sure much of it is now no longer relevant. You should probably also mention other ways that those who haven't been involved can get there hands dirty as i would like to help when I have the freetime.

Good Luck with the project and i'll get back to you with answers soon.

Mikel

[Chris Wilkinson]

Hi Mikel,

This is still the proper website, I've got a new version in the works at the moment and it should be up in a week or two.

Cheers,
Chris

[Mark_Everson]

Hi Mikel:

Glad to hear your are checking in on us, and thanks for the well-wishes.

new demo: Probably not until after Xmas

web page: Chris covered most of this, but just in case you are on an old one its still at clash.apolyton.net/frame. Just reading the intro part of each model (usually 2-5 paragraphs) will give you a good idea of the current state of play on most of the models.

things to do:
We could really use some people to check out the military models and comment/work on them. The two guys who were on it have developed a case of Real Life...

Please check the Mil page on the web site (at least the summary part at top). and the links therein, if you're interested in commenting, or even better, want to help develop the model. PS the link to "Related Web Site: Krenske's Concepts" is dead. I just let Chris know about it, but until its fixed you can check out the detailed Battle Model at http://www.usq.edu.au/users/krenske/...v/scouting.htm and the links to the other models therein.

Other than that, tell me what Kind of thing you'd like to do, and I'm sure I can come up with something.