[city]: The Game game idea, what do you think?

[Vesayen]

[City] Game idea


How about a city builder but also city management game which focuses on one city, for the majority of human history?

It would have to be in the middle east if we pick a real city, or on the eastern Mediterranean coast if we really make it old…. I’m thinking old enough that the player starts playing a wandering group of nomadic early humans, and plays on through the establishment of a permanent settlement.

Military combat ala RTW. A real time combat control, unit based. Production of military units varies with the time periods…. Earlier time periods use levies and drafts from within the city, as you later progress, the units are supplied by whatever empire the city is ruled under. All time periods you build and maintain facilities like barracks for the army you make, or which is garrisoned there.

The empire or nation which owns the city changes from time to time if it is a real city. If it is a fictitious city, it can fluctuate from an independent city state or to a city in some state, never a capital, that begs the question of addressing things OUTSIDE the city, which we don’t want to do.

The game is not as much about combat however as it is dealing with the real problems faced by a city. Commerce, politics etc. We focus on that from its creation, to the modern day.

I’m thinking a (big) mix between Civ, RTW, patrician and The Guild 2.

There would be merits to having it be a REAL city, but also merits to it being a fictitious one.

Thoughts? Would you like to play a game like this?

Just musing of course.

[:) Smiley]

I like the idea, and would not only play it, but if someone here wants to make it, I'd do graphics for it.

Most intriguing about the concept are the major outside forces beyond the player's control. In most strategy games such as Civ, the game gets dull often because the player has too much control, and the game will eventually have only one strategy that emphasizes optimized perfection, instead of a number of them that emphasize robust preparedness.

[Cyclotron]

I would definitely give such a game a look. The dynamics of being part of different empires, or a city state, or eventually a nation would be especially interesting. Also, the idea that you don't "lose" if you are taken over or if the city changes hands is another really fascinating possibility - in Civ games, when you lose a city, it's out of your hands.

I suppose the only way to lose would be to get yourself razed. First rule of [City]: Never give sh*t to the Mongols.

[Adagio]

A game like that would surely make me interested, though I believe it would be best to just keep a small timescale (4-600 years or so), to make that part deeper, than if the game spanned from 2000 BC to 2000 AD

My personel preference would be from the time settlers started colonizing America until modern days

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Cyclotron
I would definitely give such a game a look. The dynamics of being part of different empires, or a city state, or eventually a nation would be especially interesting. Also, the idea that you don't "lose" if you are taken over or if the city changes hands is another really fascinating possibility - in Civ games, when you lose a city, it's out of your hands.

I suppose the only way to lose would be to get yourself razed. First rule of [City]: Never give sh*t to the Mongols.

Well think about it, in Civ, assuming it is not raised..... the city lives on, what happens to the people inside? They aren't butchered wholesale, they just sing to a new tune....

Think of some mission based gameplay and objectives which you, the ruler of the city get when a new empire takes over.

"Find the remnants of the old royal familly and execute them/lock them up/torture them."

"the prostitution industry is an abomination to our god, see it is banned immediatly."

I always find "empire building" games more fun when they are in the distant past, not the prescent, or recent past heh, but to each his own .

[dunk]

Sounds like an interesting idea.

I think it should be an option of eras, worlds (ficticious or historical), and so on. Different eras have different problems and different means to solve them. In ancient times, you would have to build improvements on your own for the most part. In modern times, you could build them on your own, OR lobby the nation for support. Oh, this could be such a cool game.

Make it, post haste.

[duke o' york]

As far as the RTW combat is concerned, if it's a city game, then you should get direct control of only the defensive troops, so that if you decide to build an empire then all you can do is to put together an army, ensure it is properly equipped, and then wave goodbye to it in the hope that they will arrive at the enemy city, the details of which your spies/merchants have brought you, in a fit state to be able to capture and hold it. This would bring your city income through taxes and increased trade, but you'd have to make sure that the governor you chose was reliable and educated enough not just to secede at the drop of a hat and potentially cause you further problems in future.

[Vesayen]

Yeap, the only troops you control are those used to defend the city and the immediate countryside.... you can not send them off on conquest..... or if you do, say in Greek city state-ish times, you have no actual control over foreign combat, they either win, lose, or run. If you say for example, sack Sparta and your an independent state, you may get resources from the city, but you get *0* control of it. The extent of your control would be appointment of a governor over it.


As to making this…. I’ve long since given up the dream of being a game designer heh, someone else make it, thanks .

[DarkCloud]

Sounds interesting. Not mass-market, but similar to the Nation-States game idea... Sort of like a mix of Caesar and the city-screen in Machiavelli: The Prince, but text-based, etc.

Am I correct?

As to making this…. I’ve long since given up the dream of being a game designer heh, someone else make it, thanks

ha!

Well you could iron out a design-doc with the plans that you have for development. That wouldn't take any programming knowledge, and it would give some sort of guidance to the designers.

Best of luck!

-DC.

[Urban Ranger]

Have some interesting ideas, but not really thought out.

For example, during the city-state period, could you raise an army and conquer another one? If not, why not? Then, could you keep doing the same thing until you forge an empire? If so, how do you handle each individual cities? If not, why not?

[DrSpike]

Snoopy will tell me off if I post any barbed remarks, so, to show my maturity, I shall desist.