 |
|
Optimizer
|
 |
Stockholm
Feb 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
Please check as many of them as you like...
Last edited by Optimizer on 01-03-2004 at 23:32
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
 |
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:34
|
|
A good one. It's very closely linked to where Civ 4 should stop. I believe that Civ 4 could go until maybe 2100 AD, trying to only introduce future techs concepts of which are familiar now.
I'd like to see limited space warfare... military satellites that can provide missile defense and try to knock each other down, a la SMAC.
Same way, space colonies for extra resources, but not really appearing on the map - again, probably SMAC way.
Biochemical warfare... sounds good as an idea, and will be fine if implemented correctly. Robotic units though... as long as they don't look like from a Stargate episode, I'm fine. After all, we can reasonably expect to see some unmanned combat units, probably long ranged weapons, in the next 100 years.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lajzar
|
 |
Japan
Jun 2003
time: 14:34
|
|
I voted 
Let's see...
AC space race - I think I proved in another thread that with current tech it would take 200000 years, and with teh wildest dreams of current space engineers (fusion rockets and 99.9999% fuel tank), it would still take 850 years to get there.
Alien life and gaia control project could make it in though.
Definitely maybe to interplanetary travel. This would require something akin to ToT layers. But those layers weren't implemented well imho. ToT layers work well as MoM earth/myrror, or as land/deepsea/leo/underground, but not for interplanetary travel. It doesnt make sense that one part of Earth would correspond exactly to another part of Mars.
Space colonies? No thanks. Too sci-fi, and the terrain around them would be boring. Similarly, space warfare should be abstracted, unless it is made part of a leo layering system.
Undersea colonies? Possibly, but as far future tech.
Maglev trains? I've already posted a detailed transport model which relegates trains to city improvements that provide airport style RTN movement. I suppose we could have a Maglev depot that does the same thing but is cheaper to use.
Biowarfare? Should be in there along with a good WMD/nonconventional warfare model.
fusion power? ok. SDI? Definitely.
genetic engineering? I favour havinga "Genetic Farm" as a tile improvement. Extra food and a bit of pollution. Plus the cure for cancer wonder, possibly organ cloning. Anything else (new organisms, clone armies) is a bit too fantastic for my tastes.
Robotic units? Sure. I'd say it should look something like an armoured spider. The shape brings out our primordial fears, it is surprisingly stable and able to survive a lost leg, and looks cool. btw, we already have the tech for robotic aircraft. Its justa step up from those radio controleld cars some of us once played with.
SMAC style planet busters? Anything that does that should be popping the mother of all volcanoes out of teh crust and send us into a new ice age through volcanic dust in the air. Assuming a realisitc world.
Nanotech? No. I have yet to see proposed applications that arent science fantasy.
SF governments? A definite YES. Civ needs more governments, both futuristic, ancient, and modern. More variety in religious govs too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002
time: 23:34
|
|
Biochemical, SDI, Doomsday. I voted Doomsday not to see bombs that reshape the land like SMAC's planetbusters, but to emphasize how much of a non-issue nukes in Civ have been.
SDI done as a satallite system like in SMAC would be fun and make sense. Biochemical weapons are hardly future tech. I'd like to see both come into their own in WWI and WWII era military techs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PresidentMarcos
|
|
I want a space layer, a la CTP. This space layer would allow you to launch satellites, which would do numerous things...there would be communications satellites, which would make money and increase science (non-units, like caravans in CTP) There would be orbiting nukes (self explanatory) There would be ASATs. And there would be SDI satellites. After satellites, get into manned spacecraft, have reconassaince satellites...
Definetely orbital colonies. But these would be different. Production, commerce and food would be determined by improvements. Anyway, thanks to zero-g conditions and asteroid mining, these would receive a production bonus. Anyway, with zero-g factories, assemble troops in orbit and then return them to Earth. Quick way to build a big army.
As for missiles, have them be a bit more important...have cruise missiles, SRBMs, MRBMs, IRBMs, ICBMs, FOBS, and never forget armed space gliders! In addition to this, have victory points awarded for space firsts. And so on, and so forth.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
okblacke
|
|
The light-speed travel issue is interesting, if not exactly relevant. For interested parties, I recommend Tau Zero by Poul Anderson. The ship in this book uses a Brussard Ramjet to accelerate to near light speed. 2 1/2 years to accelerate, 2 1/2 years to decelerate, from the standpoint of those in the ship. (Though closer to 20 years from the standpoint of Earth.)
Alpha Centauri could certainly be kept as a goal if efforts were made to build tech toward the solution of problems related to such a trip. If not a Brussard engine, perhaps a sail, or even an FTL drive.
Here's a fun NASA link on the topic, too:
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/html/warp/warpstat.htm
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lajzar
|
|
Japan
Jun 2003
time: 14:34
|
|
Yep, for a functional bussard ramjet, we need some really powerful magnets.
To be precise, those magnets have to be powerful enough to attract molecular hydrogen up to 1000 km away while your space ship is travelling at 0.8 c.
Someone cleverer than me can do teh maths to figure out what acceleration those magnets will exert on the hydrogen, but...
1) I suspect that any magnets that powerful will do unpleasant things to the human body anywhere within the immediate vicinity of the spaceship. We contain a lot of iron, which is quite susceptible to magnetic forces.
2) Magnetism is known to be a particularly weak in terms of the 4 known forces that shape our universe. The energy to generate that kind of magnetic field must be truly staggering.
So we are still left with the issue of having to create some weird future techs to make the AC victory condition plausible. At a minimum we'd need some kind of godlike magnets tech, as well as some kind of protect human life from godlike magnets tech.
That's in addition to any environmental controls techs that would be requried for a [inhospitable world] colony. Basically, AC will need evrything Mars needs, and then some.
At a minimum, some kind of Mars colony wonder should set as a prerequisite for starting a AC victory, if we are to go for a AC victory condition at all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
okblacke
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lajzar
I'd still want the Mars colony wonder as a prerequisite somewhere along the line. |
But how would you incorporate that into the game? Maybe if it were abstracted, like a wonder-style development that was, itself, a prerequisite to a space victory. You can't go to Alpha Centauri successfully until you've built a successful Mars colony.
At the same time the Mars colony wouldn't be managed or attackable or productive, it would just be, perhaps, the research base for your AC project. (Though I suppose there could be counter-measures that might hinder or destroy research. Another good use for beefed-up espionage.)
quote:
Whatever the case, the modern and near-future tech segments should be properly detailed, not the half-aased excuse that Civ3 has. |
I know it's fashionable around here, but I'm reluctant to cast stones at Civ 3's design. Having said that, I would agree that, in hindsight, the modern age seems somewhat flat. It almost seems a reaction against CTP-stype futurisms.
quote:
If I was actually good enough at Civ3 to spend a meaningful amount of time at the modern age, I'd be asking for my money back because that section was so badly designed. |
I thought the really good players never made it past industrial.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lajzar
|
|
Japan
Jun 2003
time: 14:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by okblacke
But how would you incorporate that into the game? Maybe if it were abstracted, like a wonder-style development that was, itself, a prerequisite to a space victory. You can't go to Alpha Centauri successfully until you've built a successful Mars colony.
At the same time the Mars colony wouldn't be managed or attackable or productive, it would just be, perhaps, the research base for your AC project. (Though I suppose there could be counter-measures that might hinder or destroy research. Another good use for beefed-up espionage.)
|
I'd make the Mars colony a small wonder. Or at least, costing as much as a wonder would. Every civ can build one, it is a prerequisite to the AC victory, possibly a prereq for certain techs if we go for a detailed tech model. I wouldn't make it add to productivity in any way though. And I'd have the science bonus it represents merely be that it allows certain techs to be researched at all.
Essentially, we have certain AC-related techs have a particular city structure as a prereq instead of the traditional techs as a prereq.
quote:
I know it's fashionable around here, but I'm reluctant to cast stones at Civ 3's design. Having said that, I would agree that, in hindsight, the modern age seems somewhat flat. It almost seems a reaction against CTP-stype futurisms.
|
Perhaps it is a reaction to CTP. But it went too far. Of teh modern tech trees, Civ 2 did it best. CTP probably could have done it better if their design team had been more interested in breadth instead of length. They certainly put enough resources into developing a tech tree to have pulled it off very well had they chosen to do it broad.
quote:
I thought the really good players never made it past industrial. |
That's because they kill off the comps fast. I find the comps kill me off fast. I could probably improve if I practice enough, but the overuse of 3D in Civ3 makes my non-3D-enhanced laptop computer go slow as toffee on a cold day.
Yeah, you can say get a desktop computer. But in my line of work, desktop computers are not practical - I move around too much. And laptops with 3D cards cost several small fortunes.
They should definitely make it possible to run Civ4 in a "graphically challenged" mode. That would mean no animations, and bitmap-based graphics for everything, basically civ2 level of graphics.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krum
|
|
Bulgaria
Oct 2001
time: 07:34
|
|
A Mars colony, I think it should be in, but not as a victory condition. Some kind of a SMAC-esque transcendence would be better. Or even better, a tunnel in space as inGreg Bear's Eon. You'd have to do the experiments at an asteroid in the belt, and the Marsian colony would be nessessary to get to the asteroids.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lajzar
|
|
Japan
Jun 2003
time: 14:34
|
|
Problem is, even there, Mars just isn't close enough to teh asteroids to be relevant. Guys, you all seem to forget one thing.
Space is BIG. I mean, it's really big. Using the best rocket technology we have, it would take a couple of years to reach the asteroid belt. Mars is useful as a stepping stone towards AC for two reasons:
- Proof of funtional life support habitats
- Proof of endurance rocket propulsion
But in terms of being a processing station for the asteroid belt, or a way station to reach an asteroid base, it is hopelessly out of position. Due to the different orbital periods, it is in fact particularly badly positioned if you want a halfway house to a specific asteroid within the belt.
Oh, there's another thing you guys forget. The asteroid belt is really really thin. If you were to sit in the middle of the asteroid belt, you wouldn't know it from the amount of asteroids there are. the total mass of teh asteroid belt is estimated at being about the same as the Earth, which would be equivalent to having a 1km diameter asteroid every few thousand km of belt. Star Wars had completely the wrong idea.
Plus, there is no evidence to suggest that there is anything special about the asteroids in either mineral content or in local physics. SF is good and entertaining, buts let's not allow our love of SF get in the way of known physical laws. If that Greg Bearian tunnel can be built in the asteroids, there is no particular reason why it couldn't be built on Mars, in Earth orbit, or even on the Earth itself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krum
|
|
Bulgaria
Oct 2001
time: 07:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lajzar
Oh, there's another thing you guys forget. The asteroid belt is really really thin. If you were to sit in the middle of the asteroid belt, you wouldn't know it from the amount of asteroids there are. the total mass of teh asteroid belt is estimated at being about the same as the Earth, which would be equivalent to having a 1km diameter asteroid every few thousand km of belt. Star Wars had completely the wrong idea. |
I know that very well, what does this have to do with my proposal?
quote:
Plus, there is no evidence to suggest that there is anything special about the asteroids in either mineral content or in local physics. SF is good and entertaining, buts let's not allow our love of SF get in the way of known physical laws. If that Greg Bearian tunnel can be built in the asteroids, there is no particular reason why it couldn't be built on Mars, in Earth orbit, or even on the Earth itself. |
Actually, there are two reasons to do it on an asteroid. Fisrt, it's far away enough if anything goes horribly wrong, and second, you don't want the Earth or Mars going to a paralel universe spontaneously. That would kinda suck, I think... Anyway, I think you're right about Mars being useless, of course I know that the orbital periods are way off, but still, you could just wait for the right moment. It the belt is a lot further away than Mars though...
Last edited by Krum on 25-03-2004 at 03:42
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krum
|
|
Bulgaria
Oct 2001
time: 07:34
|
|
* Krum slaps his forehead
Phobos and Deimos!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-03-2004 23:15
Mars colony anyone? Or have I said that too many times already 
) interfere with a good game ending.
|