 |
|
Plotinus
|
|
I've never liked the current system. I've toyed with the idea of distinguishing between "construction Wonders" and perhaps "cultural Wonders" or "scientific Wonders", which are produced in different ways, but I'm not sure how it would work. Perhaps you could somehow "trade in" culture or science points of a particular city for a Wonder - that is, say that any points generated there go into building a Wonder instead of improving your culture or research? Maybe. There's certainly scope here for some imaginative ideas, I'm sure. But I absolutely agree that something ought to be done about this.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LzPrst
|
 |
Mars Colony
Apr 2001
time: 05:34
|
|
Ok, example. I want the sistine chapel. In order to build it I must first have a cathedral in the city, the city must be of a certain size, there must be at least 1 artist (see artist thread) or entertainer if no artists in civ4, the city must have a certain cultural rating, the cathedral itself must have a certain cultural rating, and finally some reconstruction would be necessary warranting production points. Does this seem ok?
Same with leonardos workshop, scientist needed, a certain extra amount of gold must be spent every round while building it, no production required for building it, just time. and maybe some other factors.
Pyramids, go production! maybe a small cultural requirement?
Colossus, at least so much trade generated, must have a harbor (maybe), must be coastal city (also maybe), production required. tech: trade and bronze working (provided that trade will be a tech).
etc etc... smells better now?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LzPrst
|
|
Mars Colony
Apr 2001
time: 05:34
|
|
cities dont specialize, but civs do, or can. national priorities will decide how much and what your cities will produce. for example, the mongols decide not to be big on science and channel their efforts into building lots of horsemen, while the greeks decide to stay defensive and peaceful and be big on tech. the individual cities would then be non-specialized in relation to each other but would be considered specialized in production/military or science/technology compared to other civs that dont have the same priorities.
 What if we eliminated "production" as we know it. instead you allocate production in each city like you do the tax/science/luxury rating nationally. that way a city with many people and lots of trade would have potential for greater production, but could decide to make cash or science instead. terrain modifications such as mines would increase the max production capacity and give extra "free" production.
it makes sense, sort of, you pay your people to work with this or that and they do. in order to train soldiers or build improvements you dont need a mine in the mountains you need people to make the weapons and construct the buildings, and fill them.
theres a lot of things i'd like to see implemented as well, like soldiers in the field being like the workers, they require population points to build, however, I'd like to eliminate population points as it is now. the game should keep track of population "levels" and not show them, instead you'd be shown the number of people in the city. then you could implement the "recruit from population" idea. for example: In the city you would have different population numbers like "Total Population", "Available Population" (recruitable) and finally "Active Population" (the workers and producers)
example: you're building a spearman, when construction of the spearman starts 1,000 people would be removed from the "available" and "active" population categories, and would be considered "in training". they'd still be considered part of the total population as long as they remain within the city, but not part of the "Active" or "Available" population. as long as they were in the city they'd be fairly cheap to maintain but if you sendt the troops out of the city, they'd cost more. if you sendt them to another city they'd be part of the "Total" population there and would again be cheaper to maintain. this way war would be expensive (as it should be) but keeping a reasonable military wouldnt bleed you dry. of course if the troops took over an enemy city they'd still be considered in the "field" as they have to actively keep order and maintain security.
where does this rant belong?
Last edited by LzPrst on 27-03-2004 at 22:40
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Richard I
|
|
Oslo, Norway
Jul 2002
time: 06:34
|
|
I'm sick and tired of the whole consept of competing to be the first civilisation to complete a wonder. I would like ALL wonders to be small wonders, so that you can build every wonder when it suits you. This would be more realistic since there ARE in fact lots of pyramides, great walls, oracle-temples, great palaces etc. in the world. Some wonders have to be renamed, though. Hoover Dam would become Great Dam, Shakespeare Theatre - National Theatre, and so on. I would also like to see the effects of wonders changed. You shouldn't be granted free Granaries, Barracks etc., but perhaps be granted free maintenance of certain buildings in stead. If you build a great temple with oracle(s), your peoples faith will become stronger, resulting in generous gifts to the temples in your cities, wich will again pay for every temples maintenance. What do you think?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lajzar
|
|
Japan
Jun 2003
time: 14:34
|
|
One thing I don't like about wonders is wonders that grant free buildings. Instant construction doesn't sit right with me. And suggestions that this be replaced by free maintenance is simply unbalancing. Let's say you'd have a library for 400 turns of game time. That's free construction (80 shields) vs free maintenance (400 gold). Spread that over an empire, and it quickly becomes ridiculous.
As for multiple wonders of teh same kind, no thanks. However, I see nothing wrong with having a "Theban Pyramid", a "Mound Builders' Pyramid" and so on, as long as each had a slightly different effect.
Multiple wonders, coupled with boolean techs, could be an interesting idea.
One of the early techs would be to choose your cultural path. If you choose to research "Meso-American Philosophy", eventually, you'll have access to Blood Cult governments and one set of wonders, but certain ancient European and Far East wonders will be locked out, and vice versa if you choose "Far Eastern Philosophy" or "xxx Philosophy". Boolean tech trees can really make the game more interesting if properly developed. Which tech you choose might also affect the graphics for your people in city view.
I want a tech tree that cannot be maxed out because the rules won't allow it.
I'd suggest that having the relevant wonder would make construction costs trivial. Perhaps having a great wall wonder would make city walls cost 1/10 the normal cost to build. Any structures built this way should also have their sale value reduced to avoid a build and sell loophole.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Plotinus
|
|
Exclusive tech tree should be the way to go. I have said before that each of the cultural groupings of civs should have its own tech tree - with a lot of overlap, to be sure - which could mean different units, buildings, even Wonders for each grouping in addition to those that are kept in common.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proserpine
|
 |
London, UK
May 2002
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lajzar
But in real life, cities don't specialise. Certainly not to the extent that any sensible player would if that was made into a useful strategic element of the game.
Anyway, I think the max number of wonders per city coupled with the enforced no wonder buildings period in a city after finishing a wonder would go a long way towards ending wonder clustering. |
Oh, but they do specialise. Think of Oxford (England) - University (i.e. Science), Cambridge - University and IT, and all the great "trading" cities (e.g. Hamburg, Venice, Amsterdam). Rome was almost entirely administrative (capital) by the end of the Punic Wars. For americans, Chicago is a classic trade city. Carthage, and especially Sparta were almost entirely devoted to the production of military units. Alexandria and whatever Mexico City was called before the Spanish (Tenochtitlan?) could be regarded as principally cultural in nature.
Oxford and Cambridge have been "science" cities for about 800 years.
There are big cities which have specialised very narrowly, e.g. Wool production (Norwich), cloth (Bruges) and so on.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proserpine
|
|
London, UK
May 2002
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lajzar
One thing I don't like about wonders is wonders that grant free buildings. Instant construction doesn't sit right with me. And suggestions that this be replaced by free maintenance is simply unbalancing. Let's say you'd have a library for 400 turns of game time. That's free construction (80 shields) vs free maintenance (400 gold). Spread that over an empire, and it quickly becomes ridiculous.
As for multiple wonders of teh same kind, no thanks. However, I see nothing wrong with having a "Theban Pyramid", a "Mound Builders' Pyramid" and so on, as long as each had a slightly different effect.
Multiple wonders, coupled with boolean techs, could be an interesting idea.
One of the early techs would be to choose your cultural path. If you choose to research "Meso-American Philosophy", eventually, you'll have access to Blood Cult governments and one set of wonders, but certain ancient European and Far East wonders will be locked out, and vice versa if you choose "Far Eastern Philosophy" or "xxx Philosophy". Boolean tech trees can really make the game more interesting if properly developed. Which tech you choose might also affect the graphics for your people in city view.
I want a tech tree that cannot be maxed out because the rules won't allow it.
I'd suggest that having the relevant wonder would make construction costs trivial. Perhaps having a great wall wonder would make city walls cost 1/10 the normal cost to build. Any structures built this way should also have their sale value reduced to avoid a build and sell loophole. |
Don't we more or less have this in C3C?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CiverDan
|
|
I think the concept here is to Get wonders of the world by doing other things then building them in cities. A Few Examples: Should be considered, esp for wonders that are not phyical buidlings
Magellan's Expedition: Be the First to Circumnavigate the globe
Sun Tzu: Generate X elite units. Why are we building a Book?
Here is another idea. Make some wonders require Reseach, not shields. The Following wonders include
Seti Program
Leonardos Workshop
Theory of Evolution
Longevity
Manhatten Project
Cure for Cancer
Newton's University
Copernicus
Manhatten Project, Apollo, The Internet (sm. wonder) could require both shields and beakers
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Margim
|
|
Mah, I'm going to defend wonders as they are. They aren't necessarily fully realistic, but I think in their present state they are part of the flavour that makes Civ a fun game.
Their effects aren't necessarily realistic, but they do add challenges and effects to the game that make them unique and attractive to get. They don't need to be realistic - as long as they don't get disproportianately powerful. I think the game keeps them fairly well balanced as is.
However, one thing I think might make it interesting in so far as a number of cities contributing to wonder production would be a 'divert' function that allows a city to send its shields directly (with a small percentage carved off) to a wonder building city that is connected via trade route. It'd be a decent compromise, I think.
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2004 08:09
) the manhattan project should be based on science production, the colossus would have to be built in a city that had a high trade income, and certain cultural wonders would be based on the city's culture rating. 
|