 |
| |
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
This is an offshoot of the population thread- I have always thought of population as the most important apect of any empire game-sadly in civ population has never been central-important yes, but not central. The following is a proposal on how to handle population. Now, since I view this as so critical, this treatise, meant to stimulate some debate, will touch most apsects of the game as well-whgile I would love for the designers of Civ4 to take some of these ideas, any other empire builder game would be fine. I also make use of ideas from colonization, Europa Universalis, Masters of Orion 2 and other strategy games I think have done great work.
what is it?: Population would be measured by equal increments of 1000 people, called People Points of PP here. Almost every action requires the use of one or more PP's. The greater the population, the more you can do.
Barbarians and neutrals
Population would be broken into 2 types, nationals and neutrals. The notion of nationality and culture remains-and like C3C, a neutral or barbarian nationality is created. The difference is that these neutral peoples get to create cities or farm fields-obviously only active civs carry out imperial expansion and diplomacy. You could trade with neutrals, incorporate them culturally or by conquest. These populations are also the source of barbarians. They conduct no independent technologicl research, but they do gain by osmosis large sections of tech from their neighbors-this means barbarians remain a threat for much of the game.
how does it grow? Like I said in the other thread, PP increase based on real world growth formulas-the factors are fertility, mortality rates(disease), immigration rates . Food would simply determine the cealing population can reach safely.
Population and agriculture:
You would have to assign PP's to agriculture to gain food and resources like you do currently. Unlike now, you could have multiple PP's on any one square if you want more production out of any square. Another change-on any field, production is broken down into 2 cateogris-subsistance and surplus. Like before, you need a certain amount of food to feed one PP- in the game that food you need to feed that population in the square stays there-if there is any surplus, it goes to the nearest city-though the further the field is from a city, the more is lost as waste.
Cities:
Cities remain the administrative, economic, commercial, cultural, and military centers of your empire. BUt their definition changes. In civ cities are the home of all the population essentially. Not here. A city controls 2 types of population- farmers in the area of control, and actual city inhabitants. Now, city inhabitants are of one type-not farmers. A city is 3 or more PP's in one square carrying out non-agricultural actions (mining, forestry included in agriculture for shorthand). These PP's can be carrying out amdinistrative work, research, production of artisan goods, weapons, ships, whatever, except agriculture. They are fully supported by the surplus of nearby farmers.
This non-farming population can also be used to make units, do terrain improvements, staff buildings, whatever.
New Cities:
New cities can be created then in 2 ways:
within your territory of control, you can always just place 3 PPs in a square and assign them non-agricultural tasks-and you will be asked if you want to make a new city. A new city extends your field of control.
Now, your capital city and palance extend a very large area of control-the asumption being if you have gotten to the point you have a palace, you control a fair area. To expand it any further you need cities. Now, new cities extend yoour control marginally. You would need to create culture to expand even further. Now, territory outside of the area of control of a city but within your territory can still have PP on it, but it will only feed itself, surplus is wasted.
You could also settle a new city ouside your borders, or within them but outside an area of control by creating a settler unit- with 10 PP's (you need a few farmers as well). This make settling new far of lands possible but expensive. And slow incremental growth much cheaper.
PP's and imporvements
PP affects city buildings in three ways. One, cities need a minimum size to be able to house anyone building. Currently a city 1 could have a factory or commercial dock-not likely in real life. Second, most buildings will need a certain number of minimum PP's to staff. Now, some don;t need PP's because the asusmption is that far far less than 1000 people would staff it. Without people, while you still have to pay to maintain, you do not get the benefits from the building. You could of course stop maintaining, and after a few turns the building is lost. Or you could sell it off.
Finally, you will need to assign people to build a building. Speeding construction is done 2 ways-increase the laborforce, or create positive or negative incentives to work faster (pay more, crack the whip), with consequences.
PP's and Units
PP's deal with units in 2 ways as well. You need PP's to staff any one unit-so one PP will be used minimum per unit. You can always at greater cost assign multiple PP's (bigger regiments)-this does not change A/D values or Firepower values. It does increase hitpoints and mobility (2 PP's twice the HP of 1 PP and so forth). This does not apply to ships,planes or other war machines- HP's are based on what kind they are-they have uniform staffing needs. You then need PP's to create the equipment for the unit-these are the shield cost of units. Certain units like Caravans, Settlers, or workcrews are cheap in resources but expensive in people. There are still no spy units.
PP's and terrain improvements:
Any terrain improvement needs to have PP's assgined to creating it. Again, more PP's, it goes faster. Tough tech levels do affect the speed as well. Now, like with City foundings, you get 2 ways of doing this.
Within urban areas of control, you can assign surplus PP's to make the improvement from the city window. You can also create a laborer (workcrew) unit to make imporvements outside areas of control or even within.
Culture:
Neutral populations, either in cities or farming squares independently can be absorbed to your civ by cultural persuasion. This is not possible for other empires.
Tech: PP's affect techs in terms of how many are assgined to research tasks, or tasks that help commerce. Tech changes how fast population grows, the maximum size of units, the productivity of actions, affects the staffing needs of buildings, and the minimum PP requirements.
War:
War has huge effects on population, and population on war: all units have the ability to retreat form combat-but once a unit is destroyed, that popualtion is lost. Now, armies have the ability to rampage throught the territory. Any army, friendly or enemy will suck up the surplus of any square and also eat into the basic needs of the square. This way it can starve populations. You can also on purpose kill the people on a square. You can also besiege a city, which means cutting of the incoming food surplus. The city is left to life off stores. Units also suffer from attrition through time if not in a friendly city. If you take a city, you can raze it, or kill a specific number as part of a campaign of terror.
PP's are killed through bombardment.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tripledoc
|
|
Would it be possible according to this model to have a 'civilization'´with no urban centres?
For instance you say that a city is defined by having 3 pp working a single square. This city I gather does not produce food, but is dependant on food imported to it.
What if you choose to have only 1 or 2 pp working each square only for agricultural or pastoral purposes.
For instance you start with 1 pp which grows exponentially. 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and so on. At the time when you reach 8, three pp form a city. Then of the remaining 5, three of them are designated to feed the city. I see that you say that the city initially is selfsufficient, but how is that? Anyway that leaves 2 pp for agriculture and they then start growing exponentially again.
Anyway if the city grow beyond 3, then I presume that they need agricultural workers to support them. This would also inhibit growth.
Knowing this would it simply not be better to simply not form cities because this would allow much quicker growth.
I presume that only a city can create military units, which can inhibit growth of other civs. But at the same time creating one military unit also subtracts from the enemy population at a rate of one.
Without going into a a deeper mathamatical evaluation (maybe someone else can do that), intuitively it would seem that focusing on pure agriculture would mean an expansion at such a rapid exponential growth that enemy military incursion would only be a minor nuisance.
Also the enemy would have no cities to lay waste.
Also why would you need cities to create combat units?
In a pastoral economy, cattle herding for instance, you need 1)riders who can herd and thus they gain tactical understanding of controlling large entities of organisms and understanding of various terrain, and 2) develop means of protecting these herds from predators which would require the use of the bow or spear.
It would not be difficult for such herders to use their skill on human combatants.
Last edited by Tripledoc on 29-05-2004 at 19:32
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
To your worries:
Without cities your territory can not expand beyond what you begin with, since you need specialized individuals to create culture and they need to be centered somewhere, You would also fall behind in technology rapidly, as you do not advance on your own but simply by osmosis of techs from neighbors. without an administration you would not be able to trade. You can tought still form units, but armed with basic tools
You also ignore growth is not exponential since we have a high death rate to keep growth pretty constant unless you can create a much bigger pool of food to have a better total.
So there are many reasons why you would want to make a city.
That being said, the type of society you describe was what was true for many plains peoples throughout history- the behavior you describe would be akin to say the Mongols, no? IN theory then, yes, you could wait and mamage a people of agirculturalists without city centers for a while, but to win the game you need cities, so at some point you can get your men and ride of to conquer.
Also remember what I said about armies-it does not matter if you have no cities to raze-as enemy armies go through your territory they eat the terrain up, and armies to have the option to kill everyone on a square. It would be difficult for them and long, yes, like in reality, but if they are from a cvilized state growing in wealth, numbers and resources they will beat you.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Max Sinister
|
|
I've got two questions:
Why does the mobility of units increase if they're bigger? 10,000 tanks can't
go faster than a single one...
Why can't you found cities in territory that noone owns? IMO it should be possible to found a new city in neutral territory always, and in enemy territory if there's a unit that guards the new city. Peter the Great founded St. Petersburg on territory that was Swedish at that time (but his armies had conquered it)
Otherwise, your post is very interesting!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Max Sinister
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
First, sorry for the misunderstanding-larger units are penalized-they are less mobile than smaller ones. This is becuase it is harder to coordinate the movements of bigger units. |
Yes, of course, that makes sense. But is the difference significant for gameplay? A single tank has movement 3 - how much does a tank army have, then?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-05-2004 20:26
, one of the best seen so far , simple and yet complicated , great ideas Gepap 
|