 |
|
shmily_dana
|
|
Tucson,AZ USA
Aug 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
I would change the concept that if you ar a democracy and you go to war, then your population will be unhappy. I would add the following conditions.
If you START the war, then the people would be unhappy.
If you are attacked, the people will most likely support the counter-attack.
If you don't counter-attack, the people might get unhappy.
If an ally is attacked, your people may demand war against the aggressor.
If an ally attacks and the asks for help, the people may or may not support the war.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Glostakarov
|
|
York, Yorkshire, England
Feb 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
Customizability. Is that a word? In essence, as much of the game as possible should be able to be toggled on or off, irrespective of difficulty level. This should apply both to normal games and the scenerio editor.
For example, suppose I don't feel like playing with regional politics, or trade, or whatever, I can just switch it off when I create the game. For scenerios, the toggle would be stored with the map as either on, off, or user selectable. An example I saw in another thread was a scenerio where the Earth was being invaded; because the people of Earth would band together they wouldn't want internal politics for that game. In such a case the person building the scenerio could simply switch off that option, so that it isn't used in the game.
Another part of being able to heavily customize/mod a game is the introduction of new units and modify the tech tree. Snazzy, high-res graphics and animated units are very nice, but they make it harder for fans to create their own units. You could include a lot of units in the editor that are not actually used for anything in the game, so we could pick them out and assign them whatever stats we see fit for use in our scenerios. However, a better idea would probably be to create the unit animations in a format that is relatively easy for end users to reproduce. It's still going to take a pretty knowledgeable person to go out and do it, but if the software is easy to plug such animations into, it will happen.
To answer the question in advance, the more that we can do to modify/enhance/enjoy the game, the more replayability it will have. Having more customization options keeps each game from being fundamentally the same as the last.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
Hi all
I would like to see more intercivilization components of the game. That is the weakness that the long empires and ics exploit, that control of your own civ is too easy. I would suggest greatly complicate the interior model with a much more elaborate governing system and citizen system. Where you are not garunteed of the control of your citizens and it is hard to keep it. This idea would provide a whole new range of choices and strategi options (including affecting foreign populations) for the Napolean in all of us.
Also I would like to say that while this is a good idea it is tooo late probably and should not be sent with mandate and maybe should not invlude grand ideas like the one I just mentioneed.
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
S. Kroeze
|
 |
the Hague, the Netherlands, Old Europe
Dec 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
DOMESTIC POLITICS: give the people a WILL OF THEIR OWN
(I know this idea is allied to the CIVilians of Doberman and Jon Millers Intercivilization Components; yet I'll expound my view)
In CivII the people are only a passive element in the game, easy to control and almost 100% predictable. They'll never revolt when -like I do each turn- you meticulously control the factors influencing their behaviour. The only influence they ever exert is on foreign policy.
So domestic politics actually don't exist. Apart from SE I would like to introduce the possibility of spontaneous revolutions, coup d'etats, civil wars, feudal risings, secessions, peasant revolts, colonies declaring independence, famine and tax riots. Most governments spent most of their time just trying to stay in power!
I would like to introduce different levels of political control, like interest, influence, protectorates and actual annexation. And to control a region you would always need the support of the local elite, sometimes priests or the aristocracy, sometimes moneyed interests or local party officials. This would also create the possibility of interfering in the politics of an other great power by supporting the local opposition.
Finally the people should have its own character and loyalty to a religion or civilization, which wil not change easily. So factors like militarism, religiousness and conservative/experimental should be introduced.
GIVE THE PEOPLE A WIIL OF THEIR OWN!!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Napoleon I
|
|
Los Angeles
Feb 2000
time: 21:14
|
|
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this idea before and if you have, I'm sorry.
How about having different levels of cities, say a village, a town, a city, and a megapolis. These levels would have progressively greater radii so that they could gather more resources, and the improvements that one can build would also be dependent on the type of city. For example, cathedrals would only be built in a town or above, while superhighways could only exist in a megapolis.
Furthermore, the cities would change status as they grow in population, so that any city below size three is a village, city under size seven is a town and so forth.
I realize that this would cause a problem in the modern times, but I think that a solution can exist. For example a city founded by an engineer instead of a settler could begin at size three or four and immediately achieve the status of a city. Meanwhile, the engineer would also be more expensive to build than a settler.
------------------
Napoleon I
|
|
| |
|
|
|
EdN
|
|
tampa,fl
Feb 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
Disease has changed the course of civilization far more any all the armies that have ever marched. 60% of the casualties in WW1 were from disease not guns. The Native Americans weren't eliminated by european armies but a tiny organism called small pox. Gengis Kahn and Alexander the Great died at the peak of their power - not by war but by disease. With the exception of a single WOW, Civ has always ignored disease.
Here's my proposal:
General disease:
General disease could have an effect similar to corruption. Medicine men/Doctors can reduce the affects (similar to elvii). The amount of disease increases drastically with an increase in population (similar to pollution). Disease levels increase with each unit of food shortage. War increases disease in all cities. Each level of disease increases the chance of Plague.
Plague:
Replace the silly barbarians (OK, some people may like em - I don't) with plague. Plague would randomly strike a city based on its disease level. Plague could spread by road or rail or if a unit is present in a city radius during an outbreak travels to another city. (Could be used as a hidden attack?) Plague reduces the population, suspends production and inflicts damage (without modifiers) to all units within the city radius. As the population decreases the chances of the plague ending increases.
Research:
Herbs & Potions
Domestication (Cats keep disease caring rodents in check.)
Plumbing (Finally a good use for the mysterious Plumbing!)
Alchemy
Modern Medicine
Drugs
Improvements:
Quarantine Zone
Hospital
Units: (battlefield versions of the Barracks)
Red Cross
Mash
Floating Hospital
WOWs
Hypothecatic Oath
Penicillin
CDC (Center for Disease Control)
Cure for Cancer
Well you get the Idea. I'm not a Civ Guru so excuse any misuse of the lingo.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Civ_Lover1701
|
|
How about realistic effects of latittude and elevation on food production(extremes of tempurature, growing season, ect.), population and such?
-near the poles is pretty unlivible
-near the equator is slightly harsh-heat, sun, rain(floods more likely maybe)
-high elevation has low pressure, cold,etc
At the very least there should be areas where you just cant build or gather resources from(You can't put New York on Mt Everest!!!)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Civ_Lover1701
|
|
How about realistic effects of latittude and elevation on food production(extremes of tempurature, growing season, ect.), population and such?
-near the poles is pretty unlivible
-near the equator is slightly harsh-heat, sun, rain(floods more likely maybe)
-high elevation has low pressure, cold,etc
At the very least there should be areas where you just cant build or gather resources from(You can't put New York on Mt Everest!!!)
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-02-2000 01:44
|