 |
|
Matthevv
|
|
Crawley, W.Sussex, England
Mar 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Seconded.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
EnochF
|
 |
Seattle, WA
Jan 1970
time: 21:14
|
|
During the late game, perfectionists like me want to colonize the entire world, which means building engineers, building tiny cities, then building small improvement after small improvement... on a given turn, nearly fifty things could be built... mind you, it's kind of nice to hear the people cheer fifty times, but it's also distracting. In all the confusion, it's easy to lose track of where a particular engineer is going, or where a particular military conflict is going on.
To help ease gameplay in the late game, combining cities into regions would cut down on the amount of management is required on each turn.
Now, what's a region? Well... the way I see it is a region is a number of squares "claimed" by a player, the shape of which is also up to the player. The squares must be within one's own borders. I also assume that each region should at a minimum be able to contain three whole city radii. Once one has colonized a region, the region acts essentially as a city. Citizens can be placed on any of the squares inside the region, and tile improvements can also be built on them. "City improvements" are then built within the region, as region-wide improvements.
The problem is how to manage the transition from cities, in the early to mid-game, into regions. I figure when one reaches a level of government higher than Republic (either democracy or communism or what have you), one should be given the opportunity to form one's cities into regions. At that point, the player will go through one single fairly complex turn, designating his regions, dividing his empire. The region will take its name from the largest city within its area (which will be its "capitol" city).
Another bonus: As long as one's military units are within a region's borders, there will be no unhappiness.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Matthevv
|
|
Crawley, W.Sussex, England
Mar 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
I think you should only be able to combine cities into a region if the communications (e.g. travelling time) between them is below a threshold level. Otherwise it would be possible to supply a city that is on the opposite side of a mountain range, without having to build roads/rails to it, just by including it in a region.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Glostakarov
|
|
York, Yorkshire, England
Feb 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
Something I read brought up a real interesting idea. Historically, vast tracts of land were often claimed long before anyone got around to seriously settling the area. Now admittedly, in many cases there were already idigenous people there, but the first claimers were the first to have the opportunity to kick them out. This would be a neat thing to incorporate.
Now that I'm brainstorming, a way to add indigenous, nomadic populations would be cool too. Center them around slow moving camps, sort of like cities with no improvements but occasional unit production. That would add a whole different feel to expansion in these areas.
Heh, I realize I'm way off topic, but the other idea this sparked is closer. Another thing that has been done historically has been the buying and selling of territories (cities included) between countries. This would be an interesting additon to the game, and a way to expand non-violently. You could build up a powerful economy, then buy territory/cities from other civs. Obviously they'd have to be pretty happy with you, and strapped for cash, unless you were strongarming them into the deal. That would add a bit more depth to the diplomacy system, and I'll stop rambling now. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Einherjar
|
|
Edgware, Middlesex, England
Mar 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
Regions are a very good idea. To determine a region, I would suggest two main criteria.
1) Overall level of corruption in civ at time. Corruption could be reduced by designating a region around a regional capital. effective size of regions would vary under different Govt's.
2) Geography. Areas which seperated by Mountains, Deserts or which are overseas colonies, could be regionalised as per above.
These ideas could be enhanced much further subject to other new features which Civ3 may ultimately contain. Culture, ethnicity faith ect. could have a part if distinct racial characteristics were incorporated in to the game, ie MOOII.
Comments?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ECHELON_VIRUS
|
|
I fully agree with the idea of regional boundaries. This should make things easier for the player in some ways as well as more interesting in other ways.
One thing I would like to see in Civillization 3 developed is something like a loyalty bar similar to a health bar for units and cities. E.g. The lower the loyalty bar, the more likely the unit is likely to desert, the less control the player or AI has over that unit (the unit can do unpredictable things that a player does not want it to do), which could also mean less money is needed to bribe that unit.
For cities, it simply means that low loyalty is more likely to cause rebellion and problems for the player such as not building the right unit or structure that the player requests, pulls out military units supported by that city or region from a war (which can be disastrous in a military campaign) or doing any number of things behind a player's back such as acting as spies for an enemy civillization. The old unrest or civil disorder concept in Civillization 2 could act as a warning to the player.
This could lead to interesting development within that civillization or empire such as certain regions or cities becoming more autonomous or independent of central control (federal control). Take a look at Russia, for instance. The regions have different degrees of autonomy or federal control imposed on them. Chechnya is rebelling most of the time and is a major drain of manpower and resources for the central government. Successful secession could lead to independence for the region and possibly the total collapse of the government or empire.
Therefore, it would be easier for the player to govern certain regions compared to other regions in the same empire. Internal diplomacy or domestic affairs would become more interesting within the empire. Tax rate can also be different in all the different regions. Some regions would have democracy (can be a communist democracy) while other regions could have dictatorship (e.g. capitalist dictatorship) imposed on them (these regions would also be most of the time rebelling against federal control). This should also act as a measure to limit an empire from constant expansion through conquest.
Other interesting developments: This would allow the player to be able to interact with all the different representives from all the different regions. The larger the empire, the more representatives it should have (unless the player doesn't want to know what is going on in his own backyard.....or just wants to deal with foreign policy). This should also allow something like rival factions to develop within the government (something that I find to be missing from Civillization 2). Different factions coming to power can also mean relocation of the capital city and vice versa.
Representatives:
Monarchy Style : Barons, Nobles
Democracy Style : Members of Parliament, Upper House, Senate, Congress,
Independent states can also combine to form a new nation with loose federal control for whatever reasons (such as facing external threats) and break up again after the threat is over. The whole idea of regional boundaries is going to be interesting here.
Outdated wonders should also act as extra income generators or source of happiness.
Last request: Please allow the Civ 2 scenarios or saved games to be played, upgraded or changed in Civ 3.
I hope this helps......
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-02-2000 13:35
|