 |
| |
|
|
monkspider
|
 |
banned
Aug 2001
time: 23:15
|
|
Allow me to quote a firaxis member for a moment; "There is, however, a new Great Wonder (Longevity) which provides a similar pop boom."
Longevity?
What is this trying to reflect? How is this a wonder?
This is such an abstract concept, it's difficult to try to visualize this as a great wonder.
Let's refer to Webster's dictionary on this one
lon·gev·i·ty (ln-jv-t, lôn-)
n. pl. lon·gev·i·ties
1. Long life; great duration of life: His longevity vexed his heirs.
Length or duration of life: comparing the longevities of the two peoples.
2. Long duration or continuance, as in an occupation: had unusual longevity in the company; her longevity as a star.
Interesting, but a wonder? Perhaps something else could have been used to reflect Longevity, but not simply the word Longevity itself. Maybe the rock of Gibraltor or something. I don't know, but you get the point.
At this point I am somewhat critical of this abstract concept being considered a wonder, it seems as hokey as the whole "rider" thing. IMHO
Last edited by monkspider on 26-09-2001 at 06:41
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dienstag
|
 |
Brea, CA, USA
Feb 2000
time: 05:15
|
|
I agree..."Longevity" does not have that classic Wonder of the World feel to it. I was hopeing they'd be getting away from arbitrary, intangible wonders like Women's Suffrage. I want a building or a monument in my city, not an icon.
Also, I can understand why no one else could build the pyramids in Civ II. It was inherently an Egyptian thing (with almost an exception in the New World, I know, but hey...) But can you imagine saying to your citizens "Sorry, the Portugese built Longevity, so you have to die now." That's just wrong.
In CivII the demographics included life expectancy, and maybe someone around here knows exactly what that was based on, and what effects it had. I don't. That would be interesting to find out...
OK, I agree with monkspider that "Longevity" would make a really hokey wonder. Anybody disagree?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
Edit: This post was misunderstood and I decided just to delete it altogether.
Last edited by Pembleton on 26-09-2001 at 08:18
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Harlan
|
|
Berkeley, CA, USA
Aug 2005
time: 21:15
|
|
I think its safe to assume that Longevity will be a small wonder, meaning any civ can build it. But still, this should be a technology, not a wonder, even a small one! Some techs in Civ2 gave specific advantages, like +1 naval movement with Nuclear Power, that's how this one should work as well. Same problem with another wonder officially mentioned, Battlefield Medicine. Both of these are technologies that are not tied to one city, as wonders are. Lets say you built these two wonders in Baltimore, and Baltimore is conquered. Everyone in your civ suddenly stops living as long? The medics on the battlefield suddenly stop knowing what to do? I think not.
I agree that if the name is changed to something more concrete, it would be easier to buy. Human Genome Project for example, could conceivably lead to longer life, and is easier to envision as exsisting in a certain city (though even that is a stretch these days).
Who knows, perhaps they'll outsmart us all and have two kinds of wonders, abstract, which though built by a certain city, does not exist in concrete form and can't be destroyed, and concrete. That doesn't fit with their less complexities the better approach, though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Harlan
I think its safe to assume that Longevity will be a small wonder, meaning any civ can build it. |
Soren Johnson said it was a Great Wonder.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
Sorry, I decided to delete this one as well.
Last edited by Pembleton on 26-09-2001 at 08:19
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970
time: 00:15
|
|
No, you said something about what you term overpopulation, which then resulted in perceived irony. In short, I don't think there's such a thing as "overpopulation". It's a big lie. But, again, this is an off topic discussion if I've ever seen one and I don't think I've flamed you in any respect.
edit: there wasn't misunderstanding, as far as I can tell. You hold a common view. I find it revolting and ill-conceived. That's all. Don't take it personally, 'cause I haven't.
As this wonder relates directly to Civ3, I would remind you that it is a macroeconomic concept that population x labor participation rate x hour units worked per person x productivity factor = output. This is probably abstracted (with slight modificactions) to population x productivity factor in Civ3, which isn't really nuanced, but seems to do the job satisfactorally. But the Civ3 construct puts even more stress on relative population structure versus your competitors than actually happens in real life.
Last edited by DanS on 26-09-2001 at 08:28
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DanS
No, you said something about what you term overpopulation, which then resulted in perceived irony. In short, I don't think there's such a thing as "overpopulation". It's a big lie. But, again, this is an off topic discussion if I've ever seen one and I don't think I've flamed you in any respect.
|
Off-topic. Um...I'm not sure why you're so concerned about this. I would consider piracy to be off-topic, but I have no objection to it being discussed here in this forum. If you mean off-topic as in not actually speaking of the thread's topic, I would say many threads go off tangent all the time.
But if you don't want to discuss it, that's fine with me.
One question which I'm really curious about though. Do you object to China's one child per family rule?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DanS
Economic growth = growth in hour units worked + growth in productivity per hour. |
Well I don't want to go into a full-blown discussion, but economics is a *social* science, not a physical one.
Your equation seems to imply that there is some immutable concept such as growth that can always be mathematically calculated and not dependent on psychological or unquantifiable concepts.
Anyway, I have no desire to continue this debate. As if right now, I'm going to bed.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Rhysie
|
 |
England
Jul 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DanS
Rhysie: doesn't really relate to any health service, considering that universal health insurance or a social health service might add a couple of years to a life. Tops. Interestingly, if you add, say, 40 years to the prime of life, the cost of universal health insurance or a social health service would be more easily borne by the larger population. |
I agree that an NHS wonder wouldn't fit the idea of massive population growth perfectly, but I think its the closest real world (i.e. not near future, but now) thing which matches the concept of a longevity wonder. It's also something which wouldn't be 'shared' with other civilizations (A cure for cancer would either be shared with, or also discovered by, other civilizations, meaning that it wouldn't just affect yours, an NHS system, as seen in the real world, doesn't automatically get set up in other countries after a few years.)
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999
time: 00:15
|
|
the longevity wonder sounds like it would work in the same way as the cloning vats did in SMAC, once you built the CV in SMAC, then every city with a +2 food surplus would experiance a population boom (the city would grow in size); it was a midgame wonder in SMAC and very powerful, against the AI once you built the CV it was virtually impossible to lose
if longevity works in the same way, but comes later in the tech tree, it might not be so overwhelming...hopefully firaxis can clarify its effect and tech requirment
EDIT:
DanS, it seems like to me that the current methods of extending lifespan might not contribute as much to economic growth as your formula would indicate...for one thing i would say that for the most part 70 year old workers aren't as productive as 25 year old workers, so although the total units are going up the productivity is going down
another thing it seems like the best way to boost worker productivity is by providing the workers with better tools and methods of performing a task, so capital expenditures and education have a huge impact on productivity
a larger but less productive workforce might not experiance any economic growth at all, or could even experiance negative economic growth
so the longevity wonder has little in common with population booms...they should get rid the longevity wonder, and make the statue of liberty create pop booms (an abstract of massive immigration) which would be historically accurate
Last edited by korn469 on 26-09-2001 at 17:27
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-09-2001 06:13
). However, that's a question for off-topic.
) in parts of the world why population is bad. But the concern is way overblown and misplaced. Economic growth = growth in hour units worked + growth in productivity per hour. While Civ3 isn't a model, per se, it does reflect, in part, this reality.
|