 |
| |
|
|
|
TERRAIN MODEL FOR CIVILIZATION III - ANDZ83, VERSION 1.0
1. INTRODUCTION
OK, now this is my first post in the Civ3 General forum after ages of not posting here...
I think this topic has been discussed several times, but I can't find a thread in our thread list about it nor is there an active topic on this issue on page 1 
2. THE HISTORY OF A GAMEPLAY FEATURE
For a start I want to show you my general thoughts on the issue. The terrain model we could find in Sid Meier's Civilization by MPS was a very badic one. We had plains, grasslands, forests, deserts etc, and even a whole terrain type called river. In those days this model was quite satisfying as Civ was the first game to actually deal with such matters. Correct me if I'm wrong here. Now in Civ2 we had two major improvements concerning the terrains directly: Rivers became a property of a map tile and were no longer a terrain type, and there were finally two instead of one special ressource goods possible for each terrain, the grassland terrain not counted (tell me, why is this terrain type not treated like a standard terrain type :confused . Another very nice improvement in Civ2 was the customisability of the game via editing the *.txt files, but that affected the terrain model only indirectly.
But between those two games there was another great MPS hit - Colonization. In this great game ( ) there were two types of rivers, different types of ocean squares and finally a certain amount of different basic terrain types, as well as an additional type of forest for each basic terrain. Now this idea was relly great and I do think we shouldn't forget it too fast.
I don't intend to talk about Civilization: Call to Power by Activision here, as this game is just a piece of crap and, in fact, still dealt with standard terrain type as in Civ2. But there was another successor of Civilization II - and that was Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri by Firaxis. This game was the first Civ-related game with improved unit and government models, and here we coudl find some innovations in terrain models too: it was the firts time that the height of a terrain square did actually make a contribution to the gameplay. And after all we learned one thing - we can create as many different types as we want - flexibility and customisability are the only things that will stand forever! Let's say BAH! to static units, government types... and terrain types!
...
3. "NOW WHAT IS THAT GUY ON ABOUT?" - THE ACTUAL TERRAIN MODEL IDEA
...So my conclusion is: We don't need static numbers, values or even names for the different terrains! We need properties, characteristics to make all squares of a map be different terrains! And you know, there's no place on earth that has the same characteristics as any other !
The core idea is the following: There are several characteristics to be set for each single terrain tile of a map (Memory  ), and the combination of different settings will then affect the productivity, the trade possibilites (no trade arrow production without real trade done!), food production or even the possibilities for a defending army to gain advantages of the terrain - what we call "defense bonus" since CIV!!!
I already collected some of those characteristics. For each ground square there should be a figure for:
Height (in m/ft)
Structure (plateau/unregular)
Humidity (in levels)
Soil Type (rocky, desert, etc.)
Intensity of Vegetation (in levels)
Type of Vegetation (grassland/savannah/forests etc.)
Zoological Population (in levels) (?)
For sea squares there are of course other characteristics to be considered:
Depth (of the water, in m/ft))
Seaground: soil type and structure (later game, don't make too much sense in ancient era  )
Vegetation strength/type
Zool. Population strength/type (Whale/Fish etc. you know )
For ground and sea squares yet another important property: Resources. Is there coal to be found? Iron ore, gold, gems? If yes, how much of those resources can be found and consumed?
Agricultural aspects like the quality and quantity of wheat or crops in general can be grown there, are calculated of humidity, soil, height etc. Also, out of those figures, the resource production capability is calculated, although I do think that there should be a possibility to force the production values for scenarios.
There was also CLIMATE mentioned in threads before, but I think this should just be affected by geographical circumstances and not just written as a number into any rules.txt
So some of you might now say: hey, so we have to keep even more numbers in mind ! That's wrong however, as you just have to look at the tile/move the cursor there and then read the terrain name, just like "Fertile Hills" and then can figure out the appr. production of that tile... More information you can then get by reading the terrain informations more careful, and that's about it!
4. FINAL DESTINATION...
OK, I hope I won't be bombarded with links to older threads like this now
However, any comments, ideas and proposals welcomed! Just don't insult me, that's the only rule!
oh, and of course: no spam! 
edit1: silly me, had to fix UBB code... 
edit2: fixed more UBB... some people wanted to have it even easier to read...
[This message has been edited by Andz83 (edited November 09, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
oh, this must be the most intellectual post I ever made on these forums...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
 |
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:12
|
|
quote:
come on fellows... a bit more appreciation towards this thread, please. goddamn, why doesn't anyone ever reply to my threads?
|
Sorry Andz, I didn't replayed because I think is a bit too complex model.
I need to understand terrain type with a glance to the main map, not crawling here and there with my mouse pointer.
Part of the model can be interesting just during map generation, if it can help, not inside gameplay, because of too many info you throw in.
I really would like to see more kind of "map seed", to have more different looks, and smoother change of terrain. I would also like to see a good earth map an some "geologically plausible" map of very joung earth (Pangea and the like), not because of full realism (mankind wasn't there, still), but because of "what if" feel I like it.
About elevation: I saw it used in SMAC, I think there it was only "half baked", but the concept should be implemented. Deep of ocean has more sense if in later part of game we can try to build undersea cities, otherwise is not very useful IMHO.
An enhancement about the climate model will be nice, but less useful than in SMAC: I don't think it will be realistic in Civ 3 to let player do main terrain modification.
Some dynamic change of map will be welcome, as forest expanding in SMAC, desertification of terrain, more visible effect of planet change because of human action (large production, city crowding, etc.)
By example, a long war fight in a region can temporary reduce food production (crop loss, excessive hunting, etc.), same for excessive fishing, etc.
------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ColdWizard
|
|
dump humidity and replace it with climate
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hmm... I already said that climate should be affected geographically.... but sure, the humidity of a map tile is affected by the climate of that region... but though a player should be able to get information on the humidity (that is a product of climatic effects, ok)...
see the point? why totally ban it?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ColdWizard
|
|
humidity is part of climate so it should be listed under climatical information if its included
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ok then... climatical information on terrain... and as it changes over the region, every tile has its own informations... as the humidity on that tile
I hope we two are still talking about the same thing... ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dom Pedro II
|
 |
The College of New Jersey
Nov 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
I like this terrain idea. If you think about it, if you strip everything and nature down passed the biological aspect, its nothing but rock, dirt, and sand. The only thing that makes one patch different from another is altitude and moisture. Therefore, the tiles should be built up from the skeleton of rock or sand using the factors Andz83 gave. Altitude and latitude would affect type and quantity of vegetation as well as animals as would the level of moisture.
SMAC had a primitive system of this, but it could certainly use improvement. I would like to take this new concept one step further. I say eliminate oceans as we now know them. The reason is that if you drain away the oceans, they are just depressions in the earth's surface. They should, therefore, be simply basins beneath sea level in the game. Water collects there. Thus you would not have ocean shelf or deep sea, it would just be negative altitude. And the depth determines vegetation (kelp) and animals like fish, whales, etc. Water would be able to appear at higher altitudes if the land around it is higher like with some mountain lakes.
------------------
"...The highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities." - Sun Tzu
Dom Pedro II.... aka Hannibal3
Dom Pedro II - 2nd and last Emperor of the Empire of Brazil (1831 - 1889).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
a friend of mine just bumpered a Porsche
I hereby bump this thread, to make sure it's not only on page 1 but on its top, yeah
|
|
| |
|
|
|
well, there has still been no reply from a FIRAXIS official
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-11-2000 20:52
|