Apolyton Archive  |  Preserved copy of the Apolyton Civilization Site and its forums as they stood in September 2005. Read-only; nothing here can be posted to or replied to.  |  Forum index |  About this archive |  The 1998–2001 UBB forums
Today on Apolyton WARDELL INTERVIEW PROMO A.C.S. HISTORY CHAPTER 4 GET CIV4 /w FREE PLUS! A.C.S. PHOTO GALLERY GET A.O.M. V1.1
Apolyton Civilization Forums
main| civ2| civ3| civ4| smac| ctp2| ron| moo3| galciv| galciv2| alt| about|
ApolytonPLUS | register | search | faq | new posts | pm (-/-) | upload | members
hall of fame new! | civgroups | civgroups news | interviews | the column | radio | chat | directory | news | store | PLUS
Apolyton Civilization Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.0.3 Apolyton Civilization Forums > Miscellaneous > Archive > Civ3-General-Archive > military units cost pop
Show a Printable Version | Email This Page to Someone! | Receive updates to this thread | Report this to Apolyton news!

bottom of page
  
Author
Thread    < Last Thread     Next Thread > Post New Thread     Post A Reply
me_irate is offline me_irate
Warlord

Feb 2001
time: 05:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 08:14
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#1 Report this post to a moderator
military units cost pop Increase the size of your Attachments

I was wondering what you guys think about this idea. im not sure i like it, but it would add an entire new demension to the game.

In the real world civs make peace to save human life, but i have found that it doesn't bother me if a military unit dies, because all it was is shields. It has no other use but to fight and die. But if military units cost population points, wars would not only become more costly but rarer. This would be accurate in real life terms. A unit in civ is not only a single person but an entire army, this army isn't just built it must be recruted from the population. As of now it just apears from thin air or is produced by shields. This very reason is why Sweden isn't a superpower now. Back in the late 1700's early 1800's they were powerful with the best weapons and best generals, but there failing was a low population. The cost of population would make civ much more realistic.

Also it wouldn't neccesarily have to be a whole pop point which is 10s of thousands of people, but maybe 1/3 pop point per unit.

SerapisIV is offline SerapisIV
King
Hartford, CT, USA
Feb 2001
time: 00:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 08:20
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#2 Report this post to a moderator
Remove this text

It makes sense to me in the early game, but as the game progresses, in modern times, even in WWII it was a small portion of society that actually fought. Most casualties were civilians. Except for Germany at the end, but that's kind of an extreme case.

King Richard is offline King Richard
Warlord
Oslo, Norway
Apr 2001
time: 06:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 08:28
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#3 Report this post to a moderator
Full PM-box? Change here!

I'll have to agree that units reprecents a small fraction of the population of a city. We don't know how many people one unit reprecents, but it can't be much.. What could be a solution is to lower the culture-points each time a unit is killed. How's that?

Daniel Frappier is offline Daniel Frappier
Prince
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Jan 1970
time: 05:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 10:20
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#4 Report this post to a moderator
Increase the size of your Attachments

Instead of having a unit cost 1 population wich i agree is a lot and too much why not have a unit cost maybe 1 or a few unit of food.

In Civ II each unit of food was representing 1000 peoples so it kind of make sense.

Gramphos is offline Gramphos
ACS Civ III Files Manager, Prince of Development
Chalmers, Sweden
Apr 2001
time: 06:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 15:09
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#5 Report this post to a moderator
Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel Frappier on 04-13-2001 01:20 AM
Instead of having a unit cost 1 population wich i agree is a lot and too much why not have a unit cost maybe 1 or a few unit of food.



I like it. Not to mush to offer for a good soldier.

Zanzin is offline Zanzin
Prince
Sydney, Australia
Mar 2001
time: 15:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 15:18
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#6 Report this post to a moderator
Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Food would represent the supplies required for troops, population points would represent the depletion of the popultion. Both should be implemented in my opinion.

In the medevial ages they could only fight wars every 20 years or so, because that's how long it took for a generation of kids to grow up to fighting age!!

Anyway, it would prevent the computer from building obese amounts of units without having to properly support them. I'm for it's implementation, mainly because it propells the realism aspect.

SerapisIV is offline SerapisIV
King
Hartford, CT, USA
Feb 2001
time: 00:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 20:12
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#7 Report this post to a moderator
Support Apolyton

The computer building "obese" amounts of units without support is just an example of the AI cheating in CivII. I've never heard of the AI being able to do that in a patched-SMAC game.

me_irate is offline me_irate
Warlord

Feb 2001
time: 05:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 20:32
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#8 Report this post to a moderator
Remove this text

The main purpose for this in my opinion is to make it more realistic. How often do empires get destroyed and assimilated entirely into another civ. Not very often. The reason for this, while defeating a civ is a much smaller matter, invading them and capturing there cities is much more difficult. And the loss of less because of this is tremendous. Why did't the US go to Baghdad in the gulf war, because the loss of life would have been to great. But very seldom in a civ game does a war end without one empire having conquered and obsorbed the other empire completley. That is the main reason in my eyes to this, to make wars more coslty, thus being more realistic.

SerapisIV is offline SerapisIV
King
Hartford, CT, USA
Feb 2001
time: 00:12
Post  Old Post 13-04-2001 22:56
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
#9 Report this post to a moderator
Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote:

Originally posted by me_irate on 04-13-2001 11:32 AM
The main purpose for this in my opinion is to make it more realistic. How often do empires get destroyed and assimilated entirely into another civ. Not very often. The reason for this, while defeating a civ is a much smaller matter, invading them and capturing there cities is much more difficult. And the loss of less because of this is tremendous. Why did't the US go to Baghdad in the gulf war, because the loss of life would have been to great. But very seldom in a civ game does a war end without one empire having conquered and obsorbed the other empire completley. That is the main reason in my eyes to this, to make wars more coslty, thus being more realistic.


The reason we didn't go to Baghdad is because it would've been political suicide, our intervention in the Gulf was to remove Iraq from Kuwait, not decide which nations should keep their government and which shouldn't. Even if we wanted Hussein out, which we did, we couldn't overtly do anything without losing the support of most of the Arab world of who's support our supply of cheap oil (relative to Europe) relys on.

I think that the increased assimilation difficulty should be made by having conquered cities very difficult to keep subdued and out of revolt in the industrial age onward. In the ancient eras, conquest was generally very possible. And still somewhat true through the 1300s. Japan was a group of small civs that was eventually unified through warfare, in the Hundred Years war, the various regions of France that were fought over rarely revolted, they were fought over, conquered repeatedly. It would be very difficult for a nation to conquer another. But this is a relatively recent phenomena when compared to the full 6000 years of history involved in Civ

  < Last Thread     Next Thread > Post New Thread     Post A Reply
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12.
    top of page
Rate This Thread:
archivepost
Forum Jump:
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
 




Contact Us - Apolyton Civilization Site - Support Us!

Building a better Apolyton through better information. Click here and take our poll!
Non-US visitors, click here!

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.0.3
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Page generated in 0.0363 seconds (87.70% PHP - 12.30% MySQL) with 30 queries
Page Loading Time:

Support Apolyton: Amazon USA | Amazon UK | Amazon DE | Amazon FR |
Support Apolyton and get FREE PLUS, Buy from Chips&Bits: Galactic Civilizations | Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition | Call to Power 2 | Civilization: The Boardgame | GURPS/ Alpha Centauri | Alpha Centauri | Civilization IV | Civilization III: Complete |


Front Page | Civilization IV | Civilization III | Civilization II | Call to Power II | Alpha Centauri | Master of Orion III
Rise of Nations | Galactic Civilizations | Galactic Civilizations II | Misc
Alt.Civs | Civ I | C:CtP I | About | News | Directory | Apolyton Store | Forums | Chat | Columns | Interviews | Newsletter
Scenario League | CSC | Clash of Civs | Spanish Site | CtP Maps | Cradle of Civ | WesW's Ctp1/2 Site | Civ3 Haven

apolyton.net | apolyton.com | civilization2.net | civilization3.net | civilization4.net | civilizationiv.info | calltopower.net | galciv.net | galciv2.net | moo3.net