 |
| |
|
|
brianshapiro
|
|
Berkeley
Nov 2001
time: 21:30
|
|
critique my ideas, and add your own ideas.
some of mine might seem complicated at first, though i think it would boil down simply if it were to be implemented.
1. RESOURCES, INDUSTRY, AND TRADING SYSTEM
a. Have within any the city radius residences, industries, and commerce appear on the map like they do in Railroad Tycoon, so that factories, farms, housing, and city improvements are shown directly on the world map.
b. Have industries form on their own related to the geography, so that in grasslands farms form, in wooden areas, lumbering industries form over time. What industries grow not only depends on the geography but on the number of trade units per that city, so trade units work like the commercial alternative to shields. ie, light industry requires 10 commerce, heavy industry 20, etc.
c. The development of certain commodities require other commodities, like in Colonization. But to make this simple, the amount of a certain commodity produced is shown on the map next to the building, so say a silk factory has three silks shown next to it. When roads between cities are connected so that all the required resources are gained for the production of another commodity, then that industry starts cropping up. This all happens by itself, without input from the player.
d. What the player can do is build the infrastructure of roads, and also build city improvements that increase the amount of commerce generated, like marketplaces and banks.
e. Have the ability for enemy units to fortify on roads and block the flow of commerce and commodities (much like a naval blockade), have the ability to fortify on industries to shut them down entirely (or pillage them depending on the players wishes). Fortifying on roads should allow a chance of piracy per turn where the resources and commerce are deverted to the enemy civilization.
2. POOL OF FOOD, RESOURCES, AND SHIELDS
a. All cities connected with roads should have access to half the food, resources, and shields that are extra and available from all surrounding cities. This creates a tier system: say one city is surrounded by two, and has twelve extra food, each of those gets six extra food, and the original city six extra. Then say, each of those cities is surrounded by two, so each of those gets three extra food, ad the two original cities only three extra themselves. If I'm right, this works out in a way where distance factors in.
b. All cities connected with railroads should have access to all the food, resources, and shields. No tier system in place, this divides everything evenly between railroad connected cities.
c. Extra of course, means shields, food, and resources, not in use by the other cities, so any city can usurp priority of them if needed. So this doesnt mean that the original city that is producing is stuck with the low number equal division through railroad, any of the cities can usurp the extra shields if needed.
3. TRAITS CONNECTED TO PLAYER ACTIONS THROUGH SELECTIVE ADVANCE
a. Technology could be dependent on a queue of certain game factors. So, for instance, Mysticism gained when enough incense is gathered, Feudalism gained when a certain number of horsemen units are created, or city walls, etc.
b. This would tie the development of the culture of each civilization both to geographic starting locations (hey, its Marx's theory of production), and to player actions during the course of the game. So a civilization which focused on building/gathering that lead to military techs would develop militarily, etc.
c. Or, Alternatively, the civilization would gain its traits (expansionist, militaristic, etc) through in game actions like this. So if you meet a certain amount of production, you get a bonus; if you win a lot of battles, you get a battle bonus, etc. What traits a civilization has at the moment would be available on the diplomacy screen.
4. REVOLTS, CORRUPTION, AND CULTURAL COHESION
a. The corruption should depend on cultural influence by that city and surrounding cities, not specific improvements like Forbidden Palaces. So if a small city is under the cultural influence of a culturally powerful city like the capitol, it would have low corruption. The further cities would be away from the capital, the more corruption they would have, unless under the cultural influence of another high culture city. Under this design, the player can beeline culture and maintain order throughout the whole of his nation.
b. Have city revolts lead to the possibility of them joining a new, independent civilization, formed from the civilizations left out of the existing game; instead of only the option of joining an existing civilization. This will make the game more realistic.
c. When a cultural flip is about to occur , and there are garrisoned units, there is either a Massacre (death of population), or Revolt (damaging of garissoned units) rather than a straight away flip
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sheik
|
|
We have had so many of these threads.
I think most of your ideas are to extreme. I really don't like 1.a
Section 3 has some interesting stuff in it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gufnork
|
|
Gothenburg, Sweden
Jul 2003
time: 05:30
|
|
1. Unnecessary complexity. Makes the game more advanced yet brings in little gameplay, making the AI worse and bringing in extra code.
2. Add tech requirements and partial losses to it and it might work.
3. Could be interesting.
4a. Removes a part of the game.
b. Might be interesting.
c. I think something needs to be done about flips, anyway. I don't mind that a city flips, but when your entire army just disappears in thin air it's really annoying.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Topcatuk
|
|
Unique civs would be a lot of work, but very rewarding. At the moment the only thing telling the Civs apart is colour and how the city looks.
Unique units across the board for every civ, probably not in their relative strengths, it'd be too confusing, but certainly graphically.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solomwi
|
 |
Don King of the Apolyton HLA Movement
Dec 2002
time: 23:30
|
|
One idea I haven't fleshed out very far, but am intrigued by, is being able to draw provincial borders within your empire, and set up a provincial capital in each to help with corruption. Optimally, there would be some tradeoff to make the option between a lot of small provinces and a few large provinces a strategic choice rather than self-evident. Maybe a set cost per provicial seat deducted from the treasury or something. I'm not advocating making a bunch of Forbidden Palace analogs available, either. Designating a provincial seat would either require building a much cheaper improvement that acted as a weak Palace, or nothing at all.
Plus, I think it'd be cool to look at a map of the empire and see province/state names like "Greek Enclave", "Arabian Territory", "Land So Many Egyptians Died So Futilely For", "Xerxes is My B*tch", etc.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
CiverDan
|
|
Too many of these suggestions would make the game too complex. I see this problem time and again with such suggestions. Some things i would like to see:
Resources:
No more "I lost my horses". Once you find horses, you shouldn't lose them because you lost a city. Funny how I lose my horses, yet I can still ride the ones I have into battle :P.
Remove rubber as a requirement after WWII era tech, as sythetic rubber was developed around this time.
Cities:
eliminate shield waste that occurs when an imrovement/unit is built. Also allow 2+ units to be built in a city/turn if there is enough production. Allow cities to actually "work" squares outside their radius via a form of colony. Should only be allowed for size 25+ cities with an airport. Would give an incentive for larger cities.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Paddy the Scot
|
 |
Hordeland
Mar 2001
time: 14:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Solomwi
One idea I haven't fleshed out very far, but am intrigued by, is being able to draw provincial borders within your empire, and set up a provincial capital in each to help with corruption. Optimally, there would be some tradeoff to make the option between a lot of small provinces and a few large provinces a strategic choice rather than self-evident. Maybe a set cost per provicial seat deducted from the treasury or something. I'm not advocating making a bunch of Forbidden Palace analogs available, either. Designating a provincial seat would either require building a much cheaper improvement that acted as a weak Palace, or nothing at all.
Plus, I think it'd be cool to look at a map of the empire and see province/state names like "Greek Enclave", "Arabian Territory", "Land So Many Egyptians Died So Futilely For", "Xerxes is My B*tch", etc. |
Well this looks like a great idea...
"the state of natural frustration when they release games full of bugs..."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Elias
|
|
I agree with all your ideas execpt for 3. otherwise i wish there
was a civ4. the U.S dosent go around building industries the
people do. A 3d city would also allow for bombers to target
specific things not just droping random bombs hoping they hit
somthing important.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
I want Civ4 to include about a hundred tribes to choose from, but I don't care if many can be in the same game. I want all the native tribes from Colonization, all the tribes available in the main game as of Conquests, possibly all the minor tribes available in Civ3, specifically the Inuit; the Australian Aborigines, the Maori, the Hmong, the Hebrews; I want there to be tribes such as Inuit and Hawaiians which can thrive in special environments such as the Arctic and Oceania. I want a balance of other cultures to complement the ones I specifically want.
I would say do away with special leader heads for each tribe. Definitely include the special bonuses system in the current game. Possibly expand the system. Let other tribal features also affect human players, at least have your governors tend to build what your tribe likes when you let them.
I want alien terrain types built into the editor, such as what you'd find on the Moon or Mars. I want more specific pregame customization of the world.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Elias
|
|
Yeah that is crazy who would want to be anyone of these people anyway what special ability would they get that could be any good anyway? Besides it would be way to many people to keep track of.However I would like to be able to group units like you could in ctp so you could have massive battles not just a whole bunch of little ones.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MyOlde
|
|
Haliburton, Ontario, Canada
Jun 1999
time: 05:30
|
|
What is the point of these wish threads? I suggest that with Conquest you're looking at Civ4. I doubt there'll be anything new on the Civ front for a long time after that debuts. Probably a patch or even two. But no new game.
When you read the latest info at civ3.com it indicates that they've put a supermarket full of stuff in Conquests. They'll get it out at the end of October and sit back and enjoy the benefits (they hope) of what must be a lot of hard work.
Maybe I'm wrong, but why don't we just get on with playing and talking about PTW until Conquests arrives -- and then discuss its merits.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MoonWolf
|
|
I agree in having a resource pool, especially in food and shields. It should be possible to trade food internally (and with others) as it's being done in real life (and civ 1 + 2). Shields also should be possible to transfer boosting e.g. a battleship, but maybe with a little loss simulating the delay cause of transport.
Also, I'd like to see the build-up of shields from Master of Orion 2 but with the possibility to pump out more than 1 unit if the additional shields allowed it (if your super-city yields 180 shields, you should be allowed to produce 2 infantry)
At last I miss the several worlds from Civ2 Test of time. Specially in a Fantasy or sci-fi scenario this was great.
I have actually a lot ideas for civ4, but I think they will drown anyway in this or the other threads...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord_Davinator
|
|
Kathmandu
Nov 2000
time: 11:00
|
|
will there be a civ4?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-09-2003 23:53
|