Thread Tools
Old September 26, 2000, 11:15   #1
rremus
Warlord
 
rremus's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 154
Irrigation, minning and roads
Hi,
I'm a fan of the ancient part of the game, so I suggest to start from a prehistoric time line.
The initial settler could be a bunch of hunter-gatheres, lacking the ability to create cities. They move around, settle for a few turns and increase in numbers. When the simple resources (fruits, wild animals) in the arrea are exhausted, the camp can be lifted and the setllers could search another location. The difference between a camp and a city would be that a camp can be lifted, alowing the settlers to search another location. A camp could turn into a city if stay in a location long enough to increase in size to the "city" size. If a camp is lifted after had growed a little, more settlers will result from it. A City cannot be lifted.
The 'default' Irrigation, Minning and Road Building should be researched for.
Maybe even certain types of cultures types can be searched for, like grains, potates, corn etc. Having researched grains, an extra food could be provided from plain terrain type. At start, the only terrains providing food should be the ones having fruit or animal or fish resources.
Minning could be searched for only after bronze working. Road Building is quite advanced, I think it should be searched for only after Trade. But Trade should be much earlier, before currency for sure!
Also, the start age should be around 8000 BC, much earlier than the current game. Maybe they could even programm in the finnish of the last Ice Age, sea level rissing, retreat of glaciers etc.
rremus is offline  
Old September 26, 2000, 17:28   #2
Shadowstrike
Emperor
 
Shadowstrike's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:28
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Glorious Land of Canada
Posts: 3,234
This could be a neat concept. But remeber that during the "Ice" Age, people were already setting down in what is now the Sahara desert (which was fertile then) and building homes. I would really like the idea of gradual climate changes though... it could represent Ice Ages and the like...
Shadowstrike is offline  
Old September 26, 2000, 19:24   #3
UltraSonix
King
 
Local Time: 10:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,728
rremus's idea should only be option for those that want to do so. I for one, think the game is slow enough as it is.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...
UltraSonix is offline  
Old September 26, 2000, 23:52   #4
Seeker
Emperor
 
Seeker's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:28
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Yongsan-Gu, Seoul
Posts: 3,647
Civ should use a system more like Imperialism 1, especially with developers, trade good transport, the marketplace, ect.
Seeker is offline  
Old October 15, 2000, 11:27   #5
S. Kroeze
Prince
 
S. Kroeze's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: the Hague, the Netherlands, Old Europe
Posts: 370
Dear Rremus,

I agree with all your ideas, suggestions, arguments used and conclusions reached!

My ideal Civilization game would start in 8000BC and time would never pass more quickly than five years a turn.
S. Kroeze is offline  
Old October 15, 2000, 14:50   #6
Helios
Settler
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United States of America
Posts: 19
I certainly like the idea that irrigation, mining, and roads have to be researched. I'm not sure about the rest, though.
Helios is offline  
Old October 16, 2000, 00:51   #7
Evil Capitalist
King
 
Evil Capitalist's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Reconstruction commissioner
Posts: 1,890
quote:

Originally posted by S. Kroeze on 10-15-2000 11:27 AM
My ideal Civilization game would start in 8000BC and time would never pass more quickly than five years a turn.


5 years per turn? So WW1 would last 1 turn, WW2 would last 1 turn, The seven years war would last 1 turn, The Gulf war would last 1 turn, the Kosovo airstrikes would last 1 turn.

Do I see a practical problem with your proposal?
Evil Capitalist is offline  
Old October 16, 2000, 17:13   #8
Va-Toran
Settler
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 22
While a good idea for a game in its own right, where you have movable camps and little population. I think RRemus' idea is not really sutible for Civ3, as the game is long enough as it is.
[This message has been edited by Va-Toran (edited October 16, 2000).]
Va-Toran is offline  
Old October 16, 2000, 17:14   #9
Adm.Naismith
King
 
Adm.Naismith's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Milano - Italy
Posts: 1,674
Evil Capitalist, I understand that S.Kroeze means the other way: no more turns equals to 50 or 10 years.
Anyway, we are speaking of civilization scale, not tactical squad game. It doesn't add an inch if time slow down to a week every turn, IMHO!

We are spending at least 5 years just for change European monetary system to the Euro, not to mention how many years we are spending to introduce a common set of laws, a real UE government and so on.

Kossovo is a minor incident, on this timescale, and truly is in world view. I don't want to insult anyone, but we must think at proper leader level to enjoy a Civ game.

In a game where military troops come from nowhere (no city population is reduced when you build and lost an army: please read again history books about effects of WWI and II on population) we are asking for micromgmt of monthly/weekly unit movement?. I can't believe it!



------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant
Adm.Naismith is offline  
Old October 16, 2000, 17:43   #10
Lord Silvi
Warlord
 
Lord Silvi's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Düsseldorf
Posts: 171
The best time of a Civ game are the first 2000 years.
Dont let it be over in a few turns!

Lord Silvi is offline  
Old October 17, 2000, 02:54   #11
rremus
Warlord
 
rremus's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 154
I think the reason I (and maybe others) enjoy more the early part of the game is that in this period the game is more balanced when playing with the AI. Later, the differences become too big when one civ has such an advantage in military unit types. In rare games where you are balanced in power with one or more civs in later stages, they ussually don't hesitate to use nukes and that takes out much of the fun...

I would like an all ancient scenario. Starting very early and ending before industrialisation.
rremus is offline  
Old October 17, 2000, 04:30   #12
UltraSonix
King
 
Local Time: 10:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,728
quote:

I think the reason I (and maybe others) enjoy more the early part of the game is that in this period the game is more balanced when playing with the AI.
Perhaps there should be a toggle option at the start of the game - you can opt for a involved game based in ancient times, medieval times, modern times, where everyone starts off with the same [amount/quality] starting techs, units, cities, etc. Or you can just choose to play the normal civ game. Everyone's happy!

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...
UltraSonix is offline  
Old October 17, 2000, 06:54   #13
Az
Emperor
 
Local Time: 03:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
you know .. those climatic changes could be implimented in a great way with ..... ( oh the horror!)
rize and fall of empires ....


no actually that sounds like a good Idea . imagine to youself. : around 10k bc the climat begins to change ..... the area of the sahara is a big bunch of plains and grassland , with rivers etc. and then ... in the middle of it ...a small bunch of 4 tiles appeares ..
another tile appears every 50 years but it will be growing around some kind of a center ..not randomly but by layers ... and then ... when the land will become infertile the cities on it will die out . .

and *bang!* rise and fall of civs.
Az is offline  
Old October 17, 2000, 08:46   #14
Caesar
Settler
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Rome, Heart of the Roman Empire
Posts: 17
I like that last idea actually... they had something like this in SMAC, I believe... one faction could do some terraforming that would change the climate in the region of another faction, and therefore harm them.

In the advanced game this could be cool for Civ3 too, but...

More interesting is the concept of long-term climactic changes and their consequences on civilizations. To some extent this already exists: I remember back in Civ1 days I had a massive globe-spanning empire on an Earth map, and then in the endgame because of my massive pollution and disinterest in sending out settlers to clean it all up, my irrigation gradually turned into swamp land, on a global scale, and each year my population starved to death... I had several tens of thousands of death a year! It was mad.

So... this was my fault... and this should be extended in Civ3... but also, natural stuff, like ice ages, would be cool.

Caesar.
Caesar is offline  
Old October 17, 2000, 22:37   #15
Shogun Gunner
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization IV: MultiplayerCivilization III PBEMApolyton Storywriters' GuildCivilization III Democracy GameCall to Power II MultiplayerCall to Power MultiplayerC3CDG Team BabylonPtWDG Vox ControliCivilization IV CreatorsC4DG Sarantium
Emperor
 
Shogun Gunner's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:28
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Potomac Falls, Virginia
Posts: 6,258
I also like the idea of starting early and smaller number of years for those early turns.

Don't forget about the "quick start" option. They could easily give two or three options.

1. rremus' propsal (8000 B.C.)
2. "Classic Start" Civ II
3. Accelerated start (actually a Civ II option also)

I agree with the more balanced A.I. play comment and I also have an interest of starting the game from very, very beginning.

This ideas would take too much time to play??? Isn't that what we are already doing with Civ??? My wife certainly thinks so. She doesn't get it...but she does like it when I play her tribe!
Shogun Gunner is offline  
Old October 18, 2000, 22:14   #16
Caesar the Great
Emperor
 
Caesar the Great's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:28
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: New York
Posts: 5,117
hello... caesar...
Caesar the Great is offline  
Old October 20, 2000, 17:58   #17
Shadowstrike
Emperor
 
Shadowstrike's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:28
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Glorious Land of Canada
Posts: 3,234
And before farming we need foraging. Maybe we should say that a certain level of technology has been reached around the world at the start of the game. People are just starting to farm in some parts of the world.
Shadowstrike is offline  
Old October 21, 2000, 00:13   #18
Stuff2
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:28
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 274
Actually. Before Irrigation we need farming.
Stuff2 is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:28.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team