StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Much of the crap could be cut out by implementing much more complicated (internal) combat, again, like Hearts of Iron, but especially like HoI naval combat, where range and surprise are huge factors. That would automatically tend to balance more modern units, as they would have much longer fighting ranges and be inflicting casualties long before an enemy got into range, but still allow "flukes" due to surprise etc.

Civ combat mechanics are boardgame simple one roll decisions, but they really don't need to be, when there's a computer to do all the fiddly maths.

I'd like to add something onto brianeyci's idea. Depending on how seperated one nation is from the world, as in no roads or transport systems leading from them to a more advanced nation, they would not receive the technology upgrade with the world. However, to cut out micromanagement, deals could simply be "You give me this resource and I will give you this tech". Hardly more complicated than standard trading between nations. Also, if a nation captures a unit more advanced than their own, after a short period of time some of their units gain the advanced technology and they gain limited ability to to produce varients of said unit. Each tech development in the area (infantry, heavy weapons, aircraft, etc.) causes them to build the next tier of the technology.

An example: A totally isolated nation has never advanced beyond percussion cap rifles. However, a nation that has advanced to producing ballistic missiles requires diamonds that the primative nation has. In return for access to diamond mines, the nation gives them plans to build missiles, allowing them to see how they work and produce less advanced versions of them (Compare it to plans for an ICBM being used to produce a V2 rocket). As the game time ticks on, they refine the plans until they can easily produce missiles.

Another example: The same nation captures a scout from a more advanced nation. They use the scout's AK-47 to learn the mechanics of semi-automatic, magazine fed rifles, and hand them out to elite soldiers. As they continue to tech up, they give out more and more of the weapons until their army is outfitted with with the rifles. Eventually they learn the ways of automatic weapons and the process starts over, with semi-auto rifles being replaced with assault rifles.

If you like, you can point out anything I might have looked over.

The main thing you've overlooked is that in Civ there's never any reason to be diplomatic with anyone not significantly more powerful than you. If a smaller nation has a resource you want, stomp in with your size fifteens and take it.

Vendetta wrote:The main thing you've overlooked is that in Civ there's never any reason to be diplomatic with anyone not significantly more powerful than you. If a smaller nation has a resource you want, stomp in with your size fifteens and take it.

What would happen if the nation you stomped with your size fifteens had an ally that could pose a threat to you, yet is not unfriendly?

Also there's the whole guerilla faction

if they implimented that correctly it would on it's own curtail some of the excess of wars of aggression. When an area get's too dissatisfied guys who just happen to have slightly weaker versions of your own kit start showing up, and burning things, revolting, and what not. makes better sense then all those roving barbarian bands.

Civ 2 had the guerillas, although they weren't really strong enough to be more than a minor nuisance. I do agree that you shouldn't be able to utterly wipe out another civlization with just one task force unless they're really pathetic, especially in the earlier periods before high explosives and such were invented.

Brian's idea was done in the Sevo mod for the vanilla game, and I assume it or a successor mod will be made for Beyond the Sword. In that mod, trade routes slowly bled tech to people who didn't have it. Better for realism and better for game balance at the same time.

Out of curiosity, at the same time, would it be too difficult for a future Civ game to incorporate a food-export-and-trading system (i.e., the ability of your cities to trade food amongst one another if the technology to do so, like primitive shipping, is there)? That's one thing that kind of bothered me about all of the Civ games and AC; while a city growing all its food nearby would make sense in a civilization without access to conveniently located waterways early on, once you start getting railroads and the like tech and infrastructure, you ought to be able to send food from that city growing in the flood plains to the city growing in the middle of a high mountain range.

Guardsman Bass wrote:Out of curiosity, at the same time, would it be too difficult for a future Civ game to incorporate a food-export-and-trading system (i.e., the ability of your cities to trade food amongst one another if the technology to do so, like primitive shipping, is there)? That's one thing that kind of bothered me about all of the Civ games and AC; while a city growing all its food nearby would make sense in a civilization without access to conveniently located waterways early on, once you start getting railroads and the like tech and infrastructure, you ought to be able to send food from that city growing in the flood plains to the city growing in the middle of a high mountain range.

You could do that in Civ 2, don't know about the others. railroads cost no movement points to use and freight units only took a turn or two to build once you'd really gotten going.

Quadlok wrote:

Guardsman Bass wrote:Out of curiosity, at the same time, would it be too difficult for a future Civ game to incorporate a food-export-and-trading system (i.e., the ability of your cities to trade food amongst one another if the technology to do so, like primitive shipping, is there)? That's one thing that kind of bothered me about all of the Civ games and AC; while a city growing all its food nearby would make sense in a civilization without access to conveniently located waterways early on, once you start getting railroads and the like tech and infrastructure, you ought to be able to send food from that city growing in the flood plains to the city growing in the middle of a high mountain range.

You could do that in Civ 2, don't know about the others. railroads cost no movement points to use and freight units only took a turn or two to build once you'd really gotten going.

You could actually send surplus food from one city to another that needed it in Civ 2? That's kind of cool - why wasn't it in Civ 3 (or perhaps I just didn't notice it)? I'm thinking along the lines of actually supporting an entire city from food imports from other cities in your civilization.

Yeah, you could do that in Civ 2, as well as in AC. Build a transport unit (camel or freight in CIV 2) and, when it's complete it gives you a list of trade goods to load it up with. The last option was "Food." Whenever it reached a city it'd give you the option of establishing a trade route, so that food produced in one city would automatically go to another city.

Erik von Nein wrote:Yeah, you could do that in Civ 2, as well as in AC. Build a transport unit (camel or freight in CIV 2) and, when it's complete it gives you a list of trade goods to load it up with. The last option was "Food." Whenever it reached a city it'd give you the option of establishing a trade route, so that food produced in one city would automatically go to another city.

Shouldn't it be more automatic? During the Roman Empire, Rome relied on grain from Carthage and other interdependencies existed else where. The game ought to take into account of historical precedence.

chitoryu12 wrote: What would happen if the nation you stomped with your size fifteens had an ally that could pose a threat to you, yet is not unfriendly?

That's what Vendetta is getting at: the awful dip system. If you're strong, everyone will hate you and pile on you. If you're weak, everyone will pile on you. The AI doesn't look at much before making these decisions: the Civ games don't seem to make an attempt to have a GalCiv2-style AI that 'plays the game', instead having AI that simply 'bothers the player'. They're the strategy game version of beat-em up enemies. I had very random experiences with the scenario you describe: the most usual result was a power declaring war on me and doing nothing for 300 years and then making peace. During this period they often moved their units to attack me but never made it, and their weakened defences were getting ruled by other AI.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Shouldn't it be more automatic? During the Roman Empire, Rome relied on grain from Carthage and other interdependencies existed else where. The game ought to take into account of historical precedence.

Eh. They had to establish those food trade routes in the first place, didn't they? Kind of the same idea.