Should espionage really cost thousands of gold? A single espionage mission seems to cost as much to preform as wonders cost to build. I dont think James Bond ever needed the funding of magellans voyage to steal a russian decryptor. All he needed was a $50 gun, a car and a gadget or two. I think that the cars and gadgets can be funded by a matinence fee in the city that holds the intelligence agency (2 gold per turn at most).

This is how it should be (listed from least to most expensive):

Expose ememy spy (max cost 2)
Steal World Map (max cost-5)
Steal Tec (max cost 8)
Steal Plans (max cost 15)
Sabatoge (max cost 25)
Propoganda (max cost 50)

Why not add:
Raid Treasury?
Bio Warfare (involving units and cities)?
Unit Takeover (workers/settlers/naval/air units only)?
Assassinations?

Ideas/suggestions welcome.

I agree espionage missions cost way to much... but that can also be edited in the biq file.

The Civ2 spy had both the "Plant Nuclear Device" and the "Bribe Unit" feature, which I miss... I think for the most part, there would have to be a physical Spy unit again for the bribery feature to be effective.

I remember that 'Birth of the Federation' had a fantastic espionage/intelligence system. In it, you built and manned 'intelligence' improvements, which gave you 'intelligence points' you could then go to your 'Intelligence' screen, and determine what % of these points went into which missions. This, in turn, would determine the relative 'frequency' of the mission types. You had the broad categories of 'Espionage', 'Sabotage' and 'Counterintelligence'. Within the first two categories, you could choose industrial, commercial, scientific and military. Lastly, you could also choose which empire you focused your attentions on. So, for instance, if you allocated 10% of your IP's into military sabotage, then there was a 1 in 10 chance that your agents would try and sabotage a unit or military improvement of your chosen enemy. The actual chance of success would depend on the TOTAL number of points you have for that mission type and your enemies 'counterintelligence' allocation.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Hmm, I guess I would prefer that espionage in Civ be largely a function of intelligence gathering. To that end, I would prefer to see actual spy units that can move about in enemy territory, and perform missions for a reasonable amount of gold. Similarly, I would like the ability to see what tech a civ is researching, how many turns it will be before they get there, a precise breakdown of attitudes towards other civs, and so on. I would like to see maybe some secret military/trade pacts in the game, as well, and the ability to ferret these out through spy missions. I would ditch the useless stuff like Expose Enemy Spy, Initiate Propaganda, Sabotage Production, etc. from the spy screen. Sabotage and Overthrow Enemy City would be better done by a new unit/game function, Guerilla Warfare. You would be able to build a small number of HN Guerillas to harass enemy civs with, These guys could attack really weak units, and destroy improvements or shields in the box if they can get close enough to attack an enemy city. IF the city contains some of YOUR citizens (i.e., it was lost by you) OR it is a city the current civ conquered from another nation, there is a chance that partisan activity will overthrow the city government and it will become Barbarian.

I agree to most of previous ideas (I was lazy enough to read the others) and it was very interesting idea for Barbarian cities. One more thing which I think could be a good idea is to see animie troops longer in Steal Plans misions.

Personally, I think reintroducing a spy 'unit' would be a HUGE step backwards for civ, not to mention adding yet more MM headaches for players. I say keep espionage abstract, but introduce a better system for determining what missions are performed and how successful they might be. My vote is for a variant of the 'Birth of the Federation' model I mentioned above ;)!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I like the idea ,maybe they could give an option of editing it in the editor.I don't like the unit takeover though.They had bribing in civ 2 and it didnt work.

Haven't you sometimes wished you could make non-agresion pact? Sometimes I wish I could make an ultimatum (I hope this is the word I ment) - For example "Make pease with someone or prepare for War!".

Yeah...but this is the wrong thread for that....

Haven't you sometimes wished you could make non-agresion pact? Sometimes I wish I could make an ultimatum (I hope this is the word I ment) - For example "Make pease with someone or prepare for War!".

That is more diplomacy than espionage. But still it is a good idea.

back on topic:
I agree that the espiange missions are slightly expensive but using that James Bond analogy, think of all the money that went into the R&D of his gagets. And, while I am not that big of a 007 fan, I don't think he ever used the same gaget twice.

Hmm, I guess I would prefer that espionage in Civ be largely a function of intelligence gathering. To that end, I would prefer to see actual spy units that can move about in enemy territory, and perform missions for a reasonable amount of gold. Similarly, I would like the ability to see what tech a civ is researching, how many turns it will be before they get there, a precise breakdown of attitudes towards other civs, and so on. I would like to see maybe some secret military/trade pacts in the game, as well, and the ability to ferret these out through spy missions. I would ditch the useless stuff like Expose Enemy Spy, Initiate Propaganda, Sabotage Production, etc. from the spy screen. Sabotage and Overthrow Enemy City would be better done by a new unit/game function, Guerilla Warfare. You would be able to build a small number of HN Guerillas to harass enemy civs with, These guys could attack really weak units, and destroy improvements or shields in the box if they can get close enough to attack an enemy city. IF the city contains some of YOUR citizens (i.e., it was lost by you) OR it is a city the current civ conquered from another nation, there is a chance that partisan activity will overthrow the city government and it will become Barbarian.

Some have objected to the use of spy unit. However I think there is a compromise that can be drawn. If you want to use spies to sabtage or bribe units without the use of spies, where's how it could be done:

1. right click on the icon you want to bribe/sabtage
2. in the options on the bar, there would a little different set up:
a) civopedia for the units
b)contact civ who owns the civs in the stack
c)list of units in stack
3. click on the unit you want and it would say give you the ability to bribe/sabtage unit.

There you've got that ability and no spies. I think this ability would have to be limited somehow, but thats the idea.

Please don't revert to the CivII diplomat/spy units!

Prices are too high ATM, and there's not really a jolly lot of use to it, that I'll agree. But espionage shouldn't be a major part of the game.

Real spying was very very very much unlike James Bond. That's why he's a movie star. ;)

Real espionage takes time, patience, and yes, money. Bribery is one of the greatest tools in the spy arsenal, which revolves completely around how much cash you have.

And, while I am not that big of a 007 fan, I don't think he ever used the same gaget twice.

I think he usually knacked it, especially if it was a car, boat, or mini-plane.

Espionage is one of the funnest parts of the game. To remove it would be unthinkable.

FYI: Last Conformest: Espionage does not equal spies. Espionage is "Espionage is the practice of obtaining secrets (spying) from rivals or enemies for military, political, or economic advantage. It is usually thought of as part of an organized (ie, governmental or corporate) effort. A spy is an agent employed to obtain such secrets. The definition has been restricted to a state spying on potential or actual enemies, primarily for military purposes, but this has been extended to spying involving corporations, known specifically as Industrial espionage. Many nations routinely spy on their enemies, and allies, although they generally deny this. Black's Law Dictionary (1990) defines espionage as: "...gathering, transmitting, or losing...[information related to the national defense]."

http://www.free-definition.com/Espionage.html

However, in the game, this is does not require a spy unit. In my idea, you simply right clicked on the unit to perform the action.

Instead of units I will suggest programs. It is like the BotF model, but not.

Part of your funding each turn goes towards 'Intelligence Programs'. The sophistication and effectiveness of these programs increases with technology. Also, cultural spread would be a big part of this as well.

There would be various areas you could devote penetration to and fund. There would be a city level for domestic/economic matters and a nation-sate level for military/trade matters. You decide which programs get 'growth funding'. All existing programs need 'maintenance funding' based on penetration. As you gain more penetration points, you gain more options and greater success with those options. Some of the options will cost some or a signifcant amount of the built up points(back-lash). Espionage would now be something that would be built up over time.


You run into your first foreign city, Ur. You start a Domestic infiltration of Ur. For the first five turns you can increase the infiltration by 3 ept(espionage points a turn). After that you now have to spend 1 ept to maintain the infiltration. Also you have accumulated 15 ep. This means as long as you are not at war with Babylon you can see Ur's city screen. Eventually you gain more money and the program grows to over 150 ep. Now you have a couple options. One is 'Assassinate Governor'. Of course with only 150 ep it will not be successful alot. At 250 ep it is more likely to be successul, although it will cost 40-50 ep to do. The effect of the assasination could be increased corruption and unhappiness for the turn.



You have invested for a long time into Babylonian Trade infiltration. With the technology Scientific Method you can now try the option of 'Ruining Industry X'. Basically it paints one of the Babylonian industries as unsafe for one to several turns, hurting their economy. Similarily you could do, 'Increase Value of Foreign Goods', hurting domestic producers in a trade war.

This is VERY similar to what I suggested above (my own variant of the BotF model ;)!) In mine, though, the success chance, frequency and sophistication of intelligence operations was related to tech level, funding AND # of 'intelligence improvements', specialists and Wonders-all of which contributed to your 'Intelligence Point' pool (though I concur with you, S_S, on the possible role of culture flow as well). You then determined what PERCENTAGE of your IP's you want to devote to different types of intelligence activities.

(a) First up, you decide what % of your IP's you devote to Espionage (spying), Sabotage and Counterintelligence (defence against foreign intelligence missions).

(b) You then FURTHER decide what % of the points from (a) you wish to devote to each nation you are in contact with.

(c) Lastly, you can then further split your IP's up, on a % basis, into domestic/civil; Military; Scientific; Industrial or Commercial. If you don't allocate any points at this level, then the computer will simply attempt each mission type on an equal basis.

As an example, lets say that you are currently generating 600 Intelligence points every turn. You decide to allocate 40% (240 points) into Espionage, 20% (or 120 points) into Sabotage and 40% (or 240 points) into Counterintelligence.

You are currently in contact with 4 civilization-the Romans, the Babylonians, the English and the Egyptians. You are currently already at war with Babylon, so do not decide to devote too many resources to them-allocating just 10% of your IP resources to this nation (24 points, 12 points and 24 points respectively). You are allied to England, and so only devote 10% of your resources to them too. Egypt you are not too sure about, so you decide to devote around 30% of your resources to (72, 36 and 72 points). Rome, though, you are DEEPLY suspicious of (having only just come out of a war with them). So you devote 50% of your total resources on intelligence operations on them (120, 60 and 120 points respectively). This essentially means that your intelligence missions will be most succesful (and most frequent) against Rome, though this might change if they have allocated significantly more IP's into counterintelligence!

Lastly, you could divide your IP's up even further. So, for instance, if you wanted to really learn about, and HURT, Romes economy, then you might devote 60% of these IP's into Economic-which amounts to 50 points and 22 points devoted to Economic espionage and Sabotage respectively! This would give you information on what kind, and how much, of certain resources Rome possesses, what kind of economic improvements/wonders they have and who they are trading with-and for what. It would also give you a chance of damaging, destroying said improvements, cutting them off from their resources and causing some form of disruption to their trade routes!!

Information on successful (or very unsuccessful) Intelligence Operations would be given in your 'pre-turn' summary list-under the 'Intelligence' heading!
Aside from this, if you have an opportunity to comit an especially vile attack (such as terrorism, assassination or the like) or plant evidence implicating another nation (via your counterintelligence) then this will appear in a pop-up as a yes/no option. All other missions, however, will be performed automatically. For example, lets say that you learn of a Roman 'Economic Great Leader', whom they are using to boost the wealth of their cities. At the start of your turn, a pop-up featuring your 'spy-chief' comes up, saying you have an opportunity to assassinate this leader, and if you want to do it (with a standard warning about your reputation ;)!) If you click 'Yes', then a further message might come up asking if you wish to try and implicate another nation in the assassination attempt, with each button relating to a VIABLE nation. You decide to cause trouble, and Click on Babylon. Thus, if you were successful, Rome's Counterintelligence would detect evidence implicating a Babylonian spy in the murder of their Chief Economist-which might lead to WAR ;)!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I really like Aussie Lurker's model. The one draw back I can see though is that it could (or would) need a lot of management. It might be made easier if the computer could handle the levels of various things, but then, when you consider the intelligence of the governer in Civ 3, and the advisors in Civ 2, then it might cause a whole lot more heart break.

Working on Aussie_Lurker's idea: How about gathering intelligence points, much like you gather trade, and then use it as a means to reduce the overall cost of performing an espionage mission. At the same instance, you might need a certain amount of intelligence points to actually carry out a mission (eg: 50 to investigate a city, 35,000 to plant a nuke). Meanwhile, some of this would still cost gold to perform, however if you have a lot of Intelligence points, then the cost would be somewhat reduced (so, investigating a city with 100 would normally cost 5 IP and 50 gold, but then if you have 1000 IP, then investigating would only cost 5IP and 5 gold) or something along those lines.

That way the micro management is gone.

Thus, if you were successful, Rome's Counterintelligence would detect evidence implicating a Babylonian spy in the murder of their Chief Economist-which might lead to WAR

"Real life" events like that sound really good! It'd certainly give some variation in the way wars are started.

Espionage is one of the funnest parts of the game.Well, that's a matter of personal opinion. I don't agree.

FYI: Last Conformest: Espionage does not equal spies.

[snip]
Did I say it did (outside of CivI/CivII)? It's entirely possible not to think that and still think that the focus of the game should remain on grand military, economic and political strategy, not espionage.

Strato, I'm glad you liked my idea, but I must disagree with you on the issue regarding the degree of player management required.
As it currently stands in civ3, every time you want to perform an act of espionage/sabotage, you have to go into the appropriate screen, select the appropriate mission, then pay your money. My system is a lot more 'set and forget' than that.
Ultimately, the only decisions a player needs to make in this system are:

1) How many 'Intelligence Based' improvements does he wish to build (which will, like all improvements, cost money to maintain)

2) How much of the money he accumulates does he wish to 'invest' in Intelligence (Not unlike investment in luxuries and science in civ2 and civ3)

3) Who does he wish to direct his intelligence efforts at, and what types of intelligence does he wish to specialise in.

4) Every once in a while-mostly when you become VERY good at intelligence operations-you will be given the opportunity to sign off on such things as assassinations, planting of nuclear/biological weapons, implicating others in your dirty deeds, and feeding false intelligence to known foreign spies ;)!

Everything else is performed by the computer, with regular progress reports on your intelligence activities appearing in a summary of the previous turns events. Any new intelligence points you generate will be AUTOMATICALLY allocated according to the percentages you have already set: so, for instance, if you have just built 4 new 'listening posts', to give you an additional 50 IP's, and you have already set your allocations to 40/20/40, as in the above example, then 20 points will go into espionage, 10 into sabotage, and another 20 into counterintelligence.
The only other thing you, the player, needs to do is occasionally move your percentage allocations around, depending on which 'enemy' is 'flavour of the month' ;)! Trust me, guys, I have seen this system in BotF, and it works VERY VERY WELL!!!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

As I've stated before, I am in favors of the Aussie Espionage system, with my addition.

Espionage is absolutely necessary to run to win a war- it is what finds the enemy. Just most of the time, the espionage units that find the units are the ones that kill- the military units.

Anytime you find a troop, that is recon. Recon is espionage cause you have found information that gives you an advantage. But enough of this squabble over definitions.

I enjoyed the spy system as it was set up in Civ 1 and 2- there it was fun. Here it is blah.

I like the idea of allocating funds to various intel programs to increase effectiveness. You could make some actions available thru discovery of new governments/tech as well.

I wonder, though, how the AI would deal with this? It is not very good at effectively managing this kind of complexity. The nice thing about actual spy units is that they are very simple for the AI to use as well, it can just build them and send them into your territory to do whatever. They are fun for the player as well, I like sending HN units into another civ's territory to cause havoc.

Unfortunately allowing espionage to be developed on one dimension:units: proved too powerful for human players. Human players had to actively restrict themselves to stop from abusing the system.

Now that we agreed on a BotF variant, we should discuss specifics and mechanics.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Here are the areas you could increase infiltration, which would allow missions.

On the per City basis:
Domestic - Military and Trade with localized government types

On National basis:
Trade - Military - Intelligence - Industry

In Your Nation:
Counter espionage per those programs for each of above listed

If you sharply limited the type of missions an actual spy unit could perform, these could still have a useful place in civ4. I would agree that it was ridiculous in civ2 that you could conquer the world through bribery and sabotage. Still, making the player have to acquire some types of intel through actual incursions into enemy territory beats the boring system we have now.

A spy unit could be invisible even to other spies, unless you perform an "expose enemy spy" mission for a large amount of gold, then any HN units are revealed as to nationality and spies/saboteurs are revealed as well. You can then attack them with units, which declares war, or order them to leave.

I can assure you, Ivan, that I was frequently being targetted with quite nasty espionage attacks from the AI in BotF. Of course, this was with an AI from over 5 years ago, and on only a P166 CPU-so imagine what the AI could do with this espionage system on current games!! I hate the idea of bringing back spies because it simply involves WAAAAYYYY too much Micromanagement. If anything, civ has been moving more and more towards abstraction, and I can see no good argument for moving backwards in this regard!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

When I read over Aussie Lurker's post after mine, it did make more sense that there would be less management. I was in the frame of mind of the pedantic player who would sit down and try and manage everything each turn, which would detract from the game. Of course, that's their problem ;)

With the one issue with how would the AI handle it. It's a good pont, and raises a few questions : Will it have the same system, will it 'cheat' and so render espionage useless for the AI? It depends on how it is programmed with respect to the game

Anyway, espionage can be a powerful tool when done right, which is why I think certain countries should also have a trait which makes them effective at intelligence gathering. I was thinking perhaps it could be integrated into the scientific trait, seeing as the civ's that I can think of with that trait often had the recongisable brightest minds, showed resourcefulness and basically around and staying one step in front of the rest of the world.

Should espionage really cost thousands of gold? A single espionage mission seems to cost as much to preform as wonders cost to build. I dont think James Bond ever needed the funding of magellans voyage to steal a russian decryptor. All he needed was a $50 gun, a car and a gadget or two. I think that the cars and gadgets can be funded by a matinence fee in the city that holds the intelligence agency (2 gold per turn at most).

This is how it should be (listed from least to most expensive):

Expose ememy spy (max cost 2)
Steal World Map (max cost-5)
Steal Tec (max cost 8)
Steal Plans (max cost 15)
Sabatoge (max cost 25)
Propoganda (max cost 50)

Why not add:
Raid Treasury?
Bio Warfare (involving units and cities)?
Unit Takeover (workers/settlers/naval/air units only)?
Assassinations?

Ideas/suggestions welcome.


2 gold? Are you kidding? Then all people whould do is espionage. I agree it could be a very little bit smaller but not that cheap. If life really did have james bonds, then everyone would of stolen stealth.

I like the raid treasury and bio warfare. But how would unit take over work? Do you get a unit in there space? And what would an assassination do?

Ah, now you see why dividing 'Covert Operations' into several categories is the best way to approach the issue of missions-let me show you:

First, you have espionage. This tells you valuable information about the nation you focus your attention on, in the following fashion:

1) Civil/Domestic: These missions involve revealing information about another civs current government; its state religion; what religious/political/cultural great leaders they have; the overall mood of its population; the civs current characteristics (i.e. militaristic, commercial etc); the nations current civic nature; its absolute and relative cultural strength; and what civs this nation has communications with.

2) Military: This reveals things like what number/kind of military units the civ has; its most advanced unit type; the number of military improvements in its cities; any recent troops movements in the current turn; any military great leaders they have; and whom they have MPP's and/or military alliances with.

3) Economic: can reveal what the other nations economc strength is; how strong the private sector is; find out their average wealth; the presence and number of economic improvements, what luxury and bonus resources (and quantity) they have, and with whom they are trading them; what economic great leaders they have.

4) Scientific: Pretty obvious, really-you can determine what techs the other civ has; what their current research focus us; what (and how many) scientific improvements they have; what scientific great leaders they possess; what science pacts they have with other civs.

5) Industrial: You can ascertain what industrial improvements (and how many) the civ has; determine what their average productivity is; what industrial great leaders they have; what strategic resources they have access to, and whom they might be trading them with.

Sabotage, of course, involves the damage and/or destruction of another civs capabilities. Such missions would normally follow a successful espionage mission of the same type. So, for example, you have a successful scientific espionage mission, which reveals a tech the other civ has, which can then be stolen in a future scientific sabotage mission.

1) Domestic/Civil: You can do Propaganda and/or create a cultural enclave in a foreign city; incite civil war/revolution; assassinate great political/cultural/religious leaders (requires player permission); destroy Domestic Improvements/Wonders (ones which are not military, scientific or commercial); damage or destroy farms; undermine the civs reputation in specific quarters.

2) Military: Damage units; Damage/destroy military improvements (both inside and outside of cities-such as forts, airbases and outposts); assassinate or bribe military great leaders (defecting leaders bring any units under their 'direct command' with them) (requires player permission); undermine any MPP's and/or military alliances.

3) Economic: 'Destroy' and/or 'pillage' gold in the treasury of a single city OR the national treasury; damage or destroy roads; undermine any trade agreements; damage or destroy economic improvements/wonders; assassinate or bribe a great economic leader; damage or steal a civs luxury resources for x turns (makes said resources unavailable for this time).

4) Scientific: Damage/destroy scientific improvements/wonders; undermine any science pacts; steal technology; steal a city's 'beakers'; destroy research (causes civ to lose a certain % of the 'beakers' it has accumulated towards their most current discovery); assassinate or bribe a great scientific leader (defecting science leaders bring a % of the other nations current accumulated 'beakers' with him).

5) Industrial: Damage/destroy industrial improvements; damage/steal a strategic resource for X turns; damage/destroy railroads or mines; destroy or steal a % of a city's shield output; assassinate/bribe an industrial great leader (who brings a % of the original civs shields with him if he defects).

OK, last of all, some missions-such as poisoning of food/water supplies, biological/chemical terrorism or planting of a nuclear device do not fit specifically into one area, but are a combination of domestic and military sabotage. They, like assassination, also require the players permission before they can occur.
The thing is that each of the missions I described above have varying degrees of difficulty, which will effect the chance of success. Counterintelligence points can also modify the success chance of covert operations, as well as allowing said player to expose a spy/saboteur in the act (which will hurt the spying players reputation); feed false info to a known spy and/or plant evidence implicating another nation in an act of espionage/sabotage!!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker

Oh and, Strato, I can only speak for my BotF experiences, but I can assure you that in that game the AI definitely seemed to be effected by espionage. I once sent the Klingons to War with the Cardassians after planting evidence implicating the Cardassians in a few acts of Sabotage against Klingon interests.
(ahhh, the joys of the Tal Shiar ;)!)
Also, the AI routinely used acts of sabotage on me in many of my games!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

ok, on the one hand, James Bond style espionage is rare in real life. It happened, but real espionage consists of guys in a basement somewhere (likely an "embassy") listening in on wiretapped conversations.

On the other hand, realistic espionage IS NOT FUN. Civ3 espionage is 'realistic', or attempts to be, and is so exciting that I have never used it, and the gold costs mean that the AI has never tried it against me, as it is easy for a good player to manipulate the AI into staying poor.

The biggest and best reason for going back to civ2 style spies is the excitement of sneaking them past enemy watchmen. This is an area where I feel it is worth going cinematic.

You see though, Rhialto, the system I propose gives you the excitement of covert operations WITHOUT the boredom of moving lots of spy units around. Also, as it works on many of the same principles as research and luxury funding from Civ3, then the AI is much more likely to use it (i.e., works on POINTS, not directly with gold!)
Let me give you a little taste of how it might work:

You have two Civs, England and France, who are also both in contact with Germany and Rome. Now, England has invested enough points into military espionage, against France, to give it a 40% chance of success, and France has enough invested in counterintelligence (or, perhaps, Counterintelligence against England) to give it a 50% chance of sucess. On this turn, the RNG generates a 30%-giving England a '10% success' and France a '20% success'-meaning that though the English Agents got what they were looking for, French counterintelligence is on to them, and they warn the French player in the upcoming turn.

At this point, France has two choices offered to them (in a pop-up box), then can either expose/capture said agent(s) or 'compromise' them. If the former option is chosen, then the English player will be told, all future covert actions against France will be at an X% penalty for Y turns, and the information will damage Englands reputation amongst the French people and, to a lesser extent, amongst Germany and Rome.
If France Compromises the English agent, then no-one else is any the wiser but, during each English Espionage mission, the French have a 50% chance of slipping the agent bogus information. Also, English Sabotage missions become unusually unsuccessful ;)! The English player, however, will have a chance, based on THEIR counterintelligence-Frances counterintelligence success, of differentiating the real from the bogus info! Once bogus info is detected, then within 1-3 turns all future actions will no longer be considered 'compromised'!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I would like to see the "realistic" fun espionage be automated in some way, whether it is hands off, or in a system like Aussier Lurker's, but nonetheless, included.

I want to be able to control the fun, unrealistic, James Bond form of espionage: the sabatage, etc.

Ah, now you see why dividing 'Covert Operations' into several categories is the best way to approach the issue of missions-let me show you:

First, you have espionage. This tells you valuable information about the nation you focus your attention on, in the following fashion:

1) Civil/Domestic: These missions involve revealing information about another civs current government; its state religion; what religious/political/cultural great leaders they have; the overall mood of its population; the civs current characteristics (i.e. militaristic, commercial etc); the nations current civic nature; its absolute and relative cultural strength; and what civs this nation has communications with.
...
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker

I LOVE that idea. The rest are also good.

P.S. Why not just put

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker

In your sig?

No, I don't think the cost is too much.

Stealing a tech, if successful, is so much cheaper than purchase or self-research, especially after Industrial Ages. Making it cheap will greatly unbalance the game.

Its a lot of number crunching, which is why it would work for the AI. Balance will be critical, bugs will be exploited, so if Auusie_Lurker's style were to be introduced, then it will often be a feature that will be consistently be updated in patches. No real biggy there I reckon.

It will also take diplomacy onto a whole new level. One thing I was also thinking would be blackmailing a foreign civ (I don't recall this being mentioned, sorry if it was). This might be more suited as an advanced option. What can happen is that a person can keep tabs on what the other civ's are doing with their espionage projects by ways of accumulating evidence (without them knowing of course) I suppose this may even fall under the counter - intelligence banner perhaps. One instance could be two allied civs may even set up an alliance where a weaker neighbour may ask for help in intelligence, and the more powerful ally offers to keep an eye on things. Or, a bored player can see what other people are up to, and focus on a few Civs that are a real nuisance which in-fighting will soften up, and accumulate evidence as a new bargaining chip.

This sort of option could really only come at a later part of the game once the technology is there for evidence to be reproduced. From there, new wars can be started, or desirable techs obtained to maintain peace. It really emphasises also that if you want to play dirty on a weaker Civ, its Big Brother Civ could still be watching.

I hope this makes some sense. If it doesn't, I'll try and re-iterate another way. Really, I think it would seamlessly fit into Aussie_Lurker's scheme, who has a better understanding on this whole thing, so could really say so.

Well, it won't really involve THAT much number crunching. All the player needs to know, really, is that the more points he has allocated to a particular form of covert operations, the more likely he is to be successful! I'm working on a principle of 5 'Intelligence Points'=1% chance of success (though this would depend ENTIRELY on game balance issues) and, also, perhaps 10 Intelligence Points=1 mission per 10 turns. So, if a player has 60 points allocated to military espionage, then he has a 12% chance of success at these missions, and will perform them 6 turns out of 10! As you can see, the maths are VERY simple, though I admit that other factors would come into it.
I could also see situations in diplomacy where you can form an 'Intelligence Pact' or have a 'Blackmail Attempt'! Of course, what would make things even MORE interesting would be to have an 'Intelligence Pact', then use your Counterintelligence to feed your 'ally' false intelligence ;)! That seems to be what you are asking for, Strato, and you're right that it could be put into my model quite seamlessly!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Have you gone onto the Firaxis site, and submitting this as a game idea. Espiionage is dirty work, and the way this idea is looking, then I really think it complements the 'dirtyness.' Firaxis would be mad not to consider this really. It might actually be the model they need.

Also, I forgot to mention in my last post that the number crunching bit works well with the AI because it would rely on maths and algorithms to function efficiently I would expect. For a player, then they have the option of not just reacting to a situation, but also initiating a situation, so they are able to adjust as they see fit, and not worry about the maths. Most of this stuff would come simply from practice I think, and not needing a detailed understanding of the mathematics behind it all - a player however can go further and understand it to really make espionage an integral part of their plans. Both newbie and vet friendly. Comp wins, player wins.

While this might be similar to ideas already suggested, here's my ideas anyway ;)

Like Civ3, it will be abstract, but, unlike Civ3, it would require more planning. Instead of Investigating a City, you plant a spy in a specific city. This requires gold every turn to maintain his position, but you get to see everything in the city. If you want to take the risk, you can spend more money to sabotage an improvement or unit (such as a ship or plane). You could also spend money to insite a rebellion or riot in the city as well. The most expensive job would be to bribe the city, which would convert it, units and all, to your civilization. I heard that poison water supplies and suitcase Nukes were cut out of Civ3 because of 9-11. If they are back, they would probably be even more expensive.

In addition to planting spies in rival cities, you can plant them in your own. They can then be on the look-out for enemy spies if they are planted in the city. This can especially be useful if your city is captured, because your spy will stay in place to keep an eye on things for you. Also, improvements can be used to combat spies in a city, such as Police Stations (and probably the Intelligence Agency itself).

If you catch a spy you can do a couple things with him. You can either Inprison/Kill him (you will may or may not find out who he works for) or you can "watch" him to find wait for his next move. If you choose the second option, you might be able to find out the loccations of other enemy spies. Of course, he also might just escape and you'll loose him.

Diplomats act different in that they act in an official manner and don't hide unnoticed in enemy cites. The best way I can figure is for an investigate city working the way it does now. IIRC, Stealing World Maps is a Spy function in Civ3. I think that it would be a cool Diplomat function and would work how it does now (bribery to get a copy). Of course, since diplomats are official representatives of your government, they don't get killed. They are released without a problem and can resume their duties. Declaring war, of course, will close the embassy and end any "official espionage".

Stealing technology is something I'm not sure about, same with stealing enemy plans. I suppose bribing is the most realistic way of doing it, but that brings it back to the same problem that currently exists. To steal a technology, I would assume there would have to be a spy in the city with the palace who bribes some scientist. I think the cost should be cheaper (since it often doesn't seem worth it in Civ3), but perhaps make it riskier, or more catostraphic is failed. For stealing plans, the spy would be planted in the army (or the city with the pentagon, after it is built). This would also be risky, and it might be more worthwhile to plant many spies in border cities.

Also, in addition to spies, there probably should be a U-2 Spy plane unit which could fly over enemy territory and see into cities to determine the units inside (these planes could be shot down for violating airspace, if there is a SAM or maybe even fighters).

I am glad that this topic has been raised again. I started a thread on this a while ago (see it at http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=87537) but there didn't seem to be much interest at the time.

I like some of Aussie_Lurkers ideas, but then he is an Australian and all good things come from the Great South Land. ;)

Regardless of all that, I do still think that there is much room for improvement. On a conceptual level, I would like to see a sliding scale for the quantity and quality of information (with each investment bringing better results, more frequently, and spies gaining experience thereby improving their service delivery), the ability to develop espionage networks, information on a variety of topics (military, culture, foreign affairs, unit concentrations etc) and also more reconnaissance units (Global Hawk, P-3 Orions, ELINT/SIGINT assets etc). The more options that exist for gathering information on everybody (there are no such things as friendly intelligence agencies, only intelligence agencies of friendly countries etc) the better.

Also, you should be able to have many of the espionage options from day one of your empire. STarting espionage in the Industrial age is stupid. Technology just increases the sophistication and success of espionage and counter-intelligence.

Aussie's system seems to be well sophisticated. I mean the division of covert operations' types.
But if we do not use diplomat/spy units, then we must face ridiculous contradiction in the game. How do you estabilish embassy in a civ wich you can not travel to? Even, more, you do not know where it is? These are questions in Civ3 that wait for solution.
So, i would bring back diplomat and spy units. More, i would use commando units.
E.g. the Nazis' scientific progress for A-bomb was devastated by an English commando operation. English guys had to go there, kill the guards and explode the facilities. AND THEN had to get out of there.
so, in Civ4 a commando unit would be able to penetrate a hostile city garrisoned by enemy troops and and accomplish its mission.
The chance of succesfull mission would depend on the grraison's number, the counterintelligence facilities, enemy spy units, etc .etc.

Although Aussie_Lurker's idea has merit in comparison to the Civ 2 system, I have to disagree on a few points. Firstly, although BOTF's system was exciting in terms of missions and possibilities, the way the IP system worked in terms of acquisition was, like a great deal of the rest of the game, excessively focused around micromanagement. Building intel buildings on individual colonies and assigning personnel to them on a per planet basis was a pointless complication of something that should have been handled empire-wide. Secondly, many of the espionage missions on offer came back with the result of, 'The Klingon have 4 Type IV factories on planet Unprounceable', which in terms of gameplay was useless, as there was no way of acquiring a more holistic view of a colony's assets without being putting the entire workforce of the empire to intelligence work and recieving an individual report on every individual planet's economy, military, science and production.

Since it's already been said that the aim this time round is simplification, regardless of the merits of the idea I think we can discount the introduction of IPs. Myself, I would prefer a system similar to a combination of SMAC's and GalCiv's. In SMAC, infiltrating an opponent's base would allow you to see the production, facilities and defending units of every city in their faction. This was obviously insanely useful, to the point that in multiplayer games one had to maintain a permanent screen against probe teams. It was, therefore, a little excessive to get all that information from a single action. Therefore, i suggest a combination of this system with that of Galciv, where the amount of money spent on espionage in a particular empire produces a varying amount of intelligence dependent on relative empire size. I suggest that Civ 4 does something similar, by at the lowest level allowing your Civ to see the buildings in your opponent's cities, then what's being produced and researched, and finally the defensive units. This sort of thing is useful in answering TLC's concerns, as it facilitates the kind of grand planning that Civ is all about, and is more representative of actual espionage. You can add or take away things like diplomatic relations and amount of gold in the treasury, but I would stand by this basic model.

Obviously the adaption of the BotF will be streamlined for empire-wide and city specific operations. Also, you could only get info from cities you can find/see. This would solve the 'far far away' problem.

Also, Civ 4 is not being simplified. Soren said the complexity is about right. That means if you complicate one thing you must simplify another. I would be willing to simplify workers to complicate this.

Thats absolutely right, Sir_Schwick. I'm not advocating a complete CLONE of the BotF system, merely introducing the best elements of their intelligence system. In my preferred model, it will be not unlike the Civ2/3 method of conducting research. i.e. you build improvements in your cities that, in turn, generate your IP points. Then, you boost your points more by adjusting the 'tax slider' to pay for Covert Operations out of your budget!
Also, as far as WHAT cities you can hit with covert ops, I think a good rule of thumb might be-if you can trace a trade route to them, then you can spy on them too! i.e., if you cannot trace a direct, unbroken line of travel from any one of your cities to the cities of your enemy, then you cannot conduct covert missions against them. Obviously, KNOWING about a city would also be vitally important in determining if you can hit that city too!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

*sigh*
just give the spys back then ability to nuke the city

I don't think that we can necessarily infer that complexity can be traded between areas on some kind of quid pro quo basis. Soren has made the motto of Civ 4 'Simplify, simplify, simplify', and thus I think it's unlikely that any area is going to be significantly more complex. With this in mind, I'm a little puzzled why Aussie_Lurker seems quite set on introducing another resource, especially one as abstracted as IPs. The model you propose would require that each city constructed some kind of intelligence improvement, which would require the invention of an entirely new type of building, some kind of spy camp, which doesn't seem to mesh with the existing types. While buildings such as courthouses and police stations ostensibly provide a degree of counter-intelligence provision (e.g. in Civ 3, spy missions in cities containing said buildings were less likely to succeed) they don't train spies. This tends to be done more centrally.

Thus, while I would accept that some kind of Intelligence Agency structure could increase the coefficient between gold spent and intelligence gained, I remain dubious of the merits of introducing a building type to generate a new resource.

Since spy missions can be divided into global and particular categories (i.e. steal map or destroy structure) I'm uncertain of the benefits of limiting the use of spies to particular cities in an empire. After all, unless they remove the Steal World Map option, you'll already be able to see them all.

OK Elysium, although I see that there might be room for wholly new 'intelligence' structures to provide IP's, I don't see that there is any reason why we couldn't simply connect IP production to existing improvements which may, historically, have had some role in intelligence gathering and other covert activities.
For instance, merchants, due to their extensive travelling, were either recruited as spies, or were used as a cover for covert activities. So were diplomats and the like. Therefore, a number of economic, educational and 'foreign relations' improvements/Wonders could also double in the production of IP's! It si true, though, that most of the IP's your nation would produce-especially later in the game, would come from a combination of several 'covert ops' related Small/Great Wonders, and the money which you divert into Covert Operations!!
As for missions, I don't see why the player would need to bother himself with selecting specific targets. The computer would choose them based on chance of success and location of a suitable 'target'-and you would simply hear about missions when, and if, they succeeded! Also, with an abstract system like this, you would still be limited by the degree of travelling you could do. So, if ocean travel is out, then so is Espionage against overseas targets!
I think that, for the quite trivial problems that my model raises, it solves a great deal more SERIOUS problems with either the Civ2 or Civ3 Espionage models!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Elysium, I just do not believe your inference that Soren's aim to simplify Civ 4 is correct. This powerpoint (http://www.gdconf.com/archives/2004/johnson_soren.zip) has a slide saying that his aim is to reduce MM, but maintain the current level of complexity. A new espionage system based on intelligence investment would actually be a feature worth simplifying workers or transportation for.

I'd just like to add in this: a person can rightfully choose to conduct espionage. Building specific intelligence buildings would be at the choosing of the player, depending on their style of play. So while some buildings could have some purpose for intelligence (ie: the courthouse or police station) don't forget there can be a three tiered style of IP gathering (much like the market place, bank, stock exchange or library, university, research lab).

So basically, building some essential buildings such as the marketplace or courthouse means a person is able to gather some basic intelligence, so the option would still be there, but to go further, other buildings would be needed. Its getting the right balance of how much IP's a building gives, and how much conducting a mission would cost that is the critical part in this game, as I've stated earlier.

For me, the major key is that simply building these 'multi-use' buildings alone WILL, as Strato points out, give you sufficient points to conduct minor intelligence operations and/or defend yourself from same. In order to get any REAL benefit from your intelligence community requires you to build the specific Wonders AND investing sufficient monetary resources into your intelligence activities!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Essentially what is being asked then is a replication of the professionalisation (is that a word?) of intelligence/espionage. That is essential for the game. Having the option to create support infrastructure (libraries, police stations) and then develop a task specific wonder/city improvement, and invest resources (planting spies) would in a simple way copy a real-world scenario and give the player information to make strategic decisions. The progression from adhoc spying, to developing a professional organisation capable of meeting your information requirements is a tantilising prospect. It is not just knowledge that gives power, but timely knowledge.

And now I'm off for a coffee. All this talk has made my head spin :crazyeye:

You pretty much have the right idea, GeneralX! The idea is that some of your education, adminstration and economic improvements will generate some amount of 'Intelligence Points'. As the game progresses, you will be able to build Small and Great Wonders that generate many MORE IP's and/or boost the average 'training' of your agents. On top of the points generated by improvements and wonders, you can boost your IP levels by adjusting the portion of your budget that you direct into Intelligence (much in the same fashion as diverting money into research!)
You can then assign these points as I mentioned above. As you achieve greater success at SPECIFIC mission types, the amount of IP's you have in those types of missions increase-to reflect the improved experience of your agents!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I like where this thread is going. Also, I would like to think that all buildings help other buildings in some form. Having a Banks allows your intelligence services to move money silently for operations and catch other operations doing the same. Intelligence buildings help banks perform with less corruption. Harbours help marketplaces generate more tax revenue. More infrastructure increases overall effectiveness, not just isolated.

I'm sorry, but I remain to be convinced why IPs in addition to gold are necessary, when all the effects you give in your post can be duplicated without the introduction of another resource, by simply changing the coefficient between gold invested and intelligence returns. Just look at Galciv for an example. Please justify while you feel IPs are needed.

Sir Schwick, I'm afraid I must disagree with your interpretation of the slideshow. Soren disparage AOM (unfairly, in my opinion) for introducing too many additional features. Also, in slide 48, which I assume is the one you mean, Soren says: "Simplifying old systems leaves room for new design elements. We were honoring the intention but not the letter of the old design"
Taking into account the criteria mentioned in other areas of the show (e.g. the hunt for 'killer features') I would infer that any complexity removed from other areas would be used for his new babies (i.e. religion & civics) and thus we're unlikely to see something as unnecessarily complex as IPs brought in. I must also express surprise that you would wish to have the worker game removed; it is, after all, currently the key to playing the game successfully, and the megalomaniac aesthete in me enjoys creating a developed empire. While improvements to MM such as the ability to control stacks of workers properly are feasible, I doubt whether Soren will alter such a crucial part of the game too much, for fear of veterans complaining that he's turning Civ into CTP. But still, that's just my interpretation.

It doesn't require BOTH gold and IP's to commit espionage etc. Gold, via a slider, BOOSTS the IP production of your nation-in the same way that your science slider boosts the research ouput (beakers) produced by research improvements!! Does that make sense?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

IPs are a way of quantifying investment in intelligence. THe problem with civ 3 in particular was that intelligence required almost no investmnet(although never any returns) besides the gold. This meant the decision to use espionage was not a long-term strategic one, it was on the moment.

Aussie, I like the system and think that IPs should be generated from trade to creat consistency between design elements. Intelligence buildings would increase generation efficiency just as libraries would increase research efficiency. IMHO culture should be operated the same way, you can get tons of culture if you let your cictznes spend on that instead of science or tax and have the right buildings.

Well, yes I do agree that who you trade with, and how many trade routes you have, should effect the number of IP's you have. Perhaps trade-related techs can boost your net IP levels, whilst having trade routes to certain nations will boost the number of IP's you have directed at that nation.

For instance, lets say that Germany and France are in contact, and France has allocated 10 IP's towards Germany (all in espionage). Now, if France and Germany form some kind of trade route, France might get a 20% bonus to their IP investment-meaning that they now have 12 IP's 'invested' in Germany (having recieved 2 free points via trade-to reflect all of the 'traders' and 'administrators'-some of whom will no doubt be spies/agents-in Germany to ensure the smooth flow of the trade route). If, however, France had NO IP's directed at Germany, then they would have recieved no IP bonus from the Trade Route!
Hope that makes sense :)!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Culture and trade should be this way as well. Th

Hey Sir-Schwick, I understand what you mean about diverting funds to boost the culture output of your buildings, but I fear that I do not understand what you mean about a similar model applying to trade :confused: Would you be able to explain it to me-as YOU see it?

I misspoke on Trade, since that is how you generate culture, science, taxes, intelligence, happiness.

Something I hope wouldn't get included would be siphoning money off an enermy via espionage. Then it would, I believe simply lead to the powerful becoming more powerfu under the systeml, and so there's an exploit.

I don't think trade should work with espionage, or at the very least, have certain forms of government not allow trade associated espionage bonuses. The reason being, trade is very much a neutral element of an empire, well namely the modern world anyway. It's up to corporations to make a decision (though can be bound by contractual arrangements with the government). For example, Coca Cola is distributed all around the world, and there is no alterior motive for selling it, besides raising cash for a corporation and the share holders, board members etc.

Yes, but that trade allows an easier amount of intelligence penetration through corporate and non-corporate means. Bersides, trade is cvilization is diverted into taxes and research, the second of which is meant as a non-governmental distribution. Citizens either spend on research or happiness what you do not take from them. Espionage could also extend to affecting trade, production, and trade of techs as well. The proper term would be Intelligence.

Espionage could also extend to affecting trade, production, and trade of techs as well.

Now we're thinking. If you were to assess a country there are several aspects to examine, one of which is the economic make-up of the nation. I imagine there many governments in the world that when preparing for a major trade negotiation, will gather information on negotiators, the target country’s economy and outlook, and which markets can be exploited and how. It is basic business sense to do that so as to gain the most advantage in negotiations. I agree with you that it is just as important to be able to gather information to assist in trade as it would be for military purposes. Timely knowledge gives you power, regardless of which sphere you are operating in.