I think that there should be some natural disaster that could pop up in the game. I know that in conquests the had volcanos and plagues but how about a hurricane, earhquake or tsunami???

here are my ideas

Hurricane: destroys city improvements, kills some of the population and destroys roads,railroads,mines and irrigation.some of the food tiles might be temporarily useless.Might even lead to an epidemic because of no food.Almost a nuclear bomb same devastation but no pollution.

Earthquake: pretty much the same thing but it is more ranged than a hurricane.

Tsunami: also the same thing but it also floods the costal areas and takes workers to fix. somewhat like pollution

This could also bring up a whole new frontier on diplomacy.

Maybe a civilization could donate money to fix the problems and make your diplomaticstatus higher because other civ can rely on your support if anything would happen or you could depend on them.

maybe to help the cities they could make a "salvation unit" that bring food to the city like the convoys in civ 2



I would like to hear your oppinions :goodjob: :goodjob:

sounds interesting, if that happend i would want a technology that lets me see the tectonic plates, that way i could avoid doing building on the faults

maybe there could be a new abillty after computers that shows you tectonic plates on the minimap on the side. The one you can chose to see georaphicaly,teritorialy. thats where they could add it if it exsists in civ 4

somewhat like
Sorry, no pollution!

IMHO, most of the natural disaster are too small scale.
hurricane: Katrina? Yes, it did cause problems, but it wasn't all Kat's fault, was it? The only reason I'd see hurricanes is for the Kamikaze.

earthquake: I think it is alo too small scale

tsunami: just an earthquake in water. Again too small, IMHO.

Sorry, no pollution!

Even though pollution per se no longer exists, we could have damage similar to CivIII pollution (not caused by CivIV pollution).

IMHO, most of the natural disaster are too small scale.
hurricane: Katrina? Yes, it did cause problems, but it wasn't all Kat's fault, was it? The only reason I'd see hurricanes is for the Kamikaze.

Actually, yeah, it kinda was Kat's fault. Whether you fault the government or not for the slow evacuation, the fact is that a major city is now destroyed.

earthquake: I think it is alo too small scale

tsunami: just an earthquake in water. Again too small, IMHO.

Tell that to the people in India a few years back. Incidentally, have you ever heard of the La Palma Megatsunami?

Actually, yeah, it kinda was Kat's fault. Whether you fault the government or not for the slow evacuation, the fact is that a major city is now destroyed.
I ain't talking about evacuation, I'm talking about the levees. They were not good enough, as we saw it.

1. The extent of the life lost was largely related to the failure (not slow, FAILURE) in evacuation.
2. The structural damage caused by the levee failure was largely related to the fact that the levees were not designed to withstand a category 4 hurricane and even with repairs/improvements that had already been funded by the state and federal goverment (see: city corruption level), it still would not have likely held.
3. Saying these things is nothing more than repeating what's been on all news/weather channels since the day it hit.
4. What the f/.{3}/ does this all have to do with the game? ... Well, perhaps they need a *EMA in the game? Maybe an "insured" demographic level that states how many of the citizens are insured against disaster? Maybe we could get a cool graphical representation on the cloud cover layer of the map? Would early civilizations take this to be an act of /[gG]od/ (see: religion)?

sounds interesting, if that happend i would want a technology that lets me see the tectonic plates, that way i could avoid doing building on the faults But no one does that. People don't move out of the way of natural disasters, they just go about their lives and occasionally build infrastructure designed to minimize the impact when a disaster finally arrives.

(Besides, where would they go? There're few places that aren't vulnerable to one kind of disaster or another.

sounds interesting, if that happend i would want a technology that lets me see the tectonic plates, that way i could avoid doing building on the faults

I like that a lot. The whole idea sounds pretty cool but could possibly just become very irritating.

ok i sense some people don't like the idea. I didn't say there should be pollution i said the devastation is like a nuke but minus the pollution. I also thought may be aftre satelites you can send a small wonder like a weather sateltie to monitor the earth. And guys this is not a hurricane disaster discussion.

You guys forgot about Tornados.

your right, tornados should be much smalle but can cause some damage

Good point about Kat's damage mostly from lack of levees+evacuation,

Meaning that if your city has levees/dams/dikes, etc. it would minimize hurricane/flood type damage.

If you have meterology it would minimize all weather type damage (ability for some forewarning/preparation)

Geology+computers would help show fault lines (+Reinforced construction to reduce the damage)... would also minimize damage from Volcanoes...Slightly (evacuation)

good point it would be cool to have some sort of warning sign to eavcuate
you could turn 1 person into a settler evrybody else into workers it is almost like evacuating. the you make a new city wit the settler and all the workers join the city. it might take a long time but it is worth savin lives.

AND ONCE AGIN NO TALK ABOUT KATRINA. JUST ABOUT THIS THREAD!!!!

I don't care, just as long as they get rid of the plague or at the very least change it so maybe it devastates the city pop in one turn instead of just going on and on nearly indefinately and making the game a drag.

in modern times yes, most of disasters can be fixed, but long time ago... Locust swarm and famine happened in Egypt and almost crippled entire covolization, weakening it dramatically. Hurricane saved Japan from mongol invasion...

earthquake: I think it is alo too small scale

tsunami: just an earthquake in water. Again too small, IMHO.Yes, but how much area is a single tile supposed to represent? If a tile represents a small area, then yes, but if it represents a 100 mile or 50 mile radius than no, it is not to small.


This is a neat concept, but think of this, your just about to wipe out an enemy that you have been trying to kill the whole game, but whoosh! sorry! your whole (experenced units, ones that took so long to build up with specific traits) just went out into the ocean and you are set for the AI to rebuild while you try despertly to recover. A tad frustrating, no? ;), it would have to be something that can be predicted with greater accuracy and seen faster the later you go in tech.

I woudl love to see natural disasters in the game. But there are dangerous consequences (not just in the game) which I'll mention.

"Movable" disasters liek tornadoes, hurricanes, etc could act like units and come in from the sea on a collision course with land, where they do damage and disappate. These could appear out of nowhere from under the aesthetic cloud cover we've seen in the screenshots.

Earthquakes could occur along fault lines along costs and mountains, destroying, or partially destroying terrain for a "line'' of so many tiles, depending on the strength. Usually just 3-4 tiles would be effective, enough to reasonable illustrate the effect on a single city or area.

Civ3conq did a great job with the volcanoes, but I think the pollution aspect was a trunoff. The lava should just cool and harden, and shouldnt contribute to global warming (i could be wrong).

Of course looking at recent events of this year, Firaxis will most likely get negative feedback if they put any natural disasters in the game, because one or more people out there will fuind it offensive and raise a big stink about it. Disasters do happen, and they'd make a worthy addition to the game. Many a great empire's plans have been shattered or even aided by natural, uncontrolable events.

Of course, as in many games, disasters could be an option that could beturned off with lower difficulty levels.

Thats just my take on this.

"Movable" disasters liek tornadoes, hurricanes, etc could act like units and come in from the sea on a collision course with land, where they do damage and disappate. These could appear out of nowhere from under the aesthetic cloud cover we've seen in the screenshots.


I am not saying it is like a unit or that it should appear out of no where but maybe the partis near the equator can expirience hurricanes and you know asia is a very fulty area for earth quakes so maybe thay could put one place in the random map with faulty lines

Yeah but how will they be represented other than visually?

Maybe disasters are good, but not in ancient times. I mean, did you see a tornado, hurricane or earthquake to last 50 years? And also in medieval times no disasters (only plagues).

Maybe disasters are good, but not in ancient times. I mean, did you see a tornado, hurricane or earthquake to last 50 years? And also in medieval times no disasters (only plagues).
Dude, did you ever hear the story that took place in 1805 when Julius Ceasar of the Romans, who, despite being about 4500 years old, looked like a 30 year old, built an army. It took them 50 years to go to it's neighboring city Washington and then another 50 years to go to it's enemy city New York led by QUEEN JOAN OF ARC OF FRANCE! Who was at the time building a space ship.

The game is in no way truely realistic, and having natural disasters lasting over 50 years is fine with me.

LOL Good one!

lol :lol: :lol:

that is a ver good joke mrdi

But seriously though they can't put something like that in, not in this day an age. A handful of people may get offended by it and the lawyers will have a field day. I think the Civ3Conq volcanoes came out great. Since there hasn't been a big volcano eruption recently, and it's more or less part of the natural terrain, it would be a safe addition.

Good point about Kat's damage mostly from lack of levees+evacuation,

Meaning that if your city has levees/dams/dikes, etc. it would minimize hurricane/flood type damage.

If you have meterology it would minimize all weather type damage (ability for some forewarning/preparation)

Geology+computers would help show fault lines (+Reinforced construction to reduce the damage)... would also minimize damage from Volcanoes...Slightly (evacuation)

Yeah I like the idea of metorlogy and you could order an evacuation of your city (there would be some time tweaking here) when it's in the path of Hurricane Sid. :D That would distrbute the cities population to all of your nearby cities (if there are no nearby cities you'd found refugee camps) until the disaster is over. Of course there would always be those who would stay in the city.

I would be worried for Firaxis if they put a disaster like ''hurricane'' into the game. Here's a scenario. Someone who lived in that area plays the game, gets offended by it, hires a lawyer and sues for all sorts of emotional damages. Then more people jump on the bandwagon. Before you know it, Firaxis could be sunk! Nobody wants that top happen! I think they should play it safe and not include it. Perhaps they could implement it in a later expansion pack.

Natural Disasters have had a generally smaller impact on history. Frankly, I dont see any balanced way it would fit into the game. There are plenty of other things they can implement before Natural Disasters.

I think there could be natural disasters in Civ4, but with an option to enable it (default = disabled) when you want. Disasters should exist at least in scenarios, as plague does in Civ3.

I think those disasters would work in similar way as vulcanoes work in Civ3. In Civ3, a vulcano is a modified mountain, which spills lava (err, polution :rolleyes: ) to random neighbour tiles. Following this idea, we could use "hidden" tiles which can trigger a pre-defined disaster: hurricanes, tsunamis or earthquakes.

The number of these "disaster tiles" should be accordingly to map size and its known frequency. Tsunamis are very rare events, so one tile set as "tsunami spot" in a standard map size is ok, while two seems enough in a huge map. Earthquakes are more common, so 3 or 4 "earthquake spots" is a good number for a standard map and the same number for "hurricane spots".

It's frenquency should be accordingly to reality. A "tsunami spot" should trigger only one tsunami in the whole game, while an "earthquake spot" should trigger 2 or 3 earthquakes and "hurricane spots" should be more frequents, 4 or 5. The "result" and area of effect should vary accordingly to disaster type. A tsunami affects a group of coastal tiles (but not affects hills and mountains, duh), a hurricane walk in a curve and an earthquake affects a non-straight line of tiles.

In my opinion, there are too many vulcanoes in Conquests, some of these squares should have different disasters. The frequency of lava spills are strange: some tiles seems to never spill lava, while some tiles seems to spill 3 times in only one game.

As Civ4 is 3d, I think it's easier to create these effects than in a 2d game. I don't know if Firaxis is doing something like old disasters, but they are nice idea and could be enable/disable when the player wants, in the same window where we set map configurations.

But anyone remembers the natural disasters of Civ?
The shifting rainfall patterns from SMAC? (linked with pollution and construction of factories in certain an extension of the global warming effect)

Aside from wild animals, do we still have global warming?
Is it possible to mod climates shifts due to our development?

As global warming is... invaild at best and total BS at worst, I don't know if they should keep it. But if someone sues over a game including a Hurricane they need help, I am sick and tired of people sueing over every little thing! Maybe they could include a warning: THIS CONTAINS NATRUAL DISATERS, IF YOU ARE OFFENDED BY US PUTTING THEM THERE THEN YOU ARE LIKELY TOO DUMB TO KNOW HOW TO PLAY THIS GAME ANYWAY!!!

I find the diplomatic idea of helping other civilizations recover from disasters natural and otherwise interesting. Here in New Zealand much of our overseas military commitment is for peacekeeping. It does affect our foreign relations. If one is pursuing a cultural victory...

Ok,

I am back from my reicent suspension...just like the one i had back in grade 6

si i know this thread is kida dead but pleaseeeee post.

i hate it when they die!!!

Maybe disasters are good, but not in ancient times. I mean, did you see a tornado, hurricane or earthquake to last 50 years? And also in medieval times no disasters (only plagues).
Fine. 'Cause, for sure, a natural disaster such as a hurricane/typhoon in middle ages didn't hurt anyone, it was like a breeze for them, while today, suddenly, we note that the breeze in the middle ages actually destroys houses. ???? :confused: ???
I think if you accept natural disasters, you want them in any era. plague is different, because it was only possible in those conditions. Like climatic changes (well, the human-made one). Hurricanes didn't appear in 1963, earthquakes in 1894 and volcanic eruptions in 1909 (the same year as the Habs!!!). They are natural.

remember global warming? like that except one or two tiles at a time. Just destroy terrain inprovements and kill a couple of citizens and destroy maybe a library and temple if one of those tiles happens to be a city.

BTW, dont think for a second that natural disasters are too small of a scale to be included in the game. I understand that its annoying and i respect that as a reason to keep it out (for the less patient people out there). Whatever reasons you give for it New Orleans is unusable infrastructure now, Huge swaths of pakistan were completely flattened by an earthquake last night with fatalities now numbering 100,000, and we all remember the tsunami, which translated into civ-tile terms probibly would have destroyed improvements (cottages, villages, and such) in maybe 12 tiles on a normal sized map (india to indonesia coastlines). I think theres definitely room for this scope of events in the game, it just takes the stomach on the part of a player to put up with it and get on with life. A good lesson.

The tsunami destroyed the coast only. There is no "coastal land" tile, AFAIK. A grass next to sea is... a grass next to sea. I think disasters are on the limit of the small scale. It is not necessarly bad. But the impact of Katrina on the economy is now near 0, excluded the fact that the Saints won't get back to the Superdome for now (they're in Texas, right?). A well done glbal warming would be much more important than a hurricane or an earthquake. Geesh, it's big enough to kill us all in a few centuries, and I think we survived to hurricanes and earthquake, right?

I would be worried for Firaxis if they put a disaster like ''hurricane'' into the game. Here's a scenario. Someone who lived in that area plays the game, gets offended by it, hires a lawyer and sues for all sorts of emotional damages. Then more people jump on the bandwagon. Before you know it, Firaxis could be sunk! Nobody wants that top happen! I think they should play it safe and not include it. Perhaps they could implement it in a later expansion pack.
That's a paranoia I would say. I know the US is a bit sue-happy but there are limits surely? You could as well sue TV networks then for showing videos in the news of hurricanes doing damage. Please don't tell me that when they're showing videos of hurricanes you get a message first 'warning, the following video might contain sensitive material'.
Now, if they would put in some dirty pictures in Civ 4, then anything might happen of course (like for the GTA game happened recently) but from what I've seen prereleased there's little chance of that.

Back on-topic: As this issue of putting something in or not keeps coming up why not implement a simple solution: make some sane defaults (open for debate of course; e.g. standard map, continents, 70% water, moderate climate, earth 4 billion years old, random civ, easiest level) and when starting up the game, you have the default setting selected: 'I just want to play a standard game, get on with it!' and an optional button saying: 'I want to play a customized game'.
When you click upon it, you get into a window with a lot of tabs for setting all kinds of stuff. One tab would then be called 'Natural Disasters' to activate none, all or just a few, another tab is called 'Unit Movement', yet another 'Victory Conditions' and what not, you get the idea. You can even put in things like Accelerated Production in it, so you don't bother new players with that.
So, everybody happy! People who just want to play see less options than even now in Civ 3 but the people who want to customize the game can do that extensively. I know the game will be moddable but a lot of buyers won't bother so it makes sense to put something like that it in upfront. The customized settings then are saved for the next time of course; put an option in to save/load every configuration under names you can choose.

Great!

I suggest the Ultimate Natural Disaster:
a meteor impact. (all cities are lost)

:D

There is some speculation on how to mod this here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=131079

Great!

I suggest the Ultimate Natural Disaster:
a meteor impact. (all cities are lost)

:D
That could be the ultimate Easter Egg in the game; there's a chance of one in a hundred thousand games that a meteor hits the earth! If you take a screenshot of the event and send it to Firaxis you get a trip to the developer studios and a signed copy of the game by Sid and Soren :)

that would be cool...
also the meteor could have some sort of alien virus and start a plauge and then the whole world goes bankrupt tring to find sa cure!!!!!!!!!!!!

thencthere would be eternal peace for mankind for they survived and alien virus!!!!!!!!!!!\

haleuja!!!!!!!!!!

that would be cool...
also the meteor could have some sort of alien virus and start a plauge and then the whole world goes bankrupt tring to find sa cure!!!!!!!!!!!!

thencthere would be eternal peace for mankind for they survived and alien virus!!!!!!!!!!!\

haleuja!!!!!!!!!!
That's just what I was going to say. :crazyeye:

Great!

I suggest the Ultimate Natural Disaster:
a meteor impact. (all cities are lost)

:D

Actually, it might be interesting for there to be a chance (after you've been playing 350-450 turns in the epic game) for a meteor hit to wipe out all cities but the capital. You keep the capital for gameplay reasons and because all your surviving resources went into saving that one city. Maybe you lose a few techs to represent the loss of human capital. Then, of course, you fight to rebuild and claim territory.

and if you are advanced you could have a tech called atronomy 2 and it enables you detect a meteor for like 100 turns away. then all the nations could combiyne to send a nuke to destroy the meteor and save earth!!!!!!!

Adding natural disasters would be interesting ,and would add another level of realism into the game.
Who says they are two small SCALE?? Pompei was completely destroyed because of a volcanic eruption. Does Krakatoa ring any bells? Blew up half the island!! Think of the damage a natural disaster can do to your cities during the early stages of the game. And don't think your civ will be safe in the modern era either. San Fransico was razed to the ground in 1906. Let's not forget the Tsunami in 2004 or the Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico. If your population changes in Civ4 by two, thats a big disadvantage(especially if your city has only 2 or 3 as a population). Including the damage to terrain improvements (such as the money earning towns) can really put some civs back and test the true leadership skills of the player on how he/she/it handles the situation.
Additionaly in Civ4 there should be plagues as in Civ3 Conquests. Plagues are devastating. The black plague killed 1/3!!! of the population of europe!! Thats millions of people, think of how it will affect your strategy and production in cities. And the Spanish flu, killed 20 MILLION people after World War 1! More poeple than in the entire war itself! Diseases are more dangerous than wars(And let's not go further with other tragic diseases such as Cancer, Aids, Malaria etc; THE LIST IS NEVER ENDING). Diseases are the ultimate civilizaton killer. That's why it should be a factor since it has always been part of human history(Man against nature!).
Obviously there should be technologies which can combat these drawbacks, as mentioned by other civfanatics. There were examples of tectonic maps. Adding to that, there should be future techs which allow for the predicitons of earthquakes and volcano eruptions, so that less damage is caused on buildings and the population. While advances in medicine (as it has been since since Civ1) should protect your people form spreading diseases.
Furthermore, an option on the level on how frequent they occur, how dangerous or even a choice to turn these options off completely, should be available so as to give the player the choice. For the Civ players who wish a more challenging and realistic empire building simulation can turn the options to the max and see how well they manage to overcome them. But for those who just want to enjoy stress-free empire build, then they just turn them off.
Civilizations throughout history have fallen and risen under the influence of mother nature. Humans, no matter how adaptable to their environment, will never be able to completely overcome the power created by our planet; EARTH!;) [FONT="Arial Black"]

ouch. my eyes. :eek:

I agree, in so much as it is important, but maybe there are already some disasters in there, we just don't know.

Lets be happy there are no mind-worms, shall we?

oh yeah ...

i hated the mind worms in alpha centauri i guess they are like barbarians

someone post this is my most succesful one yet!!!!!!!

come on post or something please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think as natural desasters there should be the following:
Meteor - Destruction of several cities close to the impact, creating a crate filled with water and if it crashes into the ocean water rises flooding coastlines,

Volcano - Can happen close to a city destroying parts of the city depending on the scale and closeness of the volcano, if the volcano blows in the ocean there should be a new island that needs 20 rounds to become plains, grasslands and forests.

Virus - Think about the black death, and AIDS, and such, they kill your population and for every virus there is a specific technology to wipe it out, the virus is brought in from unsanitary conditions ( low health levels) and once a unit from a infected city moves into another city the other city will be infected as well, however it increases science level because people will look for a cure crazily

also you could send an infected spy to other cities to get the population sick!





THIS IS MY ONE HUNDRED POST!!!!!!!!!

PARTY!!!!!!!!!!!!:cool:

:band: :dance: :banana: :dance: :banana:

:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

Natural Disasters would be cool. I think each disaster should cause alot of damage because the years go by really quick, so ND's are bound to happen. I think the largest civs should be in most risk and the smallest in least danger. Maybe even add some cool movies to it or whatever, some graphic images, and etc. It would be yet another challenge to a thriving empire. :king:

yup...and if no one told you welcome GunshySlycat once i too was a loser with only 12 post but 94 post later i am now a warlord... :joke:

I'd like to see natural disasters in cIV. And I would like to see global warming adding to the chance of being hit by a disaster (they recently discovered that global warming is a factor in the formation of submarine eathquakes...)

What about the possibility to evacuate/deportate/force to move out- the people from a city? With transport-vehicles/helicopters/ships and all that?

The people who are forced to move will be upset when there is no disaster (false alarm). The people who live in the other city, will complain that it is "far too crowded":)

Make the people "live" again. On the lands, visible.
The scientist are (safe) in the city. the people on the farms or mines can be captured...

What about the possibility to evacuate/deportate/force to move out- the people from a city? With transport-vehicles/helicopters/ships and all that?

The people who are forced to move will be upset when there is no disaster (false alarm). The people who live in the other city, will complain that it is "far too crowded":)

Make the people "live" again. On the lands, visible.
The scientist are (safe) in the city. the people on the farms or mines can be captured...Ever heard of the game "Outpost"? That's basicly what you are suggesting. You almost verbatim said the same thing!:) But what happens in the early ages were it would not make much sense historicly to get a warning, and where you really couldn't do much?

This could also bring up a whole new frontier on diplomacy.

Maybe a civilization could donate money to fix the problems and make your diplomaticstatus higher because other civ can rely on your support if anything would happen or you could depend on them.

maybe to help the cities they could make a "salvation unit" that bring food to the city like the convoys in civ 2

I would like to hear your oppinions :goodjob: :goodjob:

These are good ideas, but I have some doubts about it.

If a natural disaster happens what would the cause be. I mean if it strikes one of your major cities your whole empire will be down the ground. great fun.. sigh :-). As one of the first replies I read, the disaster is too small and the effect will too huge!

No I ment, the competition is playing the game to win, and only to win. So why should a AI helping you with the disaster. It's not obvious to do. He would rather prefer to send you a nuke to congratulate :-)

Last doubt, what should be a good ratio? Once each game, once in 1000 years, 100? 10?

i don't think it should be one every 1000 years because by the secon turn you would already have had 2 major earthquakes. I think it shoul be once every 50 turns. So that if someone had an earthquake by 50 turns the person completly forgot and bam another.

That's just what I was going to say. :crazyeye:

yes, a bit to slow.

justkidding

and when you have random die rolling combat and stupid barbarians who are powerful enough to take a whole city from you (or even more than 1) why not have disasters and *** disasters prevention?

hey atog if you don't like this thread go away. you can post your opinions put in A MUCH MORE POLITE WAY

The game definietly needs disasters! Civ 1 had many of them, and I really miss them! I miss the old pirates too! :(

Apologies if someone brought this up already, but ...

Flooding alone could be a huge problem (destroying tile improvements, destroying city infrastructure...valuing City Walls as flood protection). Of course we'd need a rain distribution simulator better than we had in Alpha Centauri, but barring that, upstream development could have an impact (like building a mine upstream).

It could make the game deeper, which is always nice. Could also add depth to diplomacy.

Gandhi get's hit by an earthquake
FDR: "Here is money to help get back on your feet"
+3 relations between America and India.

That could make the game more interesting later on, as well.

I think there should be natural disasters like:
Volcanoes
Cyclones
Earthquake
Tsunami
Floods

Add them, and also make it so you can send aid and get diplomacy bonuses!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

in modern times yes, most of disasters can be fixed, but long time ago... Locust swarm and famine happened in Egypt and almost crippled entire covolization, weakening it dramatically. Hurricane saved Japan from mongol invasion...

This is a good point. A Typhoon (Pacific Ocean name for a Hurricane) destroyed Kublai Khan's fleet and saved Japan from the Mongols. I think this would create a new dimension to the game.

The only downside I see is, with all the micro-management required on the higher levels, to have your civ devastated by a hurricane would really suck.

I do think this is a great idea though. Ancient peoples had huge problems with drought, storms, floods, earthquakes. Hell even the Tgunska meteor had an impact on the planet.

I does go a little beyond just Civilization building though.

Im all for having natural disasters but we should be given the option at the game setup menu whether to have them or not.

If they are to be included there should only be: Hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunami. Anymore would just make the game annoying to play if your civ gets repeatedly devastated.

What about floods? There could be floods along rivers. You could have dams and they can break. Maybe global warming can raise sea level late in the game. I agree that the disasters should be an option to put in the game from the options menu. Great ideas.

Yea. If they put these in, it does create more strategy diplomatically.
It could also create different techs in the tree. In turn it could create another wonder for the "seisometer" or something.

Make an evacutioation bus unit that can take people away from the place where it will hit

Requares

tech:combution & computers

allunimam or iron

Make an evacutioation bus unit that can take people away from the place where it will hit

Requares

tech:combution & computers

allunimam or iron

A bus wouldn't help much if there was an earthquake, flood or something like that.

The bus was meant to symbolize all the vehicles being used to evacuate people: A "refugee" unit would be better named. Given how dispersed the evacuees would be, it's best symbolized from the drop in population after a disaster. Of course, my arguments are purely theoretical, since I'm still opposed to disasters in the main game.

I think that there should be some natural disaster that could pop up in the game. I know that in conquests the had volcanos and plagues but how about a hurricane, earhquake or tsunami???

here are my ideas

Hurricane: destroys city improvements, kills some of the population and destroys roads,railroads,mines and irrigation.some of the food tiles might be temporarily useless.Might even lead to an epidemic because of no food.Almost a nuclear bomb same devastation but no pollution.

Earthquake: pretty much the same thing but it is more ranged than a hurricane.

Tsunami: also the same thing but it also floods the costal areas and takes workers to fix. somewhat like pollution

This could also bring up a whole new frontier on diplomacy.

Maybe a civilization could donate money to fix the problems and make your diplomaticstatus higher because other civ can rely on your support if anything would happen or you could depend on them.

maybe to help the cities they could make a "salvation unit" that bring food to the city like the convoys in civ 2



I would like to hear your oppinions :goodjob: :goodjob:
fault lines would be a good idea this would help determin the chance of a nat dis