Capture Research

meece · Mar 6, 2008

Basically I feel that when you capture a city from another Civ which has a tech(s) which you don't have then when that city is taken the research points which that city contributed to the research of those techs should be deducted from the current total of research needed to acquire that tech

i.e. for clarity: if you don't have say rifling but somebody whom your fighting does then when you take a city you also seize all the science points which that city contributed to researching rifling and those points reduce what you would have to spend on researching that tech... kinda like a great person but it varies from city to city depending on the science it outputs

This also has its basis in real life with reverse engineering.....

RedRalph · Mar 7, 2008

Not a bad idea. but I think you should only get the point when the city comes out of revolt.

Naokaukodem · Mar 7, 2008

Nice idea... but this is already the case in Civ4. Just joking... (or who knows? such a feature would be pretty hidden)

Scilly_guy · Mar 7, 2008

No it wouldn't, it would be obvious, when you captured a city your research time for something goes down! I guess if it wasn't the tech you were researching at the time you might not notice as easily, only the fact that it would say 123/4567 researched.

I think it would work as a "random" event, you know how you get wealthy people donating books, or caches of ancient texts being found in monasteries and ruins, well why not a high chance of "We have been able to reverse engineer research on gun powder from captured muskets" that could happen if you beat a musket man or capture a city (maybe only if it has had musket men garrisoned, or built there. But you get the idea, it would obviously require balancing. If you capture an Islamic city perhaps there is a chance of research for Divine Right, this increases with the proximity to the holy city, perhaps by Islam, or whatever religion spreading in you cities there is a chance of research for it leaking too.

Admiral Armada · Mar 7, 2008

Ive always liked the idea of there being a chance of discovering an unknown tech when capturing a city. Obviously this would have to be a rather low chance, 10% or so maybe.

bestbrian · Mar 7, 2008

Just give me the whole free tech like in Civ II.

warpstorm · Mar 8, 2008

No! There was a reason this feature was removed. It made military play styles the only real choice.

Scilly_guy · Mar 8, 2008

Thats true, I want less emphasis on military or at least on capturing cities.

MrCynical · Mar 8, 2008

Just give me the whole free tech like in Civ II.

That was overpowered to start with (since you could take any irrelevant city), and was easily exploitable by just allowing the more advanced enemy to retake acity they had no chance of holding, and recapturing it for further free tech.

bestbrian · Mar 8, 2008

Then make it so that you only get the tech the first time you capture a city; nothing else after that counts. But it just seems silly that I can capture a city from a civ with, say, Horseback Riding, and not be able to learn about the stirrup.

Scilly_guy · Mar 8, 2008

Well what about if you defeat a horse archer or another mounted unit, should you not be able to learn about the stirrup then too. MrCynical, you say that it was overpowered, and there were exploits, what if the amount of research that you captured was lowered and the exploits were blocked somehow.

If you capture a city with a theatre in it, the population which you capture must also know and understand about the theatre and so drama, so surely you can learn at least a bit about it from that. Of course at the minute when you capture a city all the buildings are destroyed, but you see my point.

rysmiel · Mar 10, 2008

Scilly_guy said:
Of course at the minute when you capture a city all the buildings are destroyed, but you see my point.

This is one of the decisions that needs to be undone in Civ 5, definitely.

Refar · Mar 10, 2008

I actually do like it as it is - not all buildings are destroyed - The culture producing are, there is a random chance on each building for all the others. Perhaps changing the Culture producing buildings to random destruction as well would be nice. But destroyed buildings by capturing in general are nice.

Capturing techs sounds cool, but might affect tha balance in the sense that warmongering will become even more powerfull strategy, than it is now anyway. Perhaps a random chance might be a solution here as well...

rysmiel · Mar 10, 2008

Refar said:
I actually do like it as it is - not all buildings are destroyed - The culture producing are, there is a random chance on each building for all the others. Perhaps changing the Culture producing buildings to random destruction as well would be nice. But destroyed buildings by capturing in general are nice.

The randomness is my problem, really.

I think it should depend, really, on how hardfought the capture of the city is. Say that one building is lost for every turn the city is attacked ? or for every x number of units attacking it. [ With exceptions once you get to things like cruise missiles when you can target specific units with 100% accuracy; it should really be possible with something like that or poison gas to take a city with all the buildings enitrely intact. ] Culture reset to zero when you conquer a city, sure, but not have to rebuild the buildings from scratch.

Capturing techs sounds cool, but might affect tha balance in the sense that warmongering will become even more powerfull strategy, than it is now anyway. Perhaps a random chance might be a solution here as well...

The more randomness in the game, the less fun it is.

I favour getting a certain amount of extra research points when you take a city, I think. The balance needs to be such that warmongering is less powerful than it is in Civ I-III, but not nerfed in the way that people complain about it being in Civ IV, and I think the way to go there is to make building and "soft" conflict stronger rather than to hamstring warfare.

Scilly_guy · Mar 10, 2008

Cruise missiles 100% accurate? What planet are you living on?

I agree though, bombers should more likely destroy buildings, with maybe a chance of damage being done to wonders, either the damage can be repaired or it reduces the effect of the wonder. Tanks should also cause more damage. I think the longer a city resists the more damage is done, but perhaps instead of totally destroying buildings they could just require a few turns to repair them.

rysmiel · Mar 10, 2008

Scilly_guy said:
Cruise missiles 100% accurate? What planet are you living on?

A planet where we simplify things for the sake of more enjoyable gameplay even when that goes against strict realism. Cruise missiles may not be perfect, but they should be accurate in ways that WWII bombers, let alone chucking rocks with trebuchets, are not capable of, and I think 100% is a reasonable thing to pick there if one does not have any more advanced artillery-type unit beyond the cruise missile in the standard tech tree.

I agree though, bombers should more likely destroy buildings, with maybe a chance of damage being done to wonders, either the damage can be repaired or it reduces the effect of the wonder.

Bombers should definitely do more damage; I am unsure about allowing damage to wonders, it also depends on whether it will be allowed to destroy a wonder (though you kind of have to allow it if a city is razed I suppose) and if a wonder that is destroyed becomes available for rebuilding elsewhere.

I think the longer a city resists the more damage is done, but perhaps instead of totally destroying buildings they could just require a few turns to repair them.

That's a thought. Instead of destroying them all at once, have shileds effectively knocked off them, so that when you take the city you then have, for example, 120 shields left of a 160-shield building, and have to put 40 shields' worth of production into it to make it function again ?

Scilly_guy · Mar 10, 2008

Exactly, that way you don't spend ages rebuilding a city just a few turns getting it back up and running.

More randomness=less fun? I don't think this is true, I love the random events they definitely add to re-playability, of course they shouldn't be totally random, a civ with no foreign trade route should not start exporting black peal jewellery or whatever it is that happens. Now I think that is currently the case, "random" events are affected by you game style, but they have a randomness about them. They're not yet perfect, how many times can you improve safety in a mine? Or maybe I should stop mining there and build a windmill.

Khan Quest · Mar 10, 2008

When a city is captured you should have a chance of capturing points toward each tech that they have researched, that you can research. The range of points awarded and the chance of capturing the points should depend upon the city size and what science buildings have been built. Perhaps espionage and the length of the siege (i.e., number of turns the city was attacked) could have an effect as well.
The captured research points should fade like standard research points do with the current system.

buffalo6542 · Mar 13, 2008

i think that all the science points a city has donated to a tech should go to your research of that tech. if it is something like future tech, than the points could be universal

Scilly_guy · Mar 13, 2008

Buffalo6542 that is a lot harder to calculate than you would think. I think it makes alot more sense to provide some knowledge of Drama if the city has a theatre, some knowledge of maths for an Aqueduct, Metal Working if they have a forge, Gun Powder if they have built gunpowder units, or perhaps if gunpowder units are defeated at some point.

Capture Research

Chieftain

Deity

Millenary King

Prince

The Admiral of Armadas

Just this guy, ya know?

Yumbo? Yumbo!

Prince

Deity

Just this guy, ya know?

Prince

Emperor

Deity

Emperor

Prince

Emperor

Prince

Prince

Nuke Maniac

Prince

Similar threads