ideas on game engine

(or whatever you call it)

in civIII, all we have are on standard, 1x1 cm squares. let those squares be smaller (maybe 1/4 of current ones).

-what will this do?
-towns (starting cities) occupy 4 squares (as today). then, as city grows, it occupies more squares depending on size. this may simulate the condition of today's metropolises..
borders (both city and country) will be more precise. eg. borders passing on top of mountains - no one is on top.
outside-city-improvements (i will want this) could be build without "consuming" that square.
villages could be in the game (this is important i think)
better terrain.. simply.. (multi-level terrain?)

-what do i want as saying "outside-city-improvements"?
-hydro plants!! none of them are within cities.. build as big as you can, the biggest is "hoover dam" as an outside-city-wonder!!
better colonies.. occupying smaller areas but supporting enough population and production, but vulnerable.
resource plants.. simply mine "iron" to get it.

the more i want:
* better military.. grouping of units, retirement?, need infantry to ride tanks, military schools, some city improvements to build certain units (stables to build horseman etc)

* better science.. abilty to research more than one techs at the same time (depending on scientific capabilities of the country).. education should be more expensive, so countries should pay attention to this more, and more difficult to get..
maybe some great scientific improvements (modern physics labs, CERN etc) could be free to research

* migrations.. depending on industrialization of the country, some countries will suffer this - or make use of it?

* "regions".. i really want this.. as we occupy land, we should be able to "draw" our border with mouse, and name some places (name Asian part of Turkey as "Anatolia" and in US-like government, this region will be seperate).. some of these regions could want freedom, leading civil vars, terrorism, etc..


* terrorism.. abilty to build "terrorists" - invisible in mountains, no nationality.. but if one of them "speaks" ............
these could appear if you don't govern your country well, oppress some nations, switch to a fascist gov't, or just know "communism"...

that's all i can think now..
sorry, if some of them were discussed before..

I like some of these ideas, although I am not certain how feasable or advisable it would be to have so many squares. I love the idea of drawing the border. I would like to see them switch to hexagons as well (although this may be copywrited and therefore not possible).

Instead of infantry riding tanks, I think that they should have mobilized infantry. Once motorized transportation is available (but before tank technology) an upgraded unit that rides on trucks should be allowed. Early tanks are not the same as WWII tanks. Mobilized infantry existed long before panzer armies.

Hexagons don't work, Octagones do, they could please everybody.

How do octagons work? They don't tessalate without squares in between!

Octagons don't fill the (2D) surface.
Triangles, squares and hexagons do.

Yes this is good becasue in the reality borders are not depending on culture

I like ideas that make city development more organic so smaller tiles, hexagons, and outside-the-city improvements may turn out to be very interesting.

I'll take this a step further. Say you have smaller tiles - like you mentioned, then the number of tiles a unit of population can work grows as your technology progresses. Modern farms cover a lot more area than ancient farmers ever could. Then, a unit of population can only work tiles adjacent to tiles already worked, or tiles adjacent to roads. This way you start by working close to the city and your road network grows more organically - only reaching those areas that are most important to you. I would also define your city's borders as where your citizens are working - your road networks and actual presence with population determine your influence.

I know they don't fit but they could solve all of the other problems found with hexagones and squares.

Originally posted by EddyG17
I know they don't fit but they could solve all of the other problems found with hexagones and squares.

Click to expand...

I don't follow you. Octagons are as functional as the current 'diamonds' or oblique squares - you have 8 possible movement directions. What problems do hexagons have?

moving side ways.
Some people(not me) won't buy the game if to move side ways they had to zigzag along the map.
And the Problem with squares is that they don't do a every good job with calculating distances

Octagones if they fited together could to a very good job calculating distances and have 8 possible movemnt directions.

Hexagones would cause jagged borders. In my oppinion that would look terrible.

i thought of hexagons also, but as you said, units have to zigzag to move.. and octagons would be a waste of space, i say smaller tiles to make use of every dot of the map.

Originally posted by krw72588
Hexagones would cause jagged borders.

Click to expand...

Not at all. This only happens if you insist on square or rectangular borders. If you want borders to follow a hexagonal shape when the tiles are square, the zigzagging is much worse.

The same goes for units. They only zigzag if you want them to follow a route along an imaginary square or rectangle. Usually this will not be the case. Otoh, units will always zigzag on square tiles, because it's equally fast as going straight and you'll see more.