Caveman 2 Cosmos (ideas/discussions thread)

I am thinking that subdued animals should also be able to build the Zoo and subdued (but not tales of) sea critters should be able to build the Aquarium. What do you think?
 
Dancing Hoskuld said:
I am thinking that subdued animals should also be able to build the Zoo and subdued (but not tales of) sea critters should be able to build the Aquarium. What do you think?
Click to expand...

Sounds interesting, but also how about FfH2, whereas they escape from the Zoo and cause hysteria?? (or what ever they do in FfH2)?
 
OR... an ocean improvement.
Supply lines/Trade routes.
Easy to build, provides movement bonus, acts like a road in terms of trade connections.
Pillage wise, very wealthy if it has active trade over it.
Edit: In regards to that suggestion, this means I will NOT say as England automatically have a sea trade connection to China UNLESS I have a trade route that stretches ALL THE WAY to China. Forts in this regard should allow trade to pass through as well, at a certain tech level so something like the Suez is viable, or creating the Dardenelles pass to create a connection to the Black Sea.
This also means that the trade routes need protection, stipulating a naval presence along the entirety of the route.
I generally got this idea from the trading system being developed for Europa Universalis IV.

Edit 2: The new scaling city limits might help, playing a game with them now to see how well...

Edit 3: In regards to Edit 1, connects resources on islands, like the island with stone near Athens (Greek starting point), or I believe copper on Cyprus and Wine on Crete.
Click to expand...
(Was in regards to the GEM scenario)

ALSO...

If someone reaches the Industrial Era, I think a tech modifier should start for other players.
-IF, a player has entered the Industrial player,
-You have discovered said player, and have some form of open borders (Right of Passage).
-You have a means to educate your people, a certain tech ('Education')

You gain a bonus to tech research until you reach the Industrial Era, or current highest era... to reflect world trade and the natural exchange of ideas.
Perhaps 'Closed Bordered' nations could get a 'Trade Station' to control foreign trade.

-The modifier can be related to how open one's border are.

With the tech modifier, should come unhappiness, instability and a little unhealthiness.
To represent the changing of society and rapid industrialization.
If possible, the further behind in terms of era, the more of a tech boost.

In terms of leader traits, some leaders should be more willing to cozy up with the tech leader while others should abhor rapid tech developments to some degree.

Just thought I'd toss out ideas... I was wondering, on the latter idea if that could simply be managed by auto build buildings.
 
Acularius said:
(Was in regards to the GEM scenario)

ALSO...

If someone reaches the Industrial Era, I think a tech modifier should start for other players.
-IF, a player has entered the Industrial player,
-You have discovered said player, and have some form of open borders (Right of Passage).
-You have a means to educate your people, a certain tech ('Education')

You gain a bonus to tech research until you reach the Industrial Era, or current highest era... to reflect world trade and the natural exchange of ideas.
Perhaps 'Closed Bordered' nations could get a 'Trade Station' to control foreign trade.

-The modifier can be related to how open one's border are.

With the tech modifier, should come unhappiness, instability and a little unhealthiness.
To represent the changing of society and rapid industrialization.
If possible, the further behind in terms of era, the more of a tech boost.

In terms of leader traits, some leaders should be more willing to cozy up with the tech leader while others should abhor rapid tech developments to some degree.

Just thought I'd toss out ideas... I was wondering, on the latter idea if that could simply be managed by auto build buildings.
Click to expand...

You pretty much just summed up a lot of how we'd like to make sure Tech Diffusion works. ;)

As for the leaders being more willing to cozy up with the tech leader, that may already be a definition in their personality profiles. It's not really a trait issue but a personality issue. Traits : Direct Game effects from personality habits and leadership methods; Personality : Guides the desires and decisions the leader will generally make.

There are a LOT of definitions on leaders to aide in their personality profile and I haven't gotten to fully go through all of it yet. I'm not sure but that could already be considered there and if not... yeah, might be a good eventual goal to make that a consideration. I can now work pretty well with diplomacy modifiers and will eventually get down and dirty with it to improve it from a lot of angles. I'll keep that in mind when that becomes the current project but that will be a long while yet.

Admittedly, we don't have anything yet to represent the frustration of citizens about falling behind their contemporary civilizations in knowledge (the 3rd world country citizen mentality) and its another area to consider and probably in tangent with an eventual full review of Revolution mechanisms as well. Again... a project for a day quite a ways off from now but a worthy one overall.

Some good thinking all around though!
 
Thunderbrd said:
You pretty much just summed up a lot of how we'd like to make sure Tech Diffusion works. ;)

As for the leaders being more willing to cozy up with the tech leader, that may already be a definition in their personality profiles. It's not really a trait issue but a personality issue. Traits : Direct Game effects from personality habits and leadership methods; Personality : Guides the desires and decisions the leader will generally make.

There are a LOT of definitions on leaders to aide in their personality profile and I haven't gotten to fully go through all of it yet. I'm not sure but that could already be considered there and if not... yeah, might be a good eventual goal to make that a consideration. I can now work pretty well with diplomacy modifiers and will eventually get down and dirty with it to improve it from a lot of angles. I'll keep that in mind when that becomes the current project but that will be a long while yet.

Admittedly, we don't have anything yet to represent the frustration of citizens about falling behind their contemporary civilizations in knowledge (the 3rd world country citizen mentality) and its another area to consider and probably in tangent with an eventual full review of Revolution mechanisms as well. Again... a project for a day quite a ways off from now but a worthy one overall.

Some good thinking all around though!
Click to expand...
I was trying to think of a temporary stop gap that, to me didn't seem to difficult, but I don't know much about code or such...

Personally I wouldn't mind looking under the hood for Revolutions just to see if I can figure it out. It's literally one of my most favourite mechanics. (Maybe figure out how it works)

Similar to the Trade route suggestion, a temporary solution until the supply system is brought up again. :p
I just wanted to stop being able to trade, by sea, with China in the BCE timeframe of the game while at the same time boosting the wonder 'Silk Road', and its ability to create a road link to the largest populated city on the continent.
 
OK, this is going to be long so I will put the main body of the idea in a Spoiler to save space.

1. Chariots before horsemen

Spoiler :
Chariots were the first "Mounted" combat, yet animal riding at x17 comes way before chariotry at x24. Who is going to build Chariots when you already have Horsemen as they are better. The two should be switched as well as the other techs needed or dependent on them, (the Wheel, Mega fauna domestication(I really cannot see a Mammoth pulling a Chariot, I would NOT want to be in that Chariot when that Mammoth drops a load), Tengriism). Can there be a Deer or Bison Chariot?


2. Strategic Redeployment.

Spoiler :
How about a special move called Strategic Redeployment. X number of units can move Y number of spaces, only between cities, X and Y being defined by transportation level. Trails is 1 unit 5 spaces, mud road is 2 units 8 spaces, or 1 unit 14 spaces, and so on. Same for overseas travel, but different tech requirements. Cities must be connected by road or overseas trade route. Can still be used after Air Redeployment, more troops and equipment are moved by ship than by plane.


3. Great General Commanders keeping up with the army.

Spoiler :
There should be a land transport unit that can only carry GG and allow them to keep up with a fast moving army, after all, Ramses rode to war in a Chariot, Robert E. Lee had a horse, Pershing used a Jeep, Patton had a command car, and Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf used a helicopter. Maybe allow this transport to carry all GP to move them around your Civ safer. Give the transport a defense only strength, to represent the staff, out riders, bodyguards and such (you don't have a Division escorting Elvis, just Security), and a fast speed to move the GP around to where he is needed fast. Only defensive promotions available. Chariot, War Wagon, Horse, Coach, Jeep, Command Car, Light Helicopter, Blackhawk, might be the upgrade progression.


4. More diversity for units

Spoiler :
I love the animal diversity, really makes it interesting to see all these different animals running around. How about more diversity in the units as well. I see in the download data base, lots of different skins and animations for Tanks, Bi-planes, Prop Planes, Jets, Carriers, Ironclads, steamships, dreadnoughts, battleships, all vehicles too.

Even if they all have the same stats, I don't want just a bi-plane over my city, but Spad VII, Spad XIII, Neuport 11, Neuport 17, Sopwith pup, Sopwith Camel, Avro DH-1 Pusher, all of them circling on CAP over my city. I want to watch a dogfight with Albatross DIII and a Sopwith Camel, A fight between and ME 110 and a Zero.
I want to see the different Carriers, the Langley did not look the same as the Lexington, and neither looked like the Zuikaku or the Ark Royal. The Bismark and the Yamato and the Missouri all looked different.

Different kinds of Ironclads and steamships too. different skins for Cavalry units.

Have the different units require different culture, (Europe, America, not England or US) and tied to different Civics (Fascist for Me109, Democratic for Spad, Totalitarian for Zuikaku and Yamato). Just examples, not carved in stone.


5. More promotions for Great Generals.

Spoiler :
Can the promotions for the GG be expanded? What other promotions can be given to a GG that would apply to the whole stack? Would March, (call it Field Hospital) give heal on the move to all units in the stack? How about the Warm and Cold promotions, Rommel and Montgomery were Desert Leaders, and could keep their troops in good condition in the sand.

I thought of an extension at the end, two different lines, one called Command that adds 1 command point per level, the other called General Staff that adds 1% strength per level. Every 5th level needs both Command 4 and General Staff 4 to progress, this prevents just adding the General Staff for all that strength, you have to do Command too.


6. GG getting too many xp points too fast

Spoiler :
the Great Generals are leveling too fast, if you have the Dynamic XP turned on, which slows the xp of your units, can it also be applied to the GG, and have them get fractional xp, but still use 1 full command point per battle?


7. Canines

Spoiler :
Can Canine units ever get March or some equivalent? They already have a minus on city attack, why give them City Raider, can they get city defense instead? Can they also get the Policing promotion?


8. Settled Slaves

Spoiler :
What happens to the settled Slaves when you no longer have the slavery civic? Can there be an Emancipation Proclamation Event? How about a worldwide vote, Apostolic or UN, to end slavery for all members, like the no Nukes vote, all settled slaves become something else, Freed Men maybe, or 2 or 3 to one population increase. Not 1 to 1 as many will leave the city and country that kept them as slaves.


9. Roman Legionnaires

Spoiler :
Roman Legionnaires were known for their building ability, they built a temporary fort EVERY night for camp, just to abandon it the next morning. Can Roman Legionnaires be allowed to build Forts, and Paved roads, perhaps at a slower rate?


10. Leader as unit.

Spoiler :
How about having your Leader as a Great General free at the start? If he dies you are in anarchy for twice as long till you get a new one at your capitol. He cannot build any buildings, he is already a field commander.


11. Heights of Mountains

Spoiler :
With Cartography, can all mountain tiles get a random (reasonably) generated height? By reasonable I mean no single tile Mount Everest surrounded by hills only. Each mountain tile should be within about 3K meters of all adjacent tiles, meaning all mountains next to hills or flat, cannot be higher than 3000 meters or about 10,000 feet. Only mountains surrounded by other mountains can, and must, be over 10,000 feet, no upper limit.

This can bring up a new event of first to climb the highest known mountain. Having the highest known mountain in your borders, gives a culture boost to nearest city, and commerce boost with tourism. Having the highest mountain in your Civ, gives a smaller boost to the nearest city, if you do not already have the worlds tallest. One time culture boost for discovering a new highest known mountain.

Event for random city in your nation for first person in your Civ to climb highest known mountain, top 5 highest known mountains, top 10 highest known mountains.


12. Waterfalls

Spoiler :
After the above, if there is a riverside on any mountain tile, chance to have a waterfall with random height and maybe random width. Niagara is famous for width, not height.
Again culture boost and commerce boost to nearest city, for highest in world and highest in your civ.


13. Race for the Poles

Spoiler :
New event of first to reach the North and/or the South pole and first to reach both by same person. Obviously will not work on a Donut World. Possible tied to tech of Polar Exploration?


14. Armored Train

Spoiler :
I have seen a skin for a train unit. How about an Armored Train, can only move on Rails, has a ranged bombardment of 3 spaces. The first Rail gun, Big Bertha, used by the Germans to bombard Paris in WWI.

This means that Aircraft should be able to destroy Rails in a tile, not just improvements.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=20509
Armored train


15. Holy city relocation

Spoiler :
how about allowing a non state religion holy city migrate to a Civ that does have that religion as it's state religion? The Holy Wonder is deactivated, or can even be destroyed and rebuilt again in the new Holy City.
 
I'll respond where I have the most to say:

#4: We actually just changed things to more generic forms in those arenas mentioned. But perhaps some additional design could account for such types as cultural units.

#9: Dig In skills would account for that nicely I think... though giving units like those the ability to build select improvements may be possible now where it was problematic before... not sure if its an issue or not and I don't really think it ever was as much of one as suspected but we did turn off non-worker type units from being able to build anything and I don't think we need to stay in that box anymore.

#10: This is a plan that's not too far off on the horizon. But I'd still suspect it'll be a year or so at least before development really gets going on that. There's a lot to do for it when it gets implemented and a lot more discussion has gone along those lines to suggest a rather deeper system yet. But the first steps towards that is getting the traits and trait systems into a really great development status first. That's where we are with that.

14: I have yet to do it but a tag for limiting units to particular route types has been suggested and would support this idea a great deal. So it's another plan on the books so to speak. You added another idea to that plan in the train you mentioned there though.
 
#1. agree

#8. will all be changing if I can get passed the problem I currently have.

#9. Armies have been used to build roads, bridges, forts and more. The problem is the AI and the very occasional CTD workers with combat strength causes.

#16. Holy City does relocate if the city is destroyed. Otherwise it is a good reason to go to war.

19. The Barbarian Generals option
Spoiler :
If this option is on then you get generals too quickly. First from animals and then from Barbarians. Would it be possible to get a Great Hunter instead when defeating animals. It gives only 1xp to all units and +1xp to recon and hunter units. Or animal combat does not count passed the second GG.
 
#1

Here is a quote ...

The first domesticated horses appeared around 6000 to 5000 years ago. The first hard evidence of mounted riders dates to about 1350 B.C. Uncovering information about ancient horsemen however is difficult. They left behind no written records and relatively few other groups wrote about them. For the most part they were nomads who had few possession, and never stayed in one place for long, making it difficult for archeologists—who have traditionally excavated ancient cities and settlements of settled people—to dig up artifacts connected with them.
Click to expand...
Source: Here

In otherwords nomads could have been riding horses at the same time as Chariots (or even earlier), but since they were nomads there is little evidence left behind to show that. Places like Ur recorded cart animals 2,000 before there was hard evidence for horse riding. However this is only because of things like bas-relief depicting the carts.

There are many things in archeology (and paleontology) that do not get preserved or fossilized. Some things we will never know, while others we can only speculate.

To me it seems less of a jump that one could ride an animal than it is to invent a cart and then train the animal to pull the cart.

#4

We do its called "Culture Units" and "Flavor Units". Many civs have flavor units that have different looking units but not different names. And since Culture units can go to any nation they have a specific look and name.

#14

There is actually plans for a Steampunk train unit. But it lacks textures. I have been wanting use those models you posted an attempt to texture the existing "War Train" model.
 
Wait... are you suggesting that a civilization would have invented chariots before early horse riders? Without learning how to train and domesticate the horse, aka ride it, how would you know how to train it enough to pull a chariot effectively? I'd say that would be putting the cart before the horse ( :rolleyes: )!

But if the strengths are such that the earliest riders are stronger than the chariots, that should be looked at. The Chariot should be an evolution from early horseback riding that generally represents an increase in combat capability (though should not do well in wild terrain - is it possible to make this a 'road unit' that has a lot of strength wherever there's a route but terrible where there isn't one unless the land is VERY flat?) I could also see chariots as being a bit stronger at city combat (both defense and attack) for the reason that they are great on flat roadways.
 
I feel that if horsemen are going to be before chariots, they should be weaker, at least until a new tech is researched called Saddles. It was the saddle that allowed a rider to hit harder and not fall off. The Stirrup was a later invention that improved Mounted Archers allowing them to use their legs to guide the horse while their hands were busy. Sioux and Cheyenne not withstanding.

As stated above, there is not much historical evidence of horsemen in combat before the chariot, but there is much recorded history of chariots being used in warfare. I remember reading about that Persian King (Darius?) who prepared the field of battle before meeting Alexander by having his men flatten all the terrain, just for his chariots.
 
Thunderbrd said:
But if the strengths are such that the earliest riders are stronger than the chariots, that should be looked at. The Chariot should be an evolution from early horseback riding that generally represents an increase in combat capability (though should not do well in wild terrain - is it possible to make this a 'road unit' that has a lot of strength wherever there's a route but terrible where there isn't one unless the land is VERY flat?) I could also see chariots as being a bit stronger at city combat (both defense and attack) for the reason that they are great on flat roadways.
Click to expand...

The Celts used chariots (in wild terrain) against the Romans not Horsemen. Before the invention of the stirrup chariots were much better than horsemen for riding along the front of the enemy shooting at them with spear and arrow. On most the platform was suspended giving a stable platform to fire from on even rough terrain.
 
Plus, one person could concentrate on driving while one (or 2 or 3) could throw LOTS of javelins, a 4 horse heavy chariot, with 3 shooters is a very tough opponent, just by itself.
 
Thunderbrd said:
Wait... are you suggesting that a civilization would have invented chariots before early horse riders? Without learning how to train and domesticate the horse, aka ride it, how would you know how to train it enough to pull a chariot effectively? I'd say that would be putting the cart before the horse ( :rolleyes: )!

But if the strengths are such that the earliest riders are stronger than the chariots, that should be looked at. The Chariot should be an evolution from early horseback riding that generally represents an increase in combat capability (though should not do well in wild terrain - is it possible to make this a 'road unit' that has a lot of strength wherever there's a route but terrible where there isn't one unless the land is VERY flat?) I could also see chariots as being a bit stronger at city combat (both defense and attack) for the reason that they are great on flat roadways.
Click to expand...

Chariots and War Wagons are all together different in their strength than Horsemen. Chariots and War Wagons are extremely good at fighting Melee units. Horsemen on the other hand are good vs Archer and Siege Weapons.

Its very easy to kill a horseman with say spearman or pikeman but its a lot harder to kill a chariot/war wagon with a spearman or pikeman. However Horsemen are a lot more maneuver than a chariot/war wagon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Caveman to cosmos relegion bug
Replies
3
Views
258
jshetley
J
B
Installing a mod
Replies
11
Views
1K
raxo2222
raxo2222
M
Installation Problem
Replies
2
Views
318
Metaltooth
M
SlapstickMojo
C2C Developer Podcast Interview
Replies
9
Views
1K
Thunderbrd
Thunderbrd
M
How do I increase performance?
Replies
14
Views
1K
JosEPh_II
JosEPh_II
Top Bottom