Wodan
Deity
Sounds like the Diplomacy boardgame.
Wodan
Wodan
Devil's Advocate: is this the end of creativity in Civ?
- Thread starter dh_epic
- Start date
Well, take this long post... 
I tried to be not wasting words, though and the topic is BIG
A TURN OF ALL UNITS
Highlights:
simultaneous moves in single game, RTS feel with turn-based moves
units fighting with attack/defense formation
action-picture of units
So, on to...
...Preliminary condition ideas
A
A unit would have separate strength for
Attack – neutral (move) - defence
B:
A given tile can give place for only a limited number of units, as per X „placement points” (say 9 such points for ground units, and also a value would be for „helicopter” zone, or „air, „naval”zone – but I let it be discussed for another post)
Every unit type would have a certain placement point value it takes up, like Melee:1, Armor: 3, etc
*
THE TURN
A turn has 4 parts
- action phases
- ordering attack
- fights/actions being carried out
- final acts
1.
ACTION PHASE
Every unit has action points (AP), and the following can be done by use them in an action phase of a turn:
- move on to a tile, with click on the tile of destination. It uses 1 AP or more (e.g. with hill, like 1 or more MP in Civ4 now)
- set unit to have an attacking formation (this sets AP to value 1, unit stays on tile, and player can decide at later part of the turn what adjacent tile he or she wants to attack with attack strength, given there is any enemy unit to attack…
- set unit to have a defending formation (this sets AP to value 1, unit stays on tile and will figth with defence strength, cannot initiate fight!)
- give of peaceful action order (for non military units, it consumes all APs!)
- not doing anything in this phase
After taking up an attack or defence formation, a unit cannot use up further AP to make another move but attack can be ordered for units with attack formation!
When every unit of every civ is done, then
ENTER
The phase is carried out, result is:
a.
If by the end of phase units in war with each other would take the same tile,
then those units do NOT move to the given tile but stay on their tile till the end of the phases and then carry out fighting with neutral strength (they have no attack or defence formation).
b.
Otherwise all units get to their tiles.
In case there is a unit left with more AP and not in attack or defence formation, then comes the next phase…
*
ACTION-PICTURE
Moving the cursor over a tile icons of units on the tile show up in a row somewhere down on the main window.
A unit would be shown separately on the real 3x3 section of the map where the unit is in the center tile. The icon would have the following graphic:
- lighted: has more AP left to carry out move or action
- faded and green frame: unit has attack formation
- faded and red: unit has defence formation
- faded and grey: unit has received peaceful action order
- In case the unit is already to carry out a figth together with a move to a file, then the icon is faded with white frame, and an arrow from the icon points to the adjacent tile in the 3x3 where the fight is taking place.
*
Moves and peaceful action orders, formations are done
2.
ORDERING ATTACK
Those military units still having AP or taken up attacking formation can attack enemy unit on adjacent tile:
The player sets for all such units the tile the attck should go to. All civs do this with all units. No track of this on the action-pictures.
3.
FIGHTS/ACTION BEING CARRIED OUT
Now all attacks and other non military actions are happening.
/perhaps Dale’s mod can be used here for many units figthing simultaneously.../
4.
FINAL ACTS
In case all defending units died on a tile, then all attacking units that have AP more than zero occupy that tile.
In case a defending unit survived and has more than zero AP, the that unit gets healed in this turn.
*
end of turn
I tried to be not wasting words, though and the topic is BIG
A TURN OF ALL UNITS
Highlights:
simultaneous moves in single game, RTS feel with turn-based moves
units fighting with attack/defense formation
action-picture of units
So, on to...
...Preliminary condition ideas
A
A unit would have separate strength for
Attack – neutral (move) - defence
B:
A given tile can give place for only a limited number of units, as per X „placement points” (say 9 such points for ground units, and also a value would be for „helicopter” zone, or „air, „naval”zone – but I let it be discussed for another post)
Every unit type would have a certain placement point value it takes up, like Melee:1, Armor: 3, etc
*
THE TURN
A turn has 4 parts
- action phases
- ordering attack
- fights/actions being carried out
- final acts
1.
ACTION PHASE
Every unit has action points (AP), and the following can be done by use them in an action phase of a turn:
- move on to a tile, with click on the tile of destination. It uses 1 AP or more (e.g. with hill, like 1 or more MP in Civ4 now)
- set unit to have an attacking formation (this sets AP to value 1, unit stays on tile, and player can decide at later part of the turn what adjacent tile he or she wants to attack with attack strength, given there is any enemy unit to attack…
- set unit to have a defending formation (this sets AP to value 1, unit stays on tile and will figth with defence strength, cannot initiate fight!)
- give of peaceful action order (for non military units, it consumes all APs!)
- not doing anything in this phase
After taking up an attack or defence formation, a unit cannot use up further AP to make another move but attack can be ordered for units with attack formation!
When every unit of every civ is done, then
ENTER
The phase is carried out, result is:
a.
If by the end of phase units in war with each other would take the same tile,
then those units do NOT move to the given tile but stay on their tile till the end of the phases and then carry out fighting with neutral strength (they have no attack or defence formation).
b.
Otherwise all units get to their tiles.
In case there is a unit left with more AP and not in attack or defence formation, then comes the next phase…
*
ACTION-PICTURE
Moving the cursor over a tile icons of units on the tile show up in a row somewhere down on the main window.
A unit would be shown separately on the real 3x3 section of the map where the unit is in the center tile. The icon would have the following graphic:
- lighted: has more AP left to carry out move or action
- faded and green frame: unit has attack formation
- faded and red: unit has defence formation
- faded and grey: unit has received peaceful action order
- In case the unit is already to carry out a figth together with a move to a file, then the icon is faded with white frame, and an arrow from the icon points to the adjacent tile in the 3x3 where the fight is taking place.
*
Moves and peaceful action orders, formations are done
2.
ORDERING ATTACK
Those military units still having AP or taken up attacking formation can attack enemy unit on adjacent tile:
The player sets for all such units the tile the attck should go to. All civs do this with all units. No track of this on the action-pictures.
3.
FIGHTS/ACTION BEING CARRIED OUT
Now all attacks and other non military actions are happening.
/perhaps Dale’s mod can be used here for many units figthing simultaneously.../
4.
FINAL ACTS
In case all defending units died on a tile, then all attacking units that have AP more than zero occupy that tile.
In case a defending unit survived and has more than zero AP, the that unit gets healed in this turn.
*
end of turn
Wodan
Deity
Without critiquing the above, let me say how Diplomacy works, simply as a comparison, if nothing else.
Each player has a number of units (which varies during the game). At the start of each turn, all players each write down a secret order for each and every unit (unordered units simply hold in place).
After all players have finished writing orders (or when time runs out), the judge goes through all the orders and adjudicates them. Typically they are simply read aloud. If a specific unit has no conflicts with an opposing unit, it executes the order. If two opposing units have conflicting orders, they fight. Examples of conflicting orders are to move (attack) a tile occupied by an opposing piece which is "holding" in place, or when two opposing pieces both try to move to the same tile.
There are simple rules for determining the outcome of a fight. The algorithm in Diplomacy is simple odds. For an adaptation here, it could be the same combat mechanic that CIV already has.
Also, pieces have the same attack and defense strength. (In fact, I believe the above post from VSoma could do the same... there's no inherent reason we have to go back to the attack/defense model.) This is not a sticking point... it could go either way in either system. Doesn't matter.
Wodan
Each player has a number of units (which varies during the game). At the start of each turn, all players each write down a secret order for each and every unit (unordered units simply hold in place).
After all players have finished writing orders (or when time runs out), the judge goes through all the orders and adjudicates them. Typically they are simply read aloud. If a specific unit has no conflicts with an opposing unit, it executes the order. If two opposing units have conflicting orders, they fight. Examples of conflicting orders are to move (attack) a tile occupied by an opposing piece which is "holding" in place, or when two opposing pieces both try to move to the same tile.
There are simple rules for determining the outcome of a fight. The algorithm in Diplomacy is simple odds. For an adaptation here, it could be the same combat mechanic that CIV already has.
Also, pieces have the same attack and defense strength. (In fact, I believe the above post from VSoma could do the same... there's no inherent reason we have to go back to the attack/defense model.) This is not a sticking point... it could go either way in either system. Doesn't matter.
Wodan
Yes, there can be arguments for not touching the already existing and elegant simplicity of the single strength value.
But I think attack and defence formation could have nice tactical possibilities.
There are decisions to be made:
- shall I move one more or do not move and make formation?
- Will the enemy stay close to me or be getting next to me so I can attack?
- Can I force an enemy unit to move next to a unit I have with attack formation?
- shall I have defence formation or shall I "flee" to another tile?
Well, maybe promotions valid for a single turn going with these formations can also be a way of modifying (increasing) strength
zeroAssoluto
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2007
- Messages
- 5
hi i am a student of University of Bari. I have a course of interactive 3d ambients. We have to do a project for this exam and we have decide to modificate civ4. we are going to modify the mode how to interact with an Diplomat. We want that the player write down with his own words to the Diplomat. At the other side the Dimplomat (AI) have to understand and response to the player. We are ending the project fase and we are going to implent it. I have o problem with the SDK. I complie the .dll, but when place it in the assets folder it shows me an error. that can't find the : boost_python-vc71-mt-gd-1_32.dll . i am not an expert using visual studio cause can you help me how to place the CvGameCoreDLL ?
well, for unit actions in a turn, I made up a total new idea,
of simultaneous turns, here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=5639095#post5639095
of simultaneous turns, here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=5639095#post5639095
Wodan
Deity
Zero, go to this thread to answer your questions: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=166933
Read the whole thread.
Wodan
Khan Quest
Prince
Ok, here is an attempt to change everything while keeping it the same (Isn't that what this thread is asking for?).
First of all, I would like to post a link to dh_epic's excellent culture idea, as it inspired some of this and would play into what I am suggesting here. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=102134
I know this is more complicated and MM-heavy than is realistic, although much of it could be controlled by the governor. If considered, I would expect Firaxis to trim it down.
Some of the ideas in here have already been discussed, but I included them here for context.
Influence
The game play would be different. Rather than controlling cities within your borders, you would exercise a level of control within cities with which you have influence. There are basically four forms of influence, governmental, cultural, military and economic.
Governmental influence is primarily determined by civics choices and governmental buildings (Palace, Forbidden Palace, Versailles, courthouses, jails, etc.), and remains significant throughout the game. Military influence would dominate early game; cultural mid-game; and economic late game. The proportion of each will have to be figured out by Firaxis.
Zone of Influence
All military units (with maybe the exception of aircraft) have a zone of influence. The strength of influence is determined by unit strength. The area of influence is determined by movement rate and tile accessibility. A unit exerts ZOI in all tiles that it can reach in following turn. Roads, terrain, foreign territory all influence the ZOI. GGs have an innate +1 range bonus. The fortification bonus applies to strength of influence on the fortified tile.
Borders
Culture would no longer define political borders. Borders would be defined militarily and diplomatically. Early game, borders would be defined by worked tiles and ZOI.
Later, with the discovery of certain techs such as writing and paper (map making) diplomatically defined borders could exist.
The influence of governmental buildings decays exponentially outward from the city tile.
Civ Influence and Citizenry
The percentage of influence in a citys core determines how many citizens a civ can control. (For a size 4 city that is 75% Aztec and 25% English, the Aztecs control 3 citizens and can work up to three tiles, and the English, one.) The differentiated citizenry will be referred to as ethnic groups.
Citizen Tile assignments
Citizens may work any tile as before, but ethnic citizens get first choice of any tile in which they have dominant* influence. In tiles with that do not have dominant influence, the governing civ gets first choice of selecting tiles to work.
*Dominant influence (DI)
For two civs, one with influence >= 66.7%; for three civs, one with influence >= 50%; for four civs, one with influence >= 40%, etc.
Civs may build buildings or units in any city in which they have influence. Only the civ with governmental control of a city may build governmental buildings, military buildings, wonders or projects in that city.
There may be cultural buildings of the same type (libraries for example). There can only be single instances of other improvements such as Markets, although any one could build them.
Each civ has their own build queue for a city and may not see what others are building unless detected by a spy.
Military units of the non-governing civs build invisible units. These units remain invisible until used, or moved into or through a tile where the civ does not have DI. These units gain no XP bonus from military buildings or settled GGS.
When the number of invisible troops inside a city exceeds 25% of the city population, there is a risk of units being detected. The risk increases for each troop beyond the 25%. The number of troops revealed is random. Factors such as civics choices, garrison size, and ZOI dominance affect the base 25% value.
The governing civ will not be pleased discovering these insurgent troops.
These units require maintenance costs as usual.
The civ with governmental control of a city gets a base 100% of the production of the tiles it works, and a base 50% of the production of the tiles worked by other ethnic groups.
The civ with governmental control of a city gets a base 100% of the food of the tiles it works. For tiles worked by ethnic groups, enough food is controlled to sustain the population plus an additional base 25%, if available.
The civ with governmental control of a city gets a base 100% of all commerce, less maintenance costs.
All civs with influence in a city gain the benefit of production increasing improvements and buildings within the city.
Cultural improvements are not necessarily destroyed when a city captured, although they may be purposefully destroyed by the conquering civ at his discretion.
Religious buildings may be built in secret when intolerant civics are in place. There is a chance the controlling civ will discover the banned institution.
Civics affect flow of Culture
More restrictive civic choices will slow the rate of culture spread. The dominant civs culture rate of spread would be slowed, say 33% in a police state and foreign culture slowed 67%.
Civic types could also affect the spread of different sub-types of culture. Perhaps Organized Religion would limit religious influence as above, but not that from academic institutions such as libraries and universities.
Hybrid Civs
When influence balance reaches a certain state for at least x turns, the city becomes a hybrid civ.
Cultural improvements become those of the hybrid. Redundant cultural improvements are deleted.
Cities
A city with only two civs influence where neither has 2/3 or more influence for at least x turns will become a hybrid. With three or more civs influence and none has a majority for at least x turns will also result in a hybrid.
New Civs
For every turn thereafter a hybrid, there is a random, cumulative chance the hybrid city will try to be become a new civ, declaring independence. Perhaps happiness should figure into this. Cities with similar hybridization will band together in the rebellion. The ruling civ may grant independence or declare war. Starting units, tech level, etc. are left to Firaxis to determine.
Immigration
When a city suffers starvation rate of X over Y consecutive turns, a portion of the population (one population point) has a chance to emigrate. The chances increase when the unhappy outnumber the happy and even more so when the city is in rebellion. Certain civic choices will also affect chances.
The émigrés will go to the nearest good city. A good city is decided by a number of factors, not unlike the AI selecting a trade route city.
There is a good chance that the target city will be given the option to rebuff the immigrants, the chance influenced by civics policies. On subsequent turns, rebuffed immigrants may try to settle in another city (85%), settle a new city if possible (5%), disappear from the game (5%) or become barbarians (5%).
The ethnicity of the émigrés is random.
City unhappiness
When a citizen in a city refuses work due to unhappiness (for any reason), the ethnicity of the citizen comes in to play. There is equal chance of the citizen being for each ethnicity. If the city contains Romans, Inca and Chinese, the chances are that the idle citizen is Roman is 33%. Note that if the city is 90% Roman, 5% Incan and 5% Chinese, the chances are that the idle citizen is Roman is still 33%. This is to reflect that the minority population is the most likely to be unhappy.
Rebellion occurs when the governing civ no longer has the dominant influence.
There are different levels of rebellion, depending on the level of influence.
1. Subversion (term?)
2. Overt rebellion
3. Rioting
4. Anarchy
Subversion
Income from these cities drop x% to local corruption and increased difficulty collecting taxes. (Perhaps -1 gold/tile that produces 3 or more gold).
Increase in local unhappiness.
Overt rebellion
As above.
There is a small chance that a fat-cross resource is unavailable for export, lasting one turn.
There is a small chance that a Rebel will appear (see below) each turn.
Rioting
As above
All production shuts down, as with the current game.
Unchecked rioting may result in the destruction of institutions starting with governmental (courthouses, jails, etc.)
There is a significant chance that a Rebel will appear (see below) each turn.
Anarchy
As above.
It is likely a rebel will appear.
Movement within tiles both within the fat cross and without dominant influence is as if no roads or railroads were present (The movement of rebels and spies are not limited).
Rebels
Rebels are military-type units typically of a type garrisoned in the city.
They get no experience bonuses from city improvements. They may, however, gain any promotions inherent of a culture randomly selected from those present (aggressive, defensive bonuses).
Rebels appear on a worked tile, if any.
Rebels may pillage and attack; they may fortify.
Rebels exert ZOI.
Rebels disappear if domination is again achieved.
Rebel Notoriety
Rebels who run amok for X turns or gain 4+ XPs become notorious.
Notorious rebels have access to a new promotion, Urban Combat.
Notorious rebels may become invisible when not attacking (and not fortifying).
Notorious rebels exert ZOI as GGs (See below).
Invisible notorious rebels still exert ZOI.
When visible, notorious rebels improve the morale of other rebels as a GG.
*Urban Combat: +10% City Attack, +10% City Defense, unlimited movement in city (if the multiple-tile-city idea is adopted).
Vassalage
A second level of Vassalage (for lack of a better term, subjugation)
In addition to the current effects vassalage, the conquering empire gets control of all governmental buildings. All resources are automatically captured. All production costs are at 200%. Subjugated cities suffer a +20% unhappiness.
Military
Units would be more or less the same as they are now, with promotions, strength, etc.
Single Force
Units in a stack, including allied units, atomically meld into single force. The force will arrange itself into a default formation - melee units to the front; mounted units at the flanks, projectile units to the rear, perhaps riflemen in squares, etc. I envision the actual order in which troops will engage to be adjusted with a drag and drop interface. Reserves/reinforcements could also be allocated. The entire force or individual units would be given a set of standard orders ("Stand your ground", "Advance Cautiously/Moderately/Aggressively", "Defensive retreat", "Suicide charge", etc).
This single force will battle with a single force of the enemy. An animation will play, showing stages of the battle until one side wins. At the end of each stage, the game will pause for a moment to allow players to click a reassign orders button, if they wish, to reassign orders between stages.
Military Intelligence
The strength of enemy troops will only be an estimate (randomly skewed), whose accuracy is affected by a few factors. Spies, of course, when used, would significantly improve accuracy. Terrain would also have an effect, including hills (a bonus if on the hill; a penalty, if the enemy is on the hill), forest/jungle, cities, and certain terrain improvements, such as cottages. Scouts, units with the visibility promotion and GGs improve accuracy. These units, along with spies, may also reveal some formation information and orders. The dominant culture of the tile with troops may also influence intelligence (friendly informants and hostile citizenry).
Morale
Morale for each unit would be tracked (maybe there would be a morale bar on each unit). Base morale at the beginning of any conflict matches that of the general population.
Decreases morale: formation loses a battle; length of time at war; length of time in foreign lands; marching while significantly wounded. More experienced units morale decreases at a slower rate.
Increases morale: formation wins a battle; GG present; capturing a city; fortifying in a city or fort; pillaging. Pillaging would be like collateral damage the pillaging unit gets the biggest boost and a random number of other units get a smaller boost.
GGs morale never drops below 50%.
Affects of morale
High morale (80% +): Units gain +10% virtual strength points, with respect to battle calculations. Ex., a swordsman wounded to 5 HPs with high morale has 5.5 HPs for battle calculations.
Very high morale (100%): +10% chance of gaining +1 XP when winning a battle.
Low morale (20% -): Units suffer -10% virtual strength points, with respect to battle calculations.
Very low morale (0%): Units have 10% chance to desert. Of the deserters, 85% simply vanish from the map, 10% become rebels or criminals (change to barbarian units), 5% switch allegiance and defect to enemy ranks.
Disbanding and gifting units reduces morale of all troops.
Reserves
After some tech is discovered, a civ may have reserve units. Any unit may be made a reserve unit. The unit must be in the city core. The units lose 2 XPs upon becoming a reserve, also losing a promotion if dropping below the promotion level mark. Reserve units require only half the upkeep. Reserve units are invisible. Reserve units take a full turn to mobilize.
First of all, I would like to post a link to dh_epic's excellent culture idea, as it inspired some of this and would play into what I am suggesting here. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=102134
I know this is more complicated and MM-heavy than is realistic, although much of it could be controlled by the governor. If considered, I would expect Firaxis to trim it down.
Some of the ideas in here have already been discussed, but I included them here for context.
Influence
The game play would be different. Rather than controlling cities within your borders, you would exercise a level of control within cities with which you have influence. There are basically four forms of influence, governmental, cultural, military and economic.
Governmental influence is primarily determined by civics choices and governmental buildings (Palace, Forbidden Palace, Versailles, courthouses, jails, etc.), and remains significant throughout the game. Military influence would dominate early game; cultural mid-game; and economic late game. The proportion of each will have to be figured out by Firaxis.
Zone of Influence
All military units (with maybe the exception of aircraft) have a zone of influence. The strength of influence is determined by unit strength. The area of influence is determined by movement rate and tile accessibility. A unit exerts ZOI in all tiles that it can reach in following turn. Roads, terrain, foreign territory all influence the ZOI. GGs have an innate +1 range bonus. The fortification bonus applies to strength of influence on the fortified tile.
Borders
Culture would no longer define political borders. Borders would be defined militarily and diplomatically. Early game, borders would be defined by worked tiles and ZOI.
Later, with the discovery of certain techs such as writing and paper (map making) diplomatically defined borders could exist.
The influence of governmental buildings decays exponentially outward from the city tile.
Civ Influence and Citizenry
The percentage of influence in a citys core determines how many citizens a civ can control. (For a size 4 city that is 75% Aztec and 25% English, the Aztecs control 3 citizens and can work up to three tiles, and the English, one.) The differentiated citizenry will be referred to as ethnic groups.
Citizen Tile assignments
Citizens may work any tile as before, but ethnic citizens get first choice of any tile in which they have dominant* influence. In tiles with that do not have dominant influence, the governing civ gets first choice of selecting tiles to work.
*Dominant influence (DI)
For two civs, one with influence >= 66.7%; for three civs, one with influence >= 50%; for four civs, one with influence >= 40%, etc.
Civs may build buildings or units in any city in which they have influence. Only the civ with governmental control of a city may build governmental buildings, military buildings, wonders or projects in that city.
There may be cultural buildings of the same type (libraries for example). There can only be single instances of other improvements such as Markets, although any one could build them.
Each civ has their own build queue for a city and may not see what others are building unless detected by a spy.
Military units of the non-governing civs build invisible units. These units remain invisible until used, or moved into or through a tile where the civ does not have DI. These units gain no XP bonus from military buildings or settled GGS.
When the number of invisible troops inside a city exceeds 25% of the city population, there is a risk of units being detected. The risk increases for each troop beyond the 25%. The number of troops revealed is random. Factors such as civics choices, garrison size, and ZOI dominance affect the base 25% value.
The governing civ will not be pleased discovering these insurgent troops.
These units require maintenance costs as usual.
The civ with governmental control of a city gets a base 100% of the production of the tiles it works, and a base 50% of the production of the tiles worked by other ethnic groups.
The civ with governmental control of a city gets a base 100% of the food of the tiles it works. For tiles worked by ethnic groups, enough food is controlled to sustain the population plus an additional base 25%, if available.
The civ with governmental control of a city gets a base 100% of all commerce, less maintenance costs.
All civs with influence in a city gain the benefit of production increasing improvements and buildings within the city.
Cultural improvements are not necessarily destroyed when a city captured, although they may be purposefully destroyed by the conquering civ at his discretion.
Religious buildings may be built in secret when intolerant civics are in place. There is a chance the controlling civ will discover the banned institution.
Civics affect flow of Culture
More restrictive civic choices will slow the rate of culture spread. The dominant civs culture rate of spread would be slowed, say 33% in a police state and foreign culture slowed 67%.
Civic types could also affect the spread of different sub-types of culture. Perhaps Organized Religion would limit religious influence as above, but not that from academic institutions such as libraries and universities.
Hybrid Civs
When influence balance reaches a certain state for at least x turns, the city becomes a hybrid civ.
Cultural improvements become those of the hybrid. Redundant cultural improvements are deleted.
Cities
A city with only two civs influence where neither has 2/3 or more influence for at least x turns will become a hybrid. With three or more civs influence and none has a majority for at least x turns will also result in a hybrid.
New Civs
For every turn thereafter a hybrid, there is a random, cumulative chance the hybrid city will try to be become a new civ, declaring independence. Perhaps happiness should figure into this. Cities with similar hybridization will band together in the rebellion. The ruling civ may grant independence or declare war. Starting units, tech level, etc. are left to Firaxis to determine.
Immigration
When a city suffers starvation rate of X over Y consecutive turns, a portion of the population (one population point) has a chance to emigrate. The chances increase when the unhappy outnumber the happy and even more so when the city is in rebellion. Certain civic choices will also affect chances.
The émigrés will go to the nearest good city. A good city is decided by a number of factors, not unlike the AI selecting a trade route city.
There is a good chance that the target city will be given the option to rebuff the immigrants, the chance influenced by civics policies. On subsequent turns, rebuffed immigrants may try to settle in another city (85%), settle a new city if possible (5%), disappear from the game (5%) or become barbarians (5%).
The ethnicity of the émigrés is random.
City unhappiness
When a citizen in a city refuses work due to unhappiness (for any reason), the ethnicity of the citizen comes in to play. There is equal chance of the citizen being for each ethnicity. If the city contains Romans, Inca and Chinese, the chances are that the idle citizen is Roman is 33%. Note that if the city is 90% Roman, 5% Incan and 5% Chinese, the chances are that the idle citizen is Roman is still 33%. This is to reflect that the minority population is the most likely to be unhappy.
Rebellion occurs when the governing civ no longer has the dominant influence.
There are different levels of rebellion, depending on the level of influence.
1. Subversion (term?)
2. Overt rebellion
3. Rioting
4. Anarchy
Subversion
Income from these cities drop x% to local corruption and increased difficulty collecting taxes. (Perhaps -1 gold/tile that produces 3 or more gold).
Increase in local unhappiness.
Overt rebellion
As above.
There is a small chance that a fat-cross resource is unavailable for export, lasting one turn.
There is a small chance that a Rebel will appear (see below) each turn.
Rioting
As above
All production shuts down, as with the current game.
Unchecked rioting may result in the destruction of institutions starting with governmental (courthouses, jails, etc.)
There is a significant chance that a Rebel will appear (see below) each turn.
Anarchy
As above.
It is likely a rebel will appear.
Movement within tiles both within the fat cross and without dominant influence is as if no roads or railroads were present (The movement of rebels and spies are not limited).
Rebels
Rebels are military-type units typically of a type garrisoned in the city.
They get no experience bonuses from city improvements. They may, however, gain any promotions inherent of a culture randomly selected from those present (aggressive, defensive bonuses).
Rebels appear on a worked tile, if any.
Rebels may pillage and attack; they may fortify.
Rebels exert ZOI.
Rebels disappear if domination is again achieved.
Rebel Notoriety
Rebels who run amok for X turns or gain 4+ XPs become notorious.
Notorious rebels have access to a new promotion, Urban Combat.
Notorious rebels may become invisible when not attacking (and not fortifying).
Notorious rebels exert ZOI as GGs (See below).
Invisible notorious rebels still exert ZOI.
When visible, notorious rebels improve the morale of other rebels as a GG.
*Urban Combat: +10% City Attack, +10% City Defense, unlimited movement in city (if the multiple-tile-city idea is adopted).
Vassalage
A second level of Vassalage (for lack of a better term, subjugation)
In addition to the current effects vassalage, the conquering empire gets control of all governmental buildings. All resources are automatically captured. All production costs are at 200%. Subjugated cities suffer a +20% unhappiness.
Military
Units would be more or less the same as they are now, with promotions, strength, etc.
Single Force
Units in a stack, including allied units, atomically meld into single force. The force will arrange itself into a default formation - melee units to the front; mounted units at the flanks, projectile units to the rear, perhaps riflemen in squares, etc. I envision the actual order in which troops will engage to be adjusted with a drag and drop interface. Reserves/reinforcements could also be allocated. The entire force or individual units would be given a set of standard orders ("Stand your ground", "Advance Cautiously/Moderately/Aggressively", "Defensive retreat", "Suicide charge", etc).
This single force will battle with a single force of the enemy. An animation will play, showing stages of the battle until one side wins. At the end of each stage, the game will pause for a moment to allow players to click a reassign orders button, if they wish, to reassign orders between stages.
Military Intelligence
The strength of enemy troops will only be an estimate (randomly skewed), whose accuracy is affected by a few factors. Spies, of course, when used, would significantly improve accuracy. Terrain would also have an effect, including hills (a bonus if on the hill; a penalty, if the enemy is on the hill), forest/jungle, cities, and certain terrain improvements, such as cottages. Scouts, units with the visibility promotion and GGs improve accuracy. These units, along with spies, may also reveal some formation information and orders. The dominant culture of the tile with troops may also influence intelligence (friendly informants and hostile citizenry).
Morale
Morale for each unit would be tracked (maybe there would be a morale bar on each unit). Base morale at the beginning of any conflict matches that of the general population.
Decreases morale: formation loses a battle; length of time at war; length of time in foreign lands; marching while significantly wounded. More experienced units morale decreases at a slower rate.
Increases morale: formation wins a battle; GG present; capturing a city; fortifying in a city or fort; pillaging. Pillaging would be like collateral damage the pillaging unit gets the biggest boost and a random number of other units get a smaller boost.
GGs morale never drops below 50%.
Affects of morale
High morale (80% +): Units gain +10% virtual strength points, with respect to battle calculations. Ex., a swordsman wounded to 5 HPs with high morale has 5.5 HPs for battle calculations.
Very high morale (100%): +10% chance of gaining +1 XP when winning a battle.
Low morale (20% -): Units suffer -10% virtual strength points, with respect to battle calculations.
Very low morale (0%): Units have 10% chance to desert. Of the deserters, 85% simply vanish from the map, 10% become rebels or criminals (change to barbarian units), 5% switch allegiance and defect to enemy ranks.
Disbanding and gifting units reduces morale of all troops.
Reserves
After some tech is discovered, a civ may have reserve units. Any unit may be made a reserve unit. The unit must be in the city core. The units lose 2 XPs upon becoming a reserve, also losing a promotion if dropping below the promotion level mark. Reserve units require only half the upkeep. Reserve units are invisible. Reserve units take a full turn to mobilize.
Khan Quest
Prince
I don't know of Dale's mod.
I put the single force part to add another tactical dimension to warfare, you can decide which troops fight when with different risk, for example.
The Military Int. is because everyone "shares" (nearly) all cities so it will be more challenging if you can only estimate troop strength.
The other stuff - just because it adds a little more to the game.
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
- Messages
- 10,085
I haven´t read all 11 pages of this thread, so please forgive me, if the following was just posted there:
I would like to see a special combat screen in the next version of Civ. A combat screen at least as rich as in Age of Wonders 2, Shaddow Magic, not as poor as in CTP. Here you can use different combat speeds for units, different ranges for weapons, differnt phases of reaction of a unit and different boni for terrain that wouldn´t make sense for a combat on the big map. I enjoy these AOW 2 fights a lot.
I would like to see a special combat screen in the next version of Civ. A combat screen at least as rich as in Age of Wonders 2, Shaddow Magic, not as poor as in CTP. Here you can use different combat speeds for units, different ranges for weapons, differnt phases of reaction of a unit and different boni for terrain that wouldn´t make sense for a combat on the big map. I enjoy these AOW 2 fights a lot.
dh_epic
Cold War Veteran
Khan, I finally took some time to read your long but very thorough post.
On the topic of Military. I think you'd be interested to see Dale's mod, as some people have pointed out. The idea for "stacked combat" is out there, and I think it could really fly if it were integrated into the game right from the start. More importantly, it would make battles unfold much faster, without reducing strategy. When you make things happen faster, with fewer mouse clicks, you CAN afford to add complications in terms of battle formations, or even morale. This is a great idea. Not because I haven't heard it before, but because this is the first time it's been suggested in a way that I could actually see being implemented.
On the topic of borders. There are a lot of people who really love culture and want to see it become more important. But there's also the common complaint about weird borders being drawn that are too annoying to be realistic. There will be a lot of people excited to have a "better" border system. But I also don't think it needs to be complicated. Firstly because there are easier ways to change the border logic. Secondly, because I think any complexity you add in one department will make Firaxis more reluctant to add complexity in another department.
One reason that so many "border change" suggestions won't fly is because it usually kills the value of culture. But if you introduce value to culture elsewhere, it can fly.
That's why I particularly like what you've done with citizens. It's cool, yet actually quite simple when you think about it.
I can imagine as many as 4 players all controlling the same city, but without control over every citizen. The interface would be largely the same. You'd be in your city, building things with your citizens working tiles -- except every once in a while you'd notice that an "enemy" library sprouted up. This is your best idea, and builds on some of what I liked about Mxzs's suggestions. But there are some problems -- which you've tried to anticipate. I hope they are surmountable:
Khan, this is the closest thing I've seen to a "big vision" in a long time. A big vision is more than a single cool feature, let alone a laundry list. What I like is that you've suggested features that all seem to tie together in interesting ways, and all speak to one broad goal: redefining conflict. No suggestion is ever perfect, as I've noted a few issues so far... but unlike a lot of vague or crazy ideas, you stay specific and focused, and try to anticipate problems.
I'm surprised you haven't posted your own thread with those ideas yet -- but when you do, I hope you find the time to clarify/fix the issues I've pointed out.
On the topic of Military. I think you'd be interested to see Dale's mod, as some people have pointed out. The idea for "stacked combat" is out there, and I think it could really fly if it were integrated into the game right from the start. More importantly, it would make battles unfold much faster, without reducing strategy. When you make things happen faster, with fewer mouse clicks, you CAN afford to add complications in terms of battle formations, or even morale. This is a great idea. Not because I haven't heard it before, but because this is the first time it's been suggested in a way that I could actually see being implemented.
On the topic of borders. There are a lot of people who really love culture and want to see it become more important. But there's also the common complaint about weird borders being drawn that are too annoying to be realistic. There will be a lot of people excited to have a "better" border system. But I also don't think it needs to be complicated. Firstly because there are easier ways to change the border logic. Secondly, because I think any complexity you add in one department will make Firaxis more reluctant to add complexity in another department.
One reason that so many "border change" suggestions won't fly is because it usually kills the value of culture. But if you introduce value to culture elsewhere, it can fly.
That's why I particularly like what you've done with citizens. It's cool, yet actually quite simple when you think about it.
I can imagine as many as 4 players all controlling the same city, but without control over every citizen. The interface would be largely the same. You'd be in your city, building things with your citizens working tiles -- except every once in a while you'd notice that an "enemy" library sprouted up. This is your best idea, and builds on some of what I liked about Mxzs's suggestions. But there are some problems -- which you've tried to anticipate. I hope they are surmountable:
- Who gets control of what tiles? You talked about this a little, with certain tiles giving "first dibs" to the Civ with the dominant influence in that tile. That means that if a tile is worked by a non-dominant civ, the dominant civ can work that tile and push the minority out. Where does the minority go? This has to be extremely elegant, otherwise the dominant civ can just annoy the crap out of the minority civ by constantly pushing them out of their tiles. This is an interface problem more than a game balance problem, IMO.
- Which buildings can you build? You touched on this by saying "government buildings are only buildable by the dominant civilization". But then you mentioned that there can only be one market. This starts to get necessarily confusing. The line needs to be clear and intuitive, without too many complicated counter-rules and exceptions.
- What happens at war? I imagine problems here. If a minority civilization starts building units, they can't appear in the center city tile -- that would lead to an instant battle! The notion of "hidden" units doesn't quite make sense to me either. Nor does it make sense to have newly built units appear outside the city radius. I'm not sure what the solution is. It ties into how borders are drawn, but it's more of an interface problem. I think you've tried to address this, but I'm still not quite seeing it.
(I also think this disputed-city situation has heaps of potential. So many real conflicts throughout history started with this. Not just a minority civilization trying to struggle for control of a city... but a Nationalistic war that starts with a sudden draft in a hybrid/disputed city, backed by outside forces. Let alone does this create the potential for insurgency, guerrilla warfare, and even terrorism: a city where buildings are constantly blowing up because two groups are vying for control. I'd really like to see this work.)
- How are happiness and health resources allocated? This might not actually be that much of a problem: Greek citizens draw happiness from Greek resources, and Roman citizens draw happiness from Roman resources, even in a hybrid Greek-Roman city. Actually, since each civ has its own buildings too, I don't see the need for a probabilistic "who is the unhappy citizen" system here. It should be pretty clear to determine which citizens are unhappy. And this can still create the interesting political situations you are talking about: will that unhappy citizen be assimilated into a happier civilization, or will that unhappy citizen fuel instability in that city?
Khan, this is the closest thing I've seen to a "big vision" in a long time. A big vision is more than a single cool feature, let alone a laundry list. What I like is that you've suggested features that all seem to tie together in interesting ways, and all speak to one broad goal: redefining conflict. No suggestion is ever perfect, as I've noted a few issues so far... but unlike a lot of vague or crazy ideas, you stay specific and focused, and try to anticipate problems.
I'm surprised you haven't posted your own thread with those ideas yet -- but when you do, I hope you find the time to clarify/fix the issues I've pointed out.
Khan Quest
Prince
As always I am in a rush and don't necessarily make things clear or properly edit.
The idea here is that tiles which you dominate, you get. Tiles with no dominance go to the governing civ.
I would like to see civics choices and domination of tiles be somewhat of a trade-off.
The minority just gets bumped to the "next best" tile, dependent upon governer choices, like when borders shift. And, if you get bumped into tundra, you'll lose out if you don't get more influence in quickly.
I meant to edit that, and say that competing markets could be built. Just governmental buildings, wonders and project should be excluded.
Yeah, I was trying to think of a way that you could still build troops.
If my multi-tile city idea were incorporated it could solve much of this.
I forgot to write about this. You get health and happiness resources from hooked up tiles within your political borders. For ethnic minorities you get the health and hapiness from tiles you work.
I know there are holes, but if Firaxis likes the ideas, they can fill in holes.
Or, if I had more time than an 90 min. or so a week to think about changes (Firaxis pays me $$
(I program too))...Thanks
It is in your thread because you issued the challenge.
Wodan
Deity
Here's a spin that may have some merit:
Each city has multiple controlling factors. There's political control, economic control, cultural control, religious control (each religion is separate control). There may be one or two more factors... we wouldn't want to go overboard.
Each factor may be controlled by the same player, or by different players. e.g., who controls the Shrine for a religion controls that religion throughout the world.
What does control of a factor do in a city? A % of that city's GNP is directable by the player. In effect, each and every city has 4 or 5 production queues.
Buildings and units are categorized in what queues they may be built in. e.g., a temple or missionary may only be built in a religious queue. (Everything will have to be recosted... since a religion may only get 5-10% of a city's production, it would take forever to make a cathedral or missionary, so we make them much cheaper than they are now, but it balances out.)
The production governor would default ON, so this would avoid the micromanagement problem. There might also be interface aids. Currently you can already do such things using Shift, Alt, and Cmd (such as have every city in the world add a missionary to the end of the queue). We would make this easier to do, as well as other things.
There could be some crossover. e.g., after making temple, cathedral, etc, this increases your influence on the cultural control of the city. Eventually you may even take over cultural control. Likewise, the political control could make colosseums etc which would also influence cultural control. So, players could battle over cultural control of cities. This brings conflict into other areas than military, which adds a significant dimension to CIV5, which passes the back-of-the-box test.
Wodan
Each city has multiple controlling factors. There's political control, economic control, cultural control, religious control (each religion is separate control). There may be one or two more factors... we wouldn't want to go overboard.
Each factor may be controlled by the same player, or by different players. e.g., who controls the Shrine for a religion controls that religion throughout the world.
What does control of a factor do in a city? A % of that city's GNP is directable by the player. In effect, each and every city has 4 or 5 production queues.
Buildings and units are categorized in what queues they may be built in. e.g., a temple or missionary may only be built in a religious queue. (Everything will have to be recosted... since a religion may only get 5-10% of a city's production, it would take forever to make a cathedral or missionary, so we make them much cheaper than they are now, but it balances out.)
The production governor would default ON, so this would avoid the micromanagement problem. There might also be interface aids. Currently you can already do such things using Shift, Alt, and Cmd (such as have every city in the world add a missionary to the end of the queue). We would make this easier to do, as well as other things.
There could be some crossover. e.g., after making temple, cathedral, etc, this increases your influence on the cultural control of the city. Eventually you may even take over cultural control. Likewise, the political control could make colosseums etc which would also influence cultural control. So, players could battle over cultural control of cities. This brings conflict into other areas than military, which adds a significant dimension to CIV5, which passes the back-of-the-box test.
Wodan
Kahn, for what i have been understanding, in your idea, diferent civs have control over diferent citizens on each cities, no?
If that is like that, i don´t entirelly agree about it. I simply would hate that other civs could decide which ones of my citizens in my city work in which tiles and because of this they also receive a bonus. I also don´t like the idea of other civs being able to decide what to build in my city.
But i think that the idea that a civ can have some control over citizens of its nationality in other cities is interesting. I am thinking mostly on making spionage missions and conquest easier if that city has people of your civ or that wants to be part of your civ. Other ideas could be to make trade routes between your cities and cities with citizens sharing your culture more profitable. But on the other side war should be more dificult if your enemys cities have citizens of your nationality.
Another idea:
Such a system could be combined with an attitude of your foreing citizens toward you. For example: In real life I don´t think you could expect that cuban dissidents would provide much help to cuban spys.
If that is like that, i don´t entirelly agree about it. I simply would hate that other civs could decide which ones of my citizens in my city work in which tiles and because of this they also receive a bonus. I also don´t like the idea of other civs being able to decide what to build in my city.
But i think that the idea that a civ can have some control over citizens of its nationality in other cities is interesting. I am thinking mostly on making spionage missions and conquest easier if that city has people of your civ or that wants to be part of your civ. Other ideas could be to make trade routes between your cities and cities with citizens sharing your culture more profitable. But on the other side war should be more dificult if your enemys cities have citizens of your nationality.
Another idea:
Such a system could be combined with an attitude of your foreing citizens toward you. For example: In real life I don´t think you could expect that cuban dissidents would provide much help to cuban spys.
dh_epic
Cold War Veteran
I like the strategies that open up from dividing the control of certain cities along cultural lines:
1) You can build a huge empire with a small but significant number of "foreign" citizens.
2) You can build a small but influential nation, with many landed immigrants around the world who extend that influence.
3) In a balanced hybrid city like Jerusalem, Nicosia, Cold War Berlin, or Bangladesh, will you co-exist peacefully, erupt into all out war, or try to assimilate the city peacefully?
As you can see these types of hybrid cities are rare but highly significant in the world stage.
Nobody would control your citizens except you. The majority of cities would be controlled by one civilization, with a small number of hybrid cities. Nobody would be able to tell you what to build, but there would definitely be two sets of improvements in some cities. In those cities, you'd control citizens with your culture, and your opponent would control citizens with their culture.
Probably the toughest part is figuring out how to divide tiles. But it's already like that in Civilization 4, with some cities being denied tiles because of cultural influence.
This just takes the idea of cultural influence to a more logical and fun conclusion than "unusable tiles".
Ultimately, no idea is going to be universally liked. This thread isn't supposed to be about personal likes and dislikes. Some people were happy with pollution and corruption in Civ 3. Some people want caravans back. Some people want the old catapult system back. This thread isn't to say what the best ideas are, but to lay out a feasible way forward. I think a few disappointments are a consequence of progress, and Firaxis is willing to live with it if they think they've found something new that could work.
1) You can build a huge empire with a small but significant number of "foreign" citizens.
2) You can build a small but influential nation, with many landed immigrants around the world who extend that influence.
3) In a balanced hybrid city like Jerusalem, Nicosia, Cold War Berlin, or Bangladesh, will you co-exist peacefully, erupt into all out war, or try to assimilate the city peacefully?
As you can see these types of hybrid cities are rare but highly significant in the world stage.
Nobody would control your citizens except you. The majority of cities would be controlled by one civilization, with a small number of hybrid cities. Nobody would be able to tell you what to build, but there would definitely be two sets of improvements in some cities. In those cities, you'd control citizens with your culture, and your opponent would control citizens with their culture.
Probably the toughest part is figuring out how to divide tiles. But it's already like that in Civilization 4, with some cities being denied tiles because of cultural influence.
This just takes the idea of cultural influence to a more logical and fun conclusion than "unusable tiles".
Ultimately, no idea is going to be universally liked. This thread isn't supposed to be about personal likes and dislikes. Some people were happy with pollution and corruption in Civ 3. Some people want caravans back. Some people want the old catapult system back. This thread isn't to say what the best ideas are, but to lay out a feasible way forward. I think a few disappointments are a consequence of progress, and Firaxis is willing to live with it if they think they've found something new that could work.
Khan Quest
Prince
Qwert: It would be as dh_epic said, the cities that are multicultural will be rare and typically on borders, or recently captured.
Personally, I would not like rivals controlling anything in my cities and would do what I could to drive them out! (this is expected to part of the fun)
In the meantime, I'd want to get my fingers into every foreign city I could.
These ethnic minorities should be the most vulnerable to population loss and other adverse events.
Your strategy would come into play here. You could be an isolationist and not have open borders or trade to keep influences out.
Or perhaps, you could have open borders and trade and then target a key interior rival city with cultural (missionaries, and some other new ways I suppose) and economic influence.
You could play a game of conquest, and damn the influence. Or accept foreign influence and win the space race. Or get your infuence as widespread as possible.
The ethnic population should have some benefits as well. While you don't get all the hammers or food, you will get most or all the commerce (and science).
---
Currently there are some affects of foreign citizens in your cities, "Fighting bros & sis of same faith", "wish to rejoin motherland". What else did you have in mind, and how would it come into play?
Wodan
Deity
This is interesting....
There could be some very interesting dynamics in the civics choices. This really takes a 2D chart and adds another dimension.
Say you're running slavery... do you whip and abuse the "foreigners" or adopt a more egalitarian stance? Say you adopt Suffrage... do you include citizens of foreign birth, or do these become "second class" citizens? I imagine there would be some interesting benefits that could be programmed in to all the choices. If you have this "underclass" then possibly your native citizens are more productive. However, you have increased tension with other nations. Alternately, you have a truly free society with no bias, and have a happiness benefit and a diplomatic benefit with other nations, but have to deal with internal cultural differences and strife.
Wodan
Yes, I understand that this would happen only in cities under foreign influence or recently captured ones. But I still think that giving the AI control over these citizens would be unfun for some reasons:
1) These are your citizens.
2) It is totally unrealistic, foreign citizens in one country follow the rules of the country they live in.
3) The AI is vey bad at administrating citizens, which would make that those citizens are very unproductive both for you and for the AI.
4) The way the game is made currently, there is no way to avoid foreing culture to enter your border cities.
But I think the general idea is good. A civ should have an advantage for those citizen which are of his nationality and are in foreing cities. But giving them total control over them sounds to me as too much. Some Ideas i think could be interesting could be the following:
- More profitable trade routes with those cities.
- Cheaper amd more efficient corporations.
- Easier spionage missions
On the other side there could be disadvantages:
- Increased war wearines if you go to war against that civ. (you are attaking our own people!!)
The other Idea could be to relate this to civics. For example a player who is respectfull against foreing citizens may have some economic benfits but more tensions ("Foreigners take our jobs!!" unhappines for example) while another who doesn´t respect foreign citizens, especially in captured cities could have other problems (for example it is easier for the other civ to conduct spy missions).
The civ which creates the inmigrants could have similar situations, for example citizens of a poor civ with police state and slavery will try to fleed to richer civs with universal sufrage.
The idea of building things in foreing cities with citizens of your civ sounds interesting. But I think the system would be better inplemented in a way more similar to how you spread religions or corporations or enbasies in civ II. You send a specific unit to the foreign city and if there are enough citizens of your civ you can build something by paying gold.
Similar threads
