Elevations and terrain features

[exhile]

Talk about realism, current civ maps are all ath the same 5 altitudes: ocean, coast, plains, hills and mountains.

5+2=7 (#6.undersea layer, #7.airspace layer)

 

[civplanet]

Most coastal cities are below 50m above sea level. So when global warming kicks in and sea level rises they would all dissapear. You could have an inland empire, pollute the hell out of the planet, then watch all your enemies coastal cities go byebye.

 

[Rusty Edge]

I think all that would be required is coastal tiles and ocean tiles as is currently the case, unless, of course, underwater future techs were to be added, but even then I don't see what particular impact underwater 'altitude' would have with regards to any possible tech.

I Was thinking in terms of Death Valley and the Dad Sea. Land below sea level, because for that matter, so is some of New Orleans.

 

[Gangor]

Personally I'd like to see elevation added and terrain types removed and weather modelled. Each tile has a temperature and amount of water, depending on lattitude, elevation and local weather which is caused by proximity to ocean or nearby mountains.

Land near ocean would be milder and have more water, whereas land to the east of a mountain range would be dryer and hotter (think foehn).

Perhaps land could also have a "ruggedness" variable to represent the difference to represent the balance between defensible and arable land.

 

[weekend_warrior]

I don't think we need a million different elevations here. Just "Impassable" mountain peaks, mountains (+3 movement, +50% defense), hills (+2 movement, +75% defense), plains, and maybe valleys (chance of flooding, +3 movement, -50% defense)

 

[jst666]

I do like the concept of elevations and plateaus. Perhaps 6-10 levels. I am especially fond of the global warming -issue. It wouldn't need to occur immediately (like all level 1's are now gone). But after quite a long time. Building cities in highlands, would make interesting strategic choice to mass-nuke the enemy underwater

 

[Quasar1011]

Am I the only one who thinks it is stupid to have a map with the same constant elevation in all land tiles, except for hills and mountains?

There should be an elevation factor, on 500 meters interval, for late games when Global warming starts sinking coastal cities and people need to evacuate to higher grounds, for granting more terrain bonuses, for having certain resources only available on some altitudes, to make the game more realistic.

Global warming is the most asinine aspect of the whole civ series! Do not write this failed theory into civ 5! THAT will make the game more realistic!

 

[Atrebates]

1) Don't derail the the thread
2) Don't throw unsubstantiated bull about science into a thread.
3) Regardless of anything else, global warming plays an arguably essential role in Civ by providing negative feedback to nuke use when there otherwise wouldn't really be one.

Back on topic, variable heights adding a tactical element to Global Warming... Sounds very nice. The question is whether the gameplay improvements would be worth the increase in complexity of code, map generation and things for newbies to learn.

 

[Camikaze]

A tactical element with height for global warming does seem a bit silly (I assume it means that you would try and get higher ground for your cities?), because it just adds another bit of unrealisticness (?) into the game. Would the Ancient Egyptians really build their cities on hills to avoid global warming? To avoid flooding yes, but they would've had to have unparalleled foresight to build their cities with global warming in mind.

 

[Atrebates]

That's not really a fair criticism. Ancient Egyptians wouldn't try to claim desert to ensure access to oil (which they won't know about for 5000 years) or do a landgrab for resources they won't be able to utilise for several hundred years. And yet civ has both these things, and is probably better for it.

The game is run by you - the gamer - who inherently looks to long term strategy. The only valid consideration is gameplay, not WWRIID (What Would Rameses II Do?)

 

[Camikaze]

But it seems pretty ridiculous to add a completely unrealistic new element into the game. This is preciously why resources (such as oil) are hidden until later in the game. You cannot plan to get such resources until you actually have the technology to know what such resources are.

 

[Atrebates]

But not true of luxury resources that could be utilised after calendar.

And planning to get future resources (visible or not) is exactly what any intelligent player does. You claim terrain that is likely to have future tactical use.

Players plan, it's the essence of a strategy game. You use your knowledge to plan for future events - a city surrounded by hills to get an excellent construction centre to power your military even before you can build anything past a warrior.

Whether or not flooding would make good gameplay mechanics is a valid question... But ruling it out because it might require advance planning is not.

 

[trickofthehand]

I would welcome varied elevations in the game, for the sole purpose of AESTHETICS. No bonuses, penalties or any of that junk. Civ is simply too big of scope a game to be burdened down with such minor features, the current system of bonuses for current tiles would work just fine whether a hill is 500m or 1000m. However a map with differing elevations, waterfalls and depressions would be pretty to look at.

As far as global warming rising sea levels and flooding coastal cities... The science is completely arguable and thus should not be included in the game. Even within the group that believes in global warming (the majority of scientists, and even Bush now) there is a split amongst those that believe it will turn the world into a desert and flood coastal cities; and those that believe it will cause an Ice Age by changing ocean currents.

 

[Atrebates]

There is no such uncertainty, sorry guys. The Ice Age can't happen, Europe will get colder if the gulf stream is sunk by the low density freshwater melting off Greenland - so we might feel like we're having one but globally no. Same with deserts, some areas will become dryer (but some will become wetter) the complex results of warmer temperatures affecting the global precipitation flux. But don't let my tenacious pursuit of correct science derail the thread.

Aesthetics I completely support. I have a concern for getting mapping scripts to make continents with realistic features every time and the system resources needed to do so. But I think you're right - pretty looks are a good thing.

 

[trickofthehand]

Atrebates, I actually agree with you 100%. However planetary mechanics are.... a rather new concept for humans to be so bold in their certainty. 100 years ago most of us were still crapping in buckets.

 

[CivMyWay]

Been away for a good little while. My fellow programmer has convinced me to change our civ-variant from a hex-based game to a 3d, globe with proper terrain elevations. Though still skeptical as to how well it will work (and sad at going back to square #1 on the development process), we are about 1/2 way back to where we were. It does have some benefits though; there is no such thing as a "hill" terrain; its just given by virtue of the inclination of the land, which naturally impairs movement.

As it is not hex-based weapons will have a radius-range...

p.s. I believe ancient cities would be built on hills generally not because of flooding, but for the defensive benefit.

 

[trickofthehand]

Weapons will have a radius range... can you elaborate?

 

[Atrebates]

@trickofthehand Yes, that is true. But thirty years of investigation backed up with geology of the past few centuries... I fancy that as a good bet.

@Civmyway: That's one, springline settlements are another, then settlements on flood plains were built on raised land precisely so they weren't flooded (we were less blasé about such things before large scale civil engineering). There's also a tendency for river settlements at the lowest bridging point or inside hairpin meanders for defence (Such places tend to come with a castle -See Durham).

 

[CivMyWay]

Weapons will have a radius range... can you elaborate?

Well it's not tile based... so everything is measured like a real distance (and I haven't thought this out too much yet, not quite up to this stage). It can get complicated so I'll pluck a low hanging fruit.

An easy example is to say that an artillery unit will be able to launch successive attacks on infantry while they close the gap between the two units. e.g. the player moves the infantry towards the artillery in his turn; during which they may get attacked 3 times before they can counter-attack. An artillery unit on higher ground will have a longer range than one on a plain.

Yes; this will create near impenetrable position --- but thats what happens when you stack a whole bunch of powerful guns in a good position --- expect heavy casualties if your tech isn't up to date.

So how would you weaken such a position? Cut of their supply lines; starve them of ammunition and food; send in the saboteurs, buy them off, or if possible simply go around them...

The combat experience of the attacking unit will help it get through such attacks with less damage.

 

[Hail]

My fellow programmer has convinced me to change our civ-variant from a hex-based game to a 3d, globe with proper terrain elevations.

Well it's not tile based... so everything is measured like a real distance (and I haven't thought this out too much yet, not quite up to this stage). It can get complicated so I'll pluck a low hanging fruit.

An easy example is to say that an artillery unit will be able to launch successive attacks on infantry while they close the gap between the two units. e.g. the player moves the infantry towards the artillery in his turn; during which they may get attacked 3 times before they can counter-attack. An artillery unit on higher ground will have a longer range than one on a plain.

such behavior can be achieved on a tile-based map by adding ranged bombardment and adjusting the range proportional to elevation

Yes; this will create near impenetrable position --- but thats what happens when you stack a whole bunch of powerful guns in a good position --- expect heavy casualties if your tech isn't up to date.

what happens is they expose their position and get counter-bombarded