1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Features

Discussion in 'Civ4 - World 2009 Mod' started by DVS, Dec 19, 2008.

  1. Damburger

    Damburger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Messages:
    57
    Its a type of rocket artillery developed by the Russians in WW2 and used recently by Hezbollah, to significant effect, in their war with Israel.

    Its basically a block of tubes, sometimes mounted on the back of a vehicle, containing a whole bunch of rockets. You can launch them off in a big barrage, then hide before the people you are fighting can locate you and blow you up.

    As I said, these are basically WW2 vintage hardware but Hezbollah were able to batter Israel with them and not lose many; on the last day of the war they fired off more rockets than they had on any previous day.
     
  2. sheep21

    sheep21 Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    562
    Location:
    London
    Its not that launching a nuke is the fastes way to lose power (look at Truman) its that it would lead to the end of life on earth as we know it.
    Also with regards to Nukes, the big boys will need far more than that to reflect the modern world. If the USA or Russia launched oly there own missiles it would be the end of civilization as we know it, therefore they should have many of them to reflect MAD ingame. But the AI should use them as a last resort I agree, say if one of there core cities get captured


    With regards to Jerusalem, that would start a Nuclear war, Israel has at least 75 nuclear war heads and the capability to deliver by air, land and sea. No Arab country would attack Israel for fear of the consequences if Israel lost, the ME becoming a glass car park for one.
     
  3. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    Here another feature idea. Maybe DVS was aiming for that, too, when he said that the AIAutoPlay-mod might be part of the final mod:

    THE TERM OF OFFICE

    If the player chooses a democratic civic, like representation there has to be a way of simulating the term of office. Every 4 years, or 48 turns there should be an election. If a lot of citizens are unhappy a fictional opponent will be elected as leader of your civilization. Then you'd have to turn over control to the AI for a couple of turns. Next time you'd win the election automatically and are in charge again...
    The same system should work for AI leaders. If one AI leader loses the election, the leader name could change (maybe use great people names?) and there could be random but slight effects on the relationship to other leaders. Maybe even one leader trait changes...
    For the human player this should simulate the pressure on a leader to neglect important issues for the sake of winning an election. But also the AI should try to make its people happy before an election for the sake of winning.

    When at war you should get a bonus with your people making it easier to win. So you might think about starting a war with a tiny civ before an election. (Remember that move "Wag the dog"?)
     
  4. NikNaks

    NikNaks Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    2,972
    Location:
    England
    That's an awesome idea. That'd be great if we can get it to work properly. :goodjob:
     
  5. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    Of course there should always be polls or election forecasts available in the advisors or statistics menu. that way you'd know if youre in danger of losing.
     
  6. Mattygerst

    Mattygerst Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Messages:
    538
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Sheep21:

    Launching a nuke from Truman was a no-brainer because no one else had any to retaliate with. In today's world...it is the fastest way to lose power.

    Country X launches a nuclear missile at Country Y. Whether country Y has them or not...Countries A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J immediately invade Country X and remove the leader from power with force (and if country X has many nuclear weapons - they are countered by another country having many that would be against them, assuring that Country X doesn't strike with them again on large scale). You have to remember...someone is always there wanting to take power. Country X launches nuke - all countries invade country X, and 3rd in command in Country X senses the ability to take power, and helps remove the leader before he assures destruction of everything.
    There is no benefit to those in charge to launch nuclear weapons. The leaders have a lot of money, and a lot of power, and a lifestyle off the charts compared to those they are ruling over - there is no benefit to launching a nuclear weapon. The only good reason to have them is to A) assure that you do have the capability to counter-strike, and B ) to propogandize your power as a country and effectiveness as a leader to the citizens you rule over.

    There will, probably, never be a multitude of nuclear strikes on earth. There is no reason for someone in power to launch them (even handing it off to someone with the amount of intelligence today would lead back to who handed it off to who) and it would result in someone having a lot of power being forcefully removed from office.

    Truman had the only bombs on the planet at the time - so there was no reason for him NOT to drop them because there was A) no knowledge of them existing or what their capabilities were, and B ) no way through a counter-strike to stop him at the time.

    World is much different today.

    And Israel would never launch because their launch codes are thru the United States, and the United States would never actually give them to Israel unless Israel were nuclear struck first - which won't happen because it guarantees that the Islamic leader would lose power via death/removal from office via a war with Israel which would also be a war with the United States & Co.

    The BEST thing in the world is for EVERYONE to have a nuclear weapon because it would ensure that no one was too crazy for fear of mutual destruction & the BEST way to make that realisitic in Civ4 is to give everyone a VERY low amount, or zero nuclear weapons, representing the fact that they'll never really get launched (at least on a large scale) and while humans can do/know this, the Civ4 AI cannot, which will cause every war to be a nuclear war.

    The FIRST thing the AI does when it has nuclear weapons is launch them at the outset of a war. Not very realistic, so not even having them...or having a VERY, VERY small amounts of them, actually, makes the game more realistic. Realism of the mod is key, but you have to work within the framework of the AI system of Civ4, realizing it is not a human player, but a computer.
     
  7. VeteranLurker

    VeteranLurker Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    For the Term of Office feature, I think it would be problematic (read: unfun for the player) if they lost control of their civ to the AI for any number of turns. But I like the idea of having a 'price' for having an elective government as opposed to the price of having authoritarianism (e.g., unhappy people, military unkeep, etc). An alternative would be, to semi-randomly modify the civics based on the opposition-party's preferences. Simplistically, it could just change civics randomly and they remain that way until the next election, during which time you can do things for your party to win the election (but hmm it would be unrealistic to still have control of your military in the meanwhile...). More-complexly, depending upon how politics/religion/ethnicity is handled in the game, if the opposition wins then more-radical civic choices are made.

    The trouble here is, 'who' is the player representing? Is the player the one individual leader? Or does the player represent a political party/ideology? Or nationalism/ethnicity? And what is the timeframe? In vanilla civ, you don't play a specific real person as the leader of the civilization, since obviously no one lives for 6000+ years. It would be trickier here, if the timeframe reduces to months/weeks in which case the player CAN represent a particular individual leader -- losing an election in that case might mean you lose the game! Unfun. But if you represent a party/ideology, then losing an election should create a serious setback but not the end of the game.

    Dunno how you could code politics into the game, but here's a brainstorm. Assume you have two potential leaders for a civ using representative government, such as Obama and McCain. Each leader has a set of civics-choices which they advocate, and which differ (at least slightly) from each other. The civ population, based upon recent game events as well as long-standing national identity, has its own civics preferences. THe population somehow votes based upon their civics preferences for one of the two candidates. Whichever one wins is then charged with implementing the civics choices which they advocated. Note that these promised-civics may not necessarily match the civics which the populace likes overall, or necessarily match the current civics choices in-game. Meanwhile however, "the government" of the civilization, which includes the military, the economy, etc, operates in an ongoing manner no matter which leader is in charge. It is this "government" which YOU as the player represent. Now, no matter which leader the population chooses in their election, it is the government which carries out the civics on a day-to-day basis. OK, so I am saying that the leader is essentially a figurehead; I don't necessarily believe that, but maybe that works best in game terms here. Now, in game terms, the population expects the leader to implement the civics which they promised during the election. Simple: however far they deviate from the civics they promised, the people become increasingly unhappy with that leader. Including even deviating to civics which the people actually prefer more -- this effect would be cancelled out by the fact that the people like the preferred civic more (e.g. +2 happy) than they dislike the broken promise (-1 happy). For this to work, each civic likely needs to be on a continuum, so that distance from preferred/promised civic could be easily calculated. This political unhappiness is in addition to the usual unhappiness of wars, lack of luxuries, etc. As mentioned above, there should be an incumbent effect, as well as something connected with war weariness -- if the war is going well, the incumbent gets a boost in the polls; if the war isn't going well, they get hurt in the polls. Also, the incumbent, for expedience, either gets to set their platform first and/or gets some boost for choosing civics already enacted (i.e., taking credit for them) -- this allows a player to delay civics changes with an election upcoming, then enacting those changes when they win the election, thus setting them up with a big boost for winning future elections. Basically, in general the player would still get to choose their civics but would have to deal with public opinion when they do so, which sounds fairly realistic.
     
  8. Joecoolyo

    Joecoolyo 99% Lightspeed

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,908
    Location:
    茨城県
    Once again, we can mod the revolution mod a little because there is already a system like this in the mod. If people are angry in your civ (in the revolution mod) and you are running universal suffrage, they can demand an election, and if you lose the empire goes under A.I. control for a certain amount of turns. We can try to mod this system to make it happen every 48 turns.
     
  9. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    I agree that there are some players who would consider this no fun. But there's a fairly simple solution for that: Why not make it possible to activate or deactivate that feature at the beginning in the Custom Scenario screen? Just like you can do with permanent alliances...
    So hardcore realistic gamers who like the occasional spoke in the wheel like me can run for office. And after all: The goal is to win the election so the AI doesn't come to power in the first place.

    This is fantastic!
     
  10. DVS

    DVS El Presidente

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,037
    Location:
    Canada
    Ok guys I updated post #1 again, I'm trying to get the definitive list of the changes we are going to have to make for V1.0. Elections are covered by revolutions so I left that out.

    Please take a look and tell me if I am forgetting any. Once we get the list finalized, we can work each one out in detail, and the programmers can start working on them.

    Progress is moving fast so we have to get out of the ideas stage and fully in to working on making the modifications.
     
  11. NikNaks

    NikNaks Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    2,972
    Location:
    England
    RE: Improved Stats
    The WoC has a cool Unit Statistics mod, which is slightly irrelevant, but none-the-less cool, which keeps a track of kills, battles, most advanced unit killed etc. For other stats, the BUG Mod has graphs and tables galore, so I'm not sure I totally understand which stats you're looking for.

    As for everything else, can I just suggest putting a link to each post on each one to make things easy for casual readers? Otherwise, great list. :goodjob:
     
  12. DVS

    DVS El Presidente

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,037
    Location:
    Canada
    The main thing I want is the full lists for each of the demographic that is shown on the f9 screen. If we can't do it no biggie, it's just something I've always though would be nice (and available in real life).

    I'll update the post with links tonight. :)
     
  13. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    Has anyone come up with an idea how to properly simulate crime? I think that is an important problem in today's world. I'll just post my thoughts on that subject here...far away from a masterplan, but I guess you guys have thougts on this too.

    Three important keywords come to my mind:
    - drug trade
    - trafficking in human beings
    - organised crime

    Drug Trade
    We might have drugs as an illegal ressource. This would mean that you cannot officially trade that resource but it spreads like religions do. There should be ways to promote drug spreading to other civs (earning a little extra money and destabilizing your opponents) or to fight drug trade. Maybe you could also distinguish between drug cultivation and drug trade. Cultivation would be having the drug resource in your territory and cultivate it, trade would mean the smuggling of drugs into your or your opponents territory.
    A city that has access to drugs should earn some happy faces and additional culture but also reduced health, commerce and production.

    Trafficking in human beings
    This would mean the trade of slaves/forced laborers and prositutes into other countries. I'm not sure how to do this:
    - Either similarly to drug trade as (illegal/self-spreading) resources
    - Or similarly to Great Specialists. Whenever a forced laborer or prostitute has been smuggled to a city the slave or prostitute appears like a Great Specialist in the city window producing bonuses and maluses. Unlike ordinary specialists it cannot be removed or added by purpose.
    Prostitutes should produce additional happy faces but reduce commerce. Forced laborers should produce some hammers and reduce commerce.
    Just like drugs you should be able to promote or to fight trafficking in human beings.
    Maybe this could be connected with the immigration feature...the more immigrant units are near your borders the higher the chance of prostitutes or forced laborers appearing in your cities. This chance might also rise with the number of wars near your borders or the number of neighboring poorer civs.

    Organised crime
    I'm not sure whether it would make sense to establish crime organisations (Cosa Nostra, Triades, Yakuza etc.) in a corporations-like way. These could be linked somehow to the first two aspects but also work like corporations with a little difference. They don't give you any money, they don't have a immediate positive effect. They just drain money. You have no possibility to spread it yourself like you do with corporations. They spread themselves. So the only benefit you can get is if you keep them out of your country while your neighbours can't and are destabilised.


    So how to fight crime?
    I had the idea of a new concept that works like the science/culture/espionage rate.
    The Homeland Security rate
    The higher it is the lower the chances of:
    - crime in your cities
    - drugs appearing in your cities
    - prostitutes or forced laborers in your cities
    - successful terrorist attacks against you
    - maybe also espionage against you

    Buildings add bonuses to this Homeland Security rate. e.g. courthouses, jails, police stations, cctvs. And so do certain civics like police state.

    But be careful! Having your Homeland Security rate positioned too high causes unhappiness. People don't like being watched by Big Brother...
     
  14. DVS

    DVS El Presidente

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,037
    Location:
    Canada
    Ok, first post updated with links to individual ideas. I think this list of features is both doable and includes enough changes to make this mod a fantastic gameplay improvement.

    We'll post updates as features are coded to let you guys know how they are working.

    As it stands now, I think we could afford to find one or two more programmers who can do the GDP related features. Contact myself or NikNaks if you can help with this.
     
  15. DVS

    DVS El Presidente

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,037
    Location:
    Canada
    ianinsane, great ideas. The reason I didn't add that to the front page is that, we probably will not have enough programmers to get that included in version 1.0 without leaving out something else.

    IMO the crime feature merits it's own thread and discussion, but let's put that on hold until we have the first version working. There is just so much we could do with it, it will become a project of it's own. Cool?
     
  16. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    I agree. I just wanted to have it written down so the idea won't get lost. ;)
     
  17. remake20

    remake20 :)

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,901
    This is sorta like the weapons one but different: I don't know where to start... You know how some corporation produce a resource like the ethanol company. Well I had an idea for that like buildings. Have buildings that produce resources, but the resources expire after one use. The resources would be thing like guns or armor and each would have it's own building, but you can build as many as you want in the city. Military units use that resource when the build and it goes away. Now some units can use more than one resources. If I need to say anything else about please tell.
     
  18. MasterOfDomain

    MasterOfDomain Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    98
    There are so many fantastic features coming into fruition here, I'm really excited!

    But no one seems to have mentioned an absolute glaringly obvious one. If it has and is going to be implemented then I apologise. If it has and is not going to be implemented then it needs to be!

    Global Warming

    Rather than the ridiculous idea of one Nuclear Warhead inducing the planet into an unstoppable Global Warming we should really do something realistic and workable for ours.

    Could we possibly count up the Polution caused by Buildings for each and every city and create some sort of effects from that?

    Ideas for Global Warming Punishments (if possible (not a programmer)):
    - Land turning to Desert
    - Land turning to Coast
    - Food Prod reduced on Farms

    Also, UN resolutions for Climate Change? Such as 'Removal of Coal Plants' etc. The resolutions may be unattainable because of the impact of some countries defying them, reflecting the current trend of not everyone helping eachother.

    As well as this, the fact that some countries may refuse and spell doom for everyone, it may be that the players declare war on them to reduce their emissions. It sounds ridiculous at the moment, but I can see this being a real option if diplomacy fails. How about reduction in relationships if the country is the biggest polluter and things begin to get serious?
     
  19. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    Hmmm...this one is so obvious I assumed that it was already taken care of. But you're right, I can't find it in any thread...
    Of course vanilla civ does have a pollution/global warming feature but frankly I don't like it. However, I'd be surprised if there wasn't already any mod that tackled that subject.

    It would also be cool if we had a feature for emissions trading in a later version.
     
  20. remake20

    remake20 :)

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,901
    Here is the full list and the things that they do. Let's start narrowing them out. The one at the end is an addition by me.

    EDIT: Later I'll make sure we can tell when one begins and ends.

    Spoiler :

    Global Warming

    Rather than the ridiculous idea of one Nuclear Warhead inducing the planet into an unstoppable Global Warming we should really do something realistic and workable for ours.

    Could we possibly count up the Polution caused by Buildings for each and every city and create some sort of effects from that?

    Ideas for Global Warming Punishments (if possible (not a programmer)):
    - Land turning to Desert
    - Land turning to Coast
    - Food Prod reduced on Farms

    Also, UN resolutions for Climate Change? Such as 'Removal of Coal Plants' etc. The resolutions may be unattainable because of the impact of some countries defying them, reflecting the current trend of not everyone helping eachother.

    As well as this, the fact that some countries may refuse and spell doom for everyone, it may be that the players declare war on them to reduce their emissions. It sounds ridiculous at the moment, but I can see this being a real option if diplomacy fails. How about reduction in relationships if the country is the biggest polluter and things begin to get serious?

    No Name:
    This is sorta like the weapons one but different: I don't know where to start... You know how some corporation produce a resource like the ethanol company. Well I had an idea for that like buildings. Have buildings that produce resources, but the resources expire after one use. The resources would be thing like guns or armor and each would have it's own building, but you can build as many as you want in the city. Military units use that resource when the build and it goes away. Now some units can use more than one resource. If I need to say anything else about please tell.
    Drug Trade
    We might have drugs as an illegal ressource. This would mean that you cannot officially trade that resource but it spreads like religions do. There should be ways to promote drug spreading to other civs (earning a little extra money and destabilizing your opponents) or to fight drug trade. Maybe you could also distinguish between drug cultivation and drug trade. Cultivation would be having the drug resource in your territory and cultivate it, trade would mean the smuggling of drugs into your or your opponents territory.
    A city that has access to drugs should earn some happy faces and additional culture but also reduced health, commerce and production.

    Trafficking in human beings
    This would mean the trade of slaves/forced laborers and prositutes into other countries. I'm not sure how to do this:
    - Either similarly to drug trade as (illegal/self-spreading) resources
    - Or similarly to Great Specialists. Whenever a forced laborer or prostitute has been smuggled to a city the slave or prostitute appears like a Great Specialist in the city window producing bonuses and maluses. Unlike ordinary specialists it cannot be removed or added by purpose.
    Prostitutes should produce additional happy faces but reduce commerce. Forced laborers should produce some hammers and reduce commerce.
    Just like drugs you should be able to promote or to fight trafficking in human beings.
    Maybe this could be connected with the immigration feature...the more immigrant units are near your borders the higher the chance of prostitutes or forced laborers appearing in your cities. This chance might also rise with the number of wars near your borders or the number of neighboring poorer civs.

    Organized crime
    I'm not sure whether it would make sense to establish crime organisations (Cosa Nostra, Triades, Yakuza etc.) in a corporations-like way. These could be linked somehow to the first two aspects but also work like corporations with a little difference. They don't give you any money, they don't have a immediate positive effect. They just drain money. You have no possibility to spread it yourself like you do with corporations. They spread themselves. So the only benefit you can get is if you keep them out of your country while your neighbours can't and are destabilised.


    So how to fight crime?
    I had the idea of a new concept that works like the science/culture/espionage rate.
    The Homeland Security rate
    The higher it is the lower the chances of:
    - crime in your cities
    - drugs appearing in your cities
    - prostitutes or forced laborers in your cities
    - successful terrorist attacks against you
    - maybe also espionage against you

    Buildings add bonuses to this Homeland Security rate. e.g. courthouses, jails, police stations, cctvs. And so do certain civics like police state.

    But be careful! Having your Homeland Security rate positioned too high causes unhappiness. People don't like being watched by Big Brother...
    RE: Improved Stats
    The WoC has a cool Unit Statistics mod, which is slightly irrelevant, but none-the-less cool, which keeps a track of kills, battles, most advanced unit killed etc. For other stats, the BUG Mod has graphs and tables galore, so I'm not sure I totally understand which stats you're looking for.
    THE TERM OF OFFICE

    If the player chooses a democratic civic, like representation there has to be a way of simulating the term of office. Every 4 years, or 48 turns there should be an election. If a lot of citizens are unhappy a fictional opponent will be elected as leader of your civilization. Then you'd have to turn over control to the AI for a couple of turns. Next time you'd win the election automatically and are in charge again...
    The same system should work for AI leaders. If one AI leader loses the election, the leader name could change (maybe use great people names?) and there could be random but slight effects on the relationship to other leaders. Maybe even one leader trait changes...
    For the human player this should simulate the pressure on a leader to neglect important issues for the sake of winning an election. But also the AI should try to make its people happy before an election for the sake of winning.

    When at war you should get a bonus with your people making it easier to win. So you might think about starting a war with a tiny civ before an election. (Remember that move "Wag the dog"?)
    Immigration
    Natural disasters (this could be pretty cool, ie: hurricanes only affect US and Pacific where they occur naturally, or it could just be plain annoying for the player.)
    ARMS TRADE

    The major producers could sell units to smaller, rich nations. If we have to, we can make it as simple as allowing units parked in the city with the building that allows this to be sold as you'd sell a tech.

    I think it's such an important part of how the world works, it certainly merits it's own section on the diplomacy screen.

    You'd be required to have a military, air force, or naval academy somewhere to be able to purchase related units (to train the crew).

    The only problem with this, is having the AI actually use it properly. It seems like something we should obviously have, because it's what happens in the world, but if the AI won't buy or sell on it's own, or if they use it in stupid ways, we'll have to make due without it.
    Asymmetric warfare

    The terrorist leader is a great idea, and if we can do it, lets. Maybe he has to recruit from cities, including foreign cities, and the resulting units are more likely to be successful if they are drawn from the civ you are attacking. But it would be much harder/more expensive to recruit compared to doing it in your cities.

    Whether we can do it this way or not, we have to include Damburgers' list of offensive units. (Although someone will have to explain to me what a Katyusha is! lol)

    We should also use ianinsane's ideas for operations. Different units will have to have different missions to some degree. Obviously a hijacked plane has a pretty low chance of assassinating someone (unless the guy's on the plane I guess).

    Also ianinsane is right about the effects. Loosing population never made much sense, unless we get into biological attacks, which I vote on leaving out since they have never happened on a big scale (from a terrorist).
    Ethnic cleansing

    I don't know how you have finally decided on the religions issue. If you use the "cultural ideologies" feature then this would work like this:
    If a certain civic like "Ethnic nationalism" or similar is active, military units that are stationed in a city with a cultural ideology that is not state cultural ideology can conduct the action "ethnic cleansing".
    Basically it works like the Inquisition (or was it called counter-reformation?) in Total Realism (...i think): The non-state cultural ideology disappears from that city.
    If we include the immigration mod this could spawn an immigrant representing the fugitives.
    Of course this affects relations with other civs, especially with those who have the expelled cultural ideology as state cultural ideology. It would become even worse if this immigration unit is killed afterwards. Then that civ would be accused of genocide which is a casus belli for other civs. There might be even the option of a UN resolution to declare war...
    International Criminal Court screen

    A screen that lists countries that have committed genocide and launched nuclear first strike attacks.

    Certainly trading with any of these countries should cost you diplomacy points with all other law abiding civs.
    Asymmetric warfare cont.

    The chances of GG being caught and/or failing at recruiting units will depend on:

    -type of unit he's recruiting.
    -mood of the city
    -the regular espionage point system

    If you are recruiting inside your own cities or friendly cities, there should be no chance of being caught on this stage, but some chance of failing. But home grown units will be much worse than foreign recruited units (maybe as simple as giving a lot of bonuses to units recruited in enemy cities?)


    The chances of being caught using one of these trained units to commit an act of asymmetrical Warfare will depend on:


    -experience of the unit obviously, if some are not suicided.
    -where the unit was recruited from (your cities or the enemy's) Probably reflected through experience bonuses.
    -again the regular espionage point system
    -city defenses (depends on unit type, ie: hijacked plane may be shot down by jet fighters or s.a.m. sites. this may be getting too in depth, we'll see.)
    Local War
    For example, this might be war where US and China fight over Taiwan, NATO and Soviets for Cold War Berlin, or from history, alternative version of beginning of WW2.
    • Can be declared over only 1 city, which must have less than 60% culture of enemy civ or must be in riot
    • AI (original civs and all their allies/vassals) will attack/defend only this city (though may attack enemy units nearby)
    • After 5 turns will either come to Cease Fire or Total War (given choice to both sides; if pre-war relations were at least 'cautious', high chance that both AIs will choose peace, not depending who owns targeted city)
    • No nuclear weapons
    • Fairly insignificant negative diplomacy changes for aggressor
    Total War
    More or less standart war from CIV4, but:
    • Around 2-5 civs involved
    • Cease Fire can't be declared for the first 10 turns, because if civs wanted peace, they had a chance during Local War
    • AI tends not to use ICBM unless they lose more than 50% of original army or 50% of original territory
    • If any ICBM is used, switched to Nuclear War (player is warned)
    • Serious negative diplomacy changes for aggressor
    World War
    Larger scale version of total war
    • 7+ Civs involved
    • All UN Resolutions become null and void, UN Wonder ceases to work
    • Activates all offensive\defensive treaties
    • War cannot end till one side or the other has vassalized the enemy or destroyed their Civ
    • If any ICBM is used, switched to Nuclear War (player is warned)
    • Very serious negative diplomacy changes for aggressor
    Nuclear War
    (Using both the M.A.D. Nukes mod and the Nuclear Arsenal mod)
    • Every civ involved in Total War launch their ICBM on enemy cities, targeting cities with ICBMs at first
    • Some devastating and/or end-of-the-world (but not game) events occur
    Proxy War
    The armament supply among civs should become more important. I'm not sure how to make it work but it should be custom that Civs supply wartime enemies of their enemy with units. That way they can weaken their enemy without having to go to war themselves.
    I can think of several ways to do this:
    • If a Civ gives a unit to another Civ the usual way (moving into the others therritory and donate it) it should have effects on diplomatic relations...like +1 for every few modern units
    • If a Civ asks you to join its war against another there should be a third option to answer like "No, but I will [secretly] supply you with weapons." Then a new diplomacy screen pops on and you can choose which of your units to transfer to the other Civ. But you can't just put a warrior on the table to buy your way out of it. The other civ has to accept it like any other trade. If you put too little on the table the "you refused to help us during war time" malus will appear. If your offer is accepted then there is no effect on relations. To gain a positive effect you additionally have to donate units the way I described before.
    Deficit Spending

    This and other modifications that we want to make to the GDP function should be figured out once and for all. Personally I think we should try to make the trade system better, and increase the use of lending.

    Right now, when you're trading you are limited to spending your surplus gold. But if a country has a large treasury, shouldn't they be allowed to increase their deficit by spending money beyond their surplus to buy resources? It is stupid that AI civs that are spending to the max on research/espionage won't go farther into the red to buy oil they need when they are under invasion.

    Hopefully we will be able to make this work, and we can get a little fancy with it. We can prevent small AI civs from being totally irresponsible by cutting them off when they start screwing themselves over. Even give civs a rating, lowering it if their economy begins to struggle, and that's when restrictions kick in. Human players could see the ratings on the "International Monetary Fund (IMF)" screen. IMF rating is also hurt by certain economic civics. Being in a trade org should probably give you a bump.

    We could also try to make the AI handle this better by only letting it increase the deficit to buy things it really needs. Extra oil only when they are at war, happiness resources only when their happiness rating is low, etc etc. Again varying degrees of restrictions based on their IMF rating.

    I also think it would be nice if we could increase the frequency of money lending. Poor nations should more often borrow money from rich ones and use it to hurry production. Interest rates/availability dependent on the attitudes of rich nations towards you of course. The US and EU should be making big loans to some of our micro states and weaker unions. Ideally.

    The amount of loans you have and have had would also tie in to the IMF screen.

    As always all of these changes are dependent on how the AI will react to them. If the limitations are there to prevent the AI from extreme stupid spending then we will have to forget about this.

    If anyone has seen a mod that modifies the GDP in any way, please share.


    Also, on a side note, I think we should remove all references to "gold" and replace them with "dollars"; including the icon. (as long as the USD remains the world's reserve currency... who knows, we may have to change it back!). Please don't anybody mention exchange rates etc until well after V1.0 comes out!

    Religious War:
    Muslims can be had towards Christians or Jew so I thought maybe we could have war declared by religion. Have different religions have enemies (e.g. Islam vs. Jew, Christians). And the people could get angry and declare war of them and you can’t do anything about it. You still have to fight the war though.
     

Share This Page