Future of Caveman2Cosmos

[armenia4ever]

Since I'm a VERY new poster on this forum, I won't throw my 2 cents in on the validity of Global Warming.. or (Climate Change) as its called now, but it does bring up the subject of how you see the future through the lens of tech growth and how it could relate to the game.

Our perspective can either be pessimistic, optimistic, or a combination of both.

Consider the prediction of Malthus. At that time, it seemed inevitable that we would not produce enough food or resources to feed an expanding population. Well, when the Industrial revolution kicked in and all the advances stemming from it, that problem of not producing enough food went away.

Now people will still differ on the subject of overpopulation, but we simply don't know what advances will either minimize that "problem" or exacerbate it. So for C2C, what view do we take as to effects of tech? Optimistic? Pessimistic? both? Blade runner? Gattaca? 1984/Brave New World?

Let's say we take the optimistic view for C2C.

Certain tech eliminates any warming. Or.... perhaps colonization of the moon and space lessens the issue. Do the tech periods in between space colonization reflect a "warmer" climate where some of the tiles change? Would certain structures change it?

In real life, much of the earths surface area - water - has massive untapped potentials due to the tech just not being there or even conceptualized. Something I did notice recently in geo politics as they call it, is China building artificial islands in the Pacific.

Currently "normal" non-artificial islands include 12 miles around them of water as territory of that country. The debate in the UN right now is whether artificial islands should render that same territorial application concerning the water around the island. China supports this. The Philippines doesnt. GeoCurrents has a long picture slide that explains the situation quite well. (Note it is a PDF, but it should pop up in your chrome viewer)

Now imagine in game if you could do this with terraforming. Does it cause tension with other civs? What about building under the water? Changes in Geography brings about huge new conflicts and ramifications for diplomacy.

Consider "renewables" and resources. Just as new resources become viable, useful, and in demand, they change the environments around them and consumption.

I suppose a mechanic could be added to reflect population strife that is then reduced by space colonization. Or perhaps it intensifies. New rebel factions can be formed from the splitting of a Civ and maybe that happens to those in space... or the water. (Think animes like Gundam Wing where the earth and its colonies in space are always pitted against each other.)

 

[Thunderbrd]

Since I'm a VERY new poster on this forum, I won't throw my 2 cents in on the validity of Global Warming.. or (Climate Change) as its called now, but it does bring up the subject of how you see the future through the lens of tech growth and how it could relate to the game.

Our perspective can either be pessimistic, optimistic, or a combination of both.

Consider the prediction of Malthus. At that time, it seemed inevitable that we would not produce enough food or resources to feed an expanding population. Well, when the Industrial revolution kicked in and all the advances stemming from it, that problem of not producing enough food went away.

Now people will still differ on the subject of overpopulation, but we simply don't know what advances will either minimize that "problem" or exacerbate it. So for C2C, what view do we take as to effects of tech? Optimistic? Pessimistic? both? Blade runner? Gattaca? 1984/Brave New World?

Let's say we take the optimistic view for C2C.

Certain tech eliminates any warming. Or.... perhaps colonization of the moon and space lessens the issue. Do the tech periods in between space colonization reflect a "warmer" climate where some of the tiles change? Would certain structures change it?

In real life, much of the earths surface area - water - has massive untapped potentials due to the tech just not being there or even conceptualized. Something I did notice recently in geo politics as they call it, is China building artificial islands in the Pacific.

Currently "normal" non-artificial islands include 12 miles around them of water as territory of that country. The debate in the UN right now is whether artificial islands should render that same territorial application concerning the water around the island. China supports this. The Philippines doesnt. GeoCurrents has a long picture slide that explains the situation quite well. (Note it is a PDF, but it should pop up in your chrome viewer)

Now imagine in game if you could do this with terraforming. Does it cause tension with other civs? What about building under the water? Changes in Geography brings about huge new conflicts and ramifications for diplomacy.

Consider "renewables" and resources. Just as new resources become viable, useful, and in demand, they change the environments around them and consumption.

I suppose a mechanic could be added to reflect population strife that is then reduced by space colonization. Or perhaps it intensifies. New rebel factions can be formed from the splitting of a Civ and maybe that happens to those in space... or the water. (Think animes like Gundam Wing where the earth and its colonies in space are always pitted against each other.)

Welcome to the forum! I hope you add more thoughts to our threads.

My view is that we should be as neutral to these challenges as possible. As in, we present the challenges, or the game makes it difficult not to encounter them at some point like crime does through properties, and we also present the solutions. Whether the players utilize the solutions, and sometimes this also means taking on some costs and penalties in the process, wisely or not is the whole name of the game. Create many points of conflict, not all of which are nation vs nation but many being internal problem solving, and let the game dynamically play out.

Sure some future visions must be presented and game dynamics must be invented to make a lot of those things happen to the depth that they can. I know underwater cities is a big goal since you brought it up. Currently the focus has mostly been on bringing some balance to the game that we have but at a point we'll start working at more dynamics that have been planned.

Again, great feedback and you're more than welcome to join our ongoing discussions and sharing your opinions.

 

[raxo2222]

Since V38 is coming soon, what are your plans for V39?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I will post a v39 goals manifesto soon after v38 is released. Top projects include evolving buildings, improving on industrial vs commercial building concepts (revolving around bonuses in a preparation for eventually making bonuses (resources) operate in a more volumetric fashion, and improvements in building prerequisite definition methods. Power as a property may be a very good project for this run as well. I'd also like to get us developing out diseases under Outbreaks and Afflictions. I have some Size Matters matters to consider for animal hunts but that may also be best to weave into the Heart of War combat mod, which is all about morale issues, routing and so on. I may want to get that developed out in v39 but I'm thinking it may need to wait still. Maybe better to just keep it to work on some of the animals spawning other animals by collecting food to certain thresholds this version.

 

[raxo2222]

I found out oldest mentions of Rise of Mankind mentions (its spiritual ancestor of caveman2cosmos for those who don't know yet), and posted them in someone's thread.
Added them to first post of this thread.
This mod has 11 years if you stretch it - counting since RoM was under development somewhere in February 2007 .
If you start counting since Caveman2Cosmos modmod for Rise of Mankind and A New Dawn, then it would be closer to 9.5 years (August 2008)
It seems like this mod got its own subforum in 2011 year, as oldest threads started appearing in 2011 year.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I found out oldest mentions of Rise of Mankind mentions (its spiritual ancestor of caveman2cosmos for those who don't know yet), and posted them in someone's thread.
Added them to first post of this thread.
This mod has 11 years if you stretch it - counting since RoM was under development somewhere in February 2007 .
If you start counting since Caveman2Cosmos modmod for Rise of Mankind and A New Dawn, then it would be closer to 9.5 years (August 2008)
It seems like this mod got its own subforum in 2011 year, as oldest threads started appearing in 2011 year.

Even RoM is based on some other major efforts before it like the BBAI mod (Better AI) and Revolutions. DH, SO and Joe know the deeper history more than I do as I picked up on things at AND.

 

[raxo2222]

Even RoM is based on some other major efforts before it like the BBAI mod (Better AI) and Revolutions. DH, SO and Joe know the deeper history more than I do as I picked up on things at AND.

This is why I called mod being 11 year old a stretch, as it was likely, that RoM itself wasn't developed from ground zero.
These roots would probably run all way to 2004 when Civilization 4 was released
Basically there are things behind Nomandic Lifestyle
Officially this mod is around 9 and half year old - counting since thread named Caveman2Cosmos was started.
If ever this mod becomes standalone game, then it will instantly break some records

Is something in ROM:AND, that C2C doesn't have?

 

[JosEPh_II]

These roots would probably run all way to 2004 when Civilization 4 was released

Zappara before Civ IV BtS and Rise of Mankind had a similar mod for Civ IV Warlords. I thought he once said he had also done some modding in Civ III. But after 11 years some of the details are getting "fuzzy", memory.

 

[JosEPh_II]

If ever this mod becomes standalone game, then it will instantly break some records

The Only way this current Mod would be a Stand a lone game is for Firaxis to come and ask to use it. Similar to what they did for Fall from Heaven Mod by Dale.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I found out oldest mentions of Rise of Mankind mentions (its spiritual ancestor of caveman2cosmos for those who don't know yet), and posted them in someone's thread.
Added them to first post of this thread.
This mod has 11 years if you stretch it - counting since RoM was under development somewhere in February 2007 .
If you start counting since Caveman2Cosmos modmod for Rise of Mankind and A New Dawn, then it would be closer to 9.5 years (August 2008)
It seems like this mod got its own subforum in 2011 year, as oldest threads started appearing in 2011 year.

Actually Rise of Mankind has its roots in two Civ III mods of the "more is better" style. "Double your Pleasure" and "RARR" if I remember correctly They were two of my three favorite mods in Civ III. The Civ II tech tree was very hard to work with. One page per era and no scrolling.

 

[raxo2222]

The Only way this current Mod would be a Stand a lone game is for Firaxis to come and ask to use it. Similar to what they did for Fall from Heaven Mod by Dale.

Considering we don't have graphics/sound artists in modding team it may be as well true.
Also Fall From Heaven as standalone game never succeeded - it failed in 2010 year due to lack of funds or something, when I searched in google.

Civilization 3 mods are indirect roots, as you would have to remake such mods for civilization 4 anyway.
Caveman2Cosmos is buit on
Rise of mankind + A New Dawn are built on
Lots of smaller and bigger mods, that are build on
Civ4 + Warlords + BTS base
I meant direct roots here

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Probably talking at cross purposes here but Zappara specifically states that he built RoM because he wanted to play DyP and RARR in Civ IV.

 

[raxo2222]

Probably talking at cross purposes here but Zappara specifically states that he built RoM because he wanted to play DyP and RARR in Civ IV.

I wonder how many fossils (features/things) are here in between Civilization 4 itself and C2C, that don't play well with this mod or just look weird.
I know Revolutions and Surround&Destroy are very bad option for AI.
Dynamic Storms or whatever it was called in BUG options section are slowing down considerably turns, when a lot of animals spawn.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Surround&Destroy are very bad option for AI.

I refuse to agree with this. Attempting to use S&D can be self defeating for the player and any AI that tries to could easily be making a mistake, just like the player. It CAN help but it can also make you a lot more vulnerable to taking losses. NOT using it is therefore a perfectly valid strategy. I do hope to help teach the AI some uses soon but I'm not thinking v39 will have enough time for that.

 

[raxo2222]

I refuse to agree with this. Attempting to use S&D can be self defeating for the player and any AI that tries to could easily be making a mistake, just like the player. It CAN help but it can also make you a lot more vulnerable to taking losses. NOT using it is therefore a perfectly valid strategy. I do hope to help teach the AI some uses soon but I'm not thinking v39 will have enough time for that.

Hmm so basically using it in self defense doesn't make it that op as someone claimed.
Basically this option is "don't use it offensively and you won't steamroll AI with it"
Edit: Here are all switches, buttons and levers both before game start and BUG settings.

Spoiler Pre-Game/BUG Options :

 

[Thunderbrd]

Hmm so basically using it in self defense doesn't make it that op as someone claimed.
Basically this option is "don't use it offensively and you won't steamroll AI with it"

You can use it offensively. The tower buildings make this more difficult now, reducing the effectiveness of S&D bonus generation, and if you spread out your units, you make them more vulnerable to counterattack.

 

[raxo2222]

You can use it offensively. The tower buildings make this more difficult now, reducing the effectiveness of S&D bonus generation, and if you spread out your units, you make them more vulnerable to counterattack.

I guess then I read some really old post about it then

What is better: 6 units utilizing S&D mechanics or 2 units with groupsize+1 strength modifier utilizing SM mechanics?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I guess then I read some really old post about it then

What is better: 6 units utilizing S&D mechanics or 2 units with groupsize+1 strength modifier utilizing SM mechanics?

Too dependent on many other factors, such as the ability of the defenders to counter attack, to say.

 

[raxo2222]

Too dependent on many other factors, such as the ability of the defenders to counter attack, to say.

Are there game options, that are absolutely unbalanced/breaking AI (like Advanced Start or Revolutions)?
I posted screenshots of all options above.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I went through and evaluated all the options in the v37 Player's Guide. I'm soon to update that page for v38 but generally, I gave opinions on playability there. I really don't know where we are with Rev balance at the moment but I think it's not tooo bad. Advanced start is just not really cost out with any genuine thought or evaluation - nearly everything has the same cost. So it's a little wonky but it's one way to go about it so as to challenge the player to really know the difference between what's worth purchasing and what isn't.

The No Storms bug option is definitely advised. Don't bother with Archer Bombard - it's pretty much obsolete.