schwal
Chieftain
First, go read Sulla's ideas, I'll wait.
I agree with a lot of what he said, namely the tech ladders, policy picks, and generally the combat. However, there are some areas where I disagree with him. First, religion is just more micromanaging, and I think culture alone is enough in that area. Second, City-States and Vassal States, but that is because of a mechanic that I will explain later. Finally, and most importantly, is the way that economy and growth is handled. but the single most important concept is...
Mini-Tiles
I prefer hexes because of the square-root-of-two-problem, but this would work with squares as well. Sulla's idea was much like Heroes of Might and Magic, in that you would walk around on a regular map, and then have tactical combat on a separate grid. While the idea is good, I feel it lacks some strategy in unit placement. So instead of the tactical map being relatively samey or random, we will have each hex contain it's own grid of 7 tiles, like so:
We'll deal with the blue tiles in a bit, but this is the basic idea. But rather than have 2 armies face off in the same tile, we'll have the armies in all of the surrounding tiles in play as well, like so:
So when the red army invades, the blue army can use it's reserve force from the rear tile for instance. or take for example this scenario:
No matter who attacks, blue has a nice flanking position.
But how do we determine the tile's structure, and how do we prevent the defense from always having an information advantage? We only say what terrain is in the tile, but not where it is. So knowing thet there are 3 forested hills, 1 forest grassland, one regular hill, and 2 grasslands, we can guess that this will be a defensible tile, but the tactical situation is not revealed (on the world map the tile would appear as a forested hill, and behave as such for strategic movement). In addition, the blue tiles from the first image are complete unknowns, letting the tactical battle be more varied. Mountains would always take up whole tiles. Rivers would only run on the outside of large hexes, and if they exist at a corner that tile will be a lake.
When a battle from the first image begins, the sides will look like this (stacking is allowed on the tactical map, though that could be changed and only allow 7 unit types per stack on the strategic map):
Each unit will get one free move to start, at it's regular speed, terrain acting as normal. Note that vision rules will be the same as on the overland map, so unless he had a scouting unit, red's map would look like this:
This brings me to unit stats. I disagree with the need for an accuracy stat, as that merely adds randomness to the results. Having the numbers be based on strength is more pure. I also think that the scale here will allow for one movement value for both the strategic and tactical maps. Artillery would work much the same way as in Civ 4 on the strategic map, with the ability to hit a stack all at the same time, but with it's damage spread between the units. on the tactical map, they will work like in Panzer General, with both the ability to hit anything within range, but also to alert, and if any unit attacks a friendly unit in range, it gets a free barrage against them. This only works for the first attack however. Aircraft will work exactly as in Civ 5, with options to air-strike a tile with the same effect as artillery, air-sweep to clear the air defences, and intercept, to attack incoming aircraft. Only fighters can perform the latter 2 actions. Aircraft will not be able to used on the tactical map.
This would apply to naval warfare as well, with regular ships being able to carry small numbers of troops, but having to use specialized transports with no weapons for large scale invasions. I think this would finaly make the cruiser/destroyer/sub strategic combo more interesting, as a sub could utterly destroy an unprotected invasion force, and could pick off ships and then retreat if the support was not to heavy. Any combat during a landing would require transports to spend time unloading troops, making them very vulnerable. Some well placed artillery could utterly hammer a landing force. With the possible exception of specialized units, landings directly into a city are not allowed.
If all of one Civ's units retreat to the rear of their starting tiles the combat will end, and they will retreat the appropriate way on the strategic map. The victor may choose how to arrange his troops. If an attacker moved out of it's starting hex (the tile it started on, and the surrounding ones) it may not move on the strategic map this turn. For city combat, the central hex will be the city with the surrounding tiles being the walls and towers. towers can shoot anything within their line of sight (unless upgraded to indirect fire). once an outer hex is destroyed, a unit may attack the city itself through the gap. All towers can hit a unit adjacent to the central tile. Initial city health is equal to it's population, but this may be upgraded significantly.
Cities and You, or how to prevent ICS
You may be asking yourself how improvements would work if you couldn't see where the terrain was. The answer is simple: each tile will get only one improvement type. So if you had a hex with four hills, you would likely put in a mine to get optimum advantage. This can lead to dilemmas when you have four hills, but also some horses, do you loose the extra production for the resource? I also like the leveling system, to prevent constant switching, but I would add a twist. On the second level, in for example a mine, the tiles that could support one to start now produce 2 extra production, but the tiles that couldn't get one also generate one extra production. (The ability to level up would likely be tied to the landscape tech ladder, but with the time being counted from when you first built the improvement). I would also de-emphasize buildings, by letting you constuct an academy or landmark improvement in the tiles to let you generate science and culture.
The second major change is the merging of worker units and city population. if you wanted to improve a hex, that would take 1 pop. 10 turns. every mini-tile you wanted to work would take one pop. Additionally 1 pop. would be tied up for a certain amount of units built in that city (Likely 100 for infantry, but things like tanks might only be able to do 20 per pop. though that may be adjusted. this number could also be used for transports, so a troop ship could carry 500 infantry or 100 tanks, or any mix of them). If you wanted a mobile worker (or group) you would tie up one pop. per worker. With the new scale we should probably change workers to work teams.
The largest change would be the way cities grow. Rather than being based on the amount of food harvested, it would grow at the constant rate of 1 population per turn (assuming 1 pop=10,000 people, a capitol of 4 million at the end of the game seems about accurate). This will help prevent ICS by keeping the need for a constantly growing food supply. Half of the excess food gathered by a Civ would be put into a common food store, to assist in keeping more urban centers growing. Every pop more than you can feed will remove another pop from use in production. For instance, a city with a pop of 30 with 20 food would only have 10 workers available. If the available workers of a city ever reaches 0, it will immediately flip to the next most influencing Civ, (or become independent if the total uninfluenced pop is higher than the next Civ) and the pop will drop to the level of food it can produce for itself. Capturing a city will yield food as well as gold equivalent to it's population's share of the reserve. Capturing a capitol will take all of a Civ's reserves.
The final way to prevent people from overextending themselves is by having a danger of far-off cities leaving your empire, but not necessarily for another one. I would calculate influence over each city with this formula (culture in city1/distance to city1*3 if trade route exists) calculated for each city, and then added up for each civ. If any city has more than 50% influence from a source other than it's current owner, that Civ takes control of it. If the city has less than 50% total influence, it becomes independent. This is why somebody may become a vassal state, in hopes that you will lose influence over them, and they can become independent once more. City-States have special rules: they grow at a slower rate than a normal Civ (1/3 to 1/5 speed prob.), they give you their excess food based on your influence. While you cannot bribe them directly, you can trade with them for extra food or resources. If you gain enough influence with them they may offer to join your empire. You can accept at any time, but the decision cannot be reversed. While this means you get the advantages of an extra city, you would permanently lose a UN vote.
The other big change to diplomacy is the way trade agreements work. The first is collateral in trade agreements. If you sign an ongoing deal and cannot deliver, the other party gets a choice of either your smallest city or one of your technologies. There is no reason not to try to trade for what you need to keep the agreeent alive from a third Civ. Research agreements would remain with one major change; when it vests you will get the lowest tech that the other Civ knows and you don't. If you know all of the other Civ's techs, you both get the next lowest tech available.
Other Units: Great People and Spies
Great people would keep their special abilities (artist's culture bomb, scientist's immediate tech research, builder's rush production, general's troop bonus, and merchant's trade mission). I also like Sulla's idea of each type of great person greenlighting something from their tech ladder, with the scientist allowed to rush tech from any of the trees. But I think with the right tech you should be able to build an academy/landmark/fort regularly (manufactuaries and customs houses are unneccisary). This brings me to Civ Revolution, which did the cultural victory right. You gain one point towards a cultural victory for every wonder, flipped city, and great person under your control. Civ Rev had the winning number at 20, but 50 would likely work better on this scale. So if you want a cultural victory you have to be very careful about expending great people. So what can you do with them?
If a great person is settled in a city, they greatly increase it's production of the appropriate resource. For instance an artist permanently settled in a city would give a 50% boost to culture. Generals stationed in cities would give a bonus to troop production as well as city defense. Civ Rev prevented exponential growth by limiting each city to one great person of each type. I prefer allowing any number, but having the boosts be additive rather than multiplicative, so a city with 3 great artists would generate 150% more culture, not 237% more.
This brings me to spying, once again something Civ Rev got right. You can (once writing is teched) produce a spy. Any time spies from different Civs meet, they do combat, assuming each has a health and attack of one. Terrain never matters, but some civics or techs might increase the power of your spies in frendly cities for example. A spy will never start a war, but if caught they can degrade your relationships with other Civs. You will only know who's spy it was if you beat them. This leads me to the abilities of the spy:
1. Steal a tech (spy must be in a capitol, will steal lowest tech you don't have even if it's not on your ladder)
2. Kidnap a great person (this is another reason to diversify your great people, as a spy will kidnap all of the great people of a certain type within a city. the spy and great people will emerge on the border closest to you in the time it would take them to move there.)
3. Assassinate a great person (generals can never be captured)
4. Scout enemy stacks
5. Disrupt defenses (I'm thinking prevent a certain tower from firing for the next 5 turns)
Note that in the cases of 1, 3, and 5 the spy would remain in it's current position at the end of the turn, and the other Civ would be notified and could send a spy to kill yours. When scouting stacks before the radio tech, the spy must make it back to a friendly unit or city before the unit makeup becomes known. On the strategic map a stack will show up as the unit that that stack has the most of, so a stack of 100 infantry and 99 tanks would show up as infantry.
Implementation
I'm not a programmer, so clearly I can't make this myself. I think some of the ideas (city growth changes, culture) would be possible to implement in Civ V in mod form. If you want to do this, go ahead, just give me (and Sulla) credit. However the most intensive changes (production, combat) and the AI to manage them would be quite a task. If the AI isn't good, or at least passable, the game almost certainly won't be.
Please share your thoughts on any or all of these ideas.
- Schwal
I agree with a lot of what he said, namely the tech ladders, policy picks, and generally the combat. However, there are some areas where I disagree with him. First, religion is just more micromanaging, and I think culture alone is enough in that area. Second, City-States and Vassal States, but that is because of a mechanic that I will explain later. Finally, and most importantly, is the way that economy and growth is handled. but the single most important concept is...
Mini-Tiles
I prefer hexes because of the square-root-of-two-problem, but this would work with squares as well. Sulla's idea was much like Heroes of Might and Magic, in that you would walk around on a regular map, and then have tactical combat on a separate grid. While the idea is good, I feel it lacks some strategy in unit placement. So instead of the tactical map being relatively samey or random, we will have each hex contain it's own grid of 7 tiles, like so:
We'll deal with the blue tiles in a bit, but this is the basic idea. But rather than have 2 armies face off in the same tile, we'll have the armies in all of the surrounding tiles in play as well, like so:
So when the red army invades, the blue army can use it's reserve force from the rear tile for instance. or take for example this scenario:
No matter who attacks, blue has a nice flanking position.
But how do we determine the tile's structure, and how do we prevent the defense from always having an information advantage? We only say what terrain is in the tile, but not where it is. So knowing thet there are 3 forested hills, 1 forest grassland, one regular hill, and 2 grasslands, we can guess that this will be a defensible tile, but the tactical situation is not revealed (on the world map the tile would appear as a forested hill, and behave as such for strategic movement). In addition, the blue tiles from the first image are complete unknowns, letting the tactical battle be more varied. Mountains would always take up whole tiles. Rivers would only run on the outside of large hexes, and if they exist at a corner that tile will be a lake.
When a battle from the first image begins, the sides will look like this (stacking is allowed on the tactical map, though that could be changed and only allow 7 unit types per stack on the strategic map):
Each unit will get one free move to start, at it's regular speed, terrain acting as normal. Note that vision rules will be the same as on the overland map, so unless he had a scouting unit, red's map would look like this:
This brings me to unit stats. I disagree with the need for an accuracy stat, as that merely adds randomness to the results. Having the numbers be based on strength is more pure. I also think that the scale here will allow for one movement value for both the strategic and tactical maps. Artillery would work much the same way as in Civ 4 on the strategic map, with the ability to hit a stack all at the same time, but with it's damage spread between the units. on the tactical map, they will work like in Panzer General, with both the ability to hit anything within range, but also to alert, and if any unit attacks a friendly unit in range, it gets a free barrage against them. This only works for the first attack however. Aircraft will work exactly as in Civ 5, with options to air-strike a tile with the same effect as artillery, air-sweep to clear the air defences, and intercept, to attack incoming aircraft. Only fighters can perform the latter 2 actions. Aircraft will not be able to used on the tactical map.
This would apply to naval warfare as well, with regular ships being able to carry small numbers of troops, but having to use specialized transports with no weapons for large scale invasions. I think this would finaly make the cruiser/destroyer/sub strategic combo more interesting, as a sub could utterly destroy an unprotected invasion force, and could pick off ships and then retreat if the support was not to heavy. Any combat during a landing would require transports to spend time unloading troops, making them very vulnerable. Some well placed artillery could utterly hammer a landing force. With the possible exception of specialized units, landings directly into a city are not allowed.
If all of one Civ's units retreat to the rear of their starting tiles the combat will end, and they will retreat the appropriate way on the strategic map. The victor may choose how to arrange his troops. If an attacker moved out of it's starting hex (the tile it started on, and the surrounding ones) it may not move on the strategic map this turn. For city combat, the central hex will be the city with the surrounding tiles being the walls and towers. towers can shoot anything within their line of sight (unless upgraded to indirect fire). once an outer hex is destroyed, a unit may attack the city itself through the gap. All towers can hit a unit adjacent to the central tile. Initial city health is equal to it's population, but this may be upgraded significantly.
Cities and You, or how to prevent ICS
You may be asking yourself how improvements would work if you couldn't see where the terrain was. The answer is simple: each tile will get only one improvement type. So if you had a hex with four hills, you would likely put in a mine to get optimum advantage. This can lead to dilemmas when you have four hills, but also some horses, do you loose the extra production for the resource? I also like the leveling system, to prevent constant switching, but I would add a twist. On the second level, in for example a mine, the tiles that could support one to start now produce 2 extra production, but the tiles that couldn't get one also generate one extra production. (The ability to level up would likely be tied to the landscape tech ladder, but with the time being counted from when you first built the improvement). I would also de-emphasize buildings, by letting you constuct an academy or landmark improvement in the tiles to let you generate science and culture.
The second major change is the merging of worker units and city population. if you wanted to improve a hex, that would take 1 pop. 10 turns. every mini-tile you wanted to work would take one pop. Additionally 1 pop. would be tied up for a certain amount of units built in that city (Likely 100 for infantry, but things like tanks might only be able to do 20 per pop. though that may be adjusted. this number could also be used for transports, so a troop ship could carry 500 infantry or 100 tanks, or any mix of them). If you wanted a mobile worker (or group) you would tie up one pop. per worker. With the new scale we should probably change workers to work teams.
The largest change would be the way cities grow. Rather than being based on the amount of food harvested, it would grow at the constant rate of 1 population per turn (assuming 1 pop=10,000 people, a capitol of 4 million at the end of the game seems about accurate). This will help prevent ICS by keeping the need for a constantly growing food supply. Half of the excess food gathered by a Civ would be put into a common food store, to assist in keeping more urban centers growing. Every pop more than you can feed will remove another pop from use in production. For instance, a city with a pop of 30 with 20 food would only have 10 workers available. If the available workers of a city ever reaches 0, it will immediately flip to the next most influencing Civ, (or become independent if the total uninfluenced pop is higher than the next Civ) and the pop will drop to the level of food it can produce for itself. Capturing a city will yield food as well as gold equivalent to it's population's share of the reserve. Capturing a capitol will take all of a Civ's reserves.
The final way to prevent people from overextending themselves is by having a danger of far-off cities leaving your empire, but not necessarily for another one. I would calculate influence over each city with this formula (culture in city1/distance to city1*3 if trade route exists) calculated for each city, and then added up for each civ. If any city has more than 50% influence from a source other than it's current owner, that Civ takes control of it. If the city has less than 50% total influence, it becomes independent. This is why somebody may become a vassal state, in hopes that you will lose influence over them, and they can become independent once more. City-States have special rules: they grow at a slower rate than a normal Civ (1/3 to 1/5 speed prob.), they give you their excess food based on your influence. While you cannot bribe them directly, you can trade with them for extra food or resources. If you gain enough influence with them they may offer to join your empire. You can accept at any time, but the decision cannot be reversed. While this means you get the advantages of an extra city, you would permanently lose a UN vote.
The other big change to diplomacy is the way trade agreements work. The first is collateral in trade agreements. If you sign an ongoing deal and cannot deliver, the other party gets a choice of either your smallest city or one of your technologies. There is no reason not to try to trade for what you need to keep the agreeent alive from a third Civ. Research agreements would remain with one major change; when it vests you will get the lowest tech that the other Civ knows and you don't. If you know all of the other Civ's techs, you both get the next lowest tech available.
Other Units: Great People and Spies
Great people would keep their special abilities (artist's culture bomb, scientist's immediate tech research, builder's rush production, general's troop bonus, and merchant's trade mission). I also like Sulla's idea of each type of great person greenlighting something from their tech ladder, with the scientist allowed to rush tech from any of the trees. But I think with the right tech you should be able to build an academy/landmark/fort regularly (manufactuaries and customs houses are unneccisary). This brings me to Civ Revolution, which did the cultural victory right. You gain one point towards a cultural victory for every wonder, flipped city, and great person under your control. Civ Rev had the winning number at 20, but 50 would likely work better on this scale. So if you want a cultural victory you have to be very careful about expending great people. So what can you do with them?
If a great person is settled in a city, they greatly increase it's production of the appropriate resource. For instance an artist permanently settled in a city would give a 50% boost to culture. Generals stationed in cities would give a bonus to troop production as well as city defense. Civ Rev prevented exponential growth by limiting each city to one great person of each type. I prefer allowing any number, but having the boosts be additive rather than multiplicative, so a city with 3 great artists would generate 150% more culture, not 237% more.
This brings me to spying, once again something Civ Rev got right. You can (once writing is teched) produce a spy. Any time spies from different Civs meet, they do combat, assuming each has a health and attack of one. Terrain never matters, but some civics or techs might increase the power of your spies in frendly cities for example. A spy will never start a war, but if caught they can degrade your relationships with other Civs. You will only know who's spy it was if you beat them. This leads me to the abilities of the spy:
1. Steal a tech (spy must be in a capitol, will steal lowest tech you don't have even if it's not on your ladder)
2. Kidnap a great person (this is another reason to diversify your great people, as a spy will kidnap all of the great people of a certain type within a city. the spy and great people will emerge on the border closest to you in the time it would take them to move there.)
3. Assassinate a great person (generals can never be captured)
4. Scout enemy stacks
5. Disrupt defenses (I'm thinking prevent a certain tower from firing for the next 5 turns)
Note that in the cases of 1, 3, and 5 the spy would remain in it's current position at the end of the turn, and the other Civ would be notified and could send a spy to kill yours. When scouting stacks before the radio tech, the spy must make it back to a friendly unit or city before the unit makeup becomes known. On the strategic map a stack will show up as the unit that that stack has the most of, so a stack of 100 infantry and 99 tanks would show up as infantry.
Implementation
I'm not a programmer, so clearly I can't make this myself. I think some of the ideas (city growth changes, culture) would be possible to implement in Civ V in mod form. If you want to do this, go ahead, just give me (and Sulla) credit. However the most intensive changes (production, combat) and the AI to manage them would be quite a task. If the AI isn't good, or at least passable, the game almost certainly won't be.
Please share your thoughts on any or all of these ideas.
- Schwal
