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

Land Rule Reformation

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game III: RPG' started by disorganizer, May 19, 2003.

  1. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    i think some reforms of the way we handle land-ownership should be implementet.

    we should seperate between land usage and land ownership...


    this would be more realistic imho...


    proposal:

    1) land owner
    * a land owner has somehow obtained ownership of a tile of land. he may have claimed it, captured it or baught it... this makes no difference.
    * each tile earns the owner the amount of commerce according to our existing ruleset
    * each tile earns the owner additional 1 commerce not stated in the rules yet. this is for compensation that he doesnt get the food/shields any more
    * each tile continues to earn the "landstrip" addition as in the ruleset now... so 1 gold for 5+ tiles, 2g for 10+ tiles, ...
    * city tiles produce the amount of food+shields+commerce they show in the city screen in commerce units
    * the land owner can convert those commerce-values 1:1 into shields or food.
    NOTE:
    the main difference is that the tile owner does not get any direct shields or food from his tiles...

    2) land user
    * land usage can be granted by the owner of a tile to any character
    * the land user can use any food or shield or resources produced by the tile for manufacturing or other things (if not explicitly forbidden by the owner even for unit creation)
    * the city tile can not be used by anyone
    * if a tile has not being given a "user", any character can claim temporary usage of that tile for self-usage (no unit creation!!!) until the owner grants the usage to him or somebody else.
    NOTE:
    usage=not ownership!



    any thoughts about this?
     
  2. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    just an additional comment: this is no full ruleset. i just posted the things which imho need to be incorporated into the existing rules. also they may be finetuned in means of numbers :)
     
  3. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    As Despot, I'm having trouble with the very last "User" rule. :D This may need some clarification.
     
  4. Shaitan

    Shaitan der Besucher

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2001
    Messages:
    6,546
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    It's squatters, Cyc. If the land is fallow (unused by the owner) other people will go ahead and use it.
     
  5. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    yep. shaitan is right. this is how people earned money in the ancient times. the barons and kings could not take care of all the land, and as such the people just used it.

    but as soon as the owner comes around and finds a new use for the land, they will have to leave (or have to fight for it)

    nevertheless, cyc, it wont make a difference for the owner, as he will not get the food+shield anyways.

    NOTE:
    of course the above ruleproposals allow the owner to "charge" the users for using his land :) in addition to his normal land-income.
     
  6. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,437
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    Land ownership would still be able to be given away, right?
     
  7. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    boot: of course. and could be traded or whatsoever. those rules would just seperate using from owning.

    note also: to use a landtile, it should be required to explicitly state what you use those resources for. all unused resources on a tile go to the void.
    this way a owner can not just proclaim to harvest all those shields ;-) and be the user by himself.
    the goal of this enhancement will be to enable businesses, even before currency! (e.g. someone could build a sword out of an iron resource and swap against a bread baked out of a food)
     
  8. Sir John

    Sir John The evil one...

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Messages:
    1,834
    Location:
    Norway, Bodø
    I thin that the land curroption suggestion should also be implented in your suggestion..
     
  9. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    sj: it can, but i believe in the solutions with small steps. we can be happy to implement the above, as land ownership would not be the primary criteria to be successful any more.
    it would implement an approach of using and owning which would allow 2 types of success.
    and as owner, always remember you have to protect yourself... any bigger neighbor can just come over and fight you down and take your land ;-) and military protection costs... as land user, you dont have to protect your land. you dont care who owns it, as long as he still lets you use it! so you can conentrate you expenses on other things.
     
  10. Chieftess

    Chieftess Moderator Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Messages:
    24,160
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Dis - we can't earn money yet. We don't even have currency. Maybe something like "100 pounds of iron ore per turnchat" might do.
     
  11. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    i didnt mention any money, ct :p
    and military protection at the moment COSTS shield and food
    note also that though we dont have currency, the commerce can still be used as shield or gold in the above ruleset, and thus is not conflicting with the techrule. the commerce is a virtual value for the land. in the beginning, this will be shields or food... as soon as we get currency, it will propably be 2 gold for each commerce, as in the existing rules it is 2 gold for each shield and 2 gold for each food ;-)
     
  12. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    note:
    due to recent confusion:
    commerce does not mean gold until we get currency.

    it represents the things received by people living there and the things you directly get from the land. as such they are on receiving them directly converted to shield or food.
    as soon as we get currency, the land-manager can set the "gold-to-shield+food+commerce" rates. the owner can then still decide whether he wants to receive them im gold, food or shield.

    THIS IS ALSO IN THE LAND RULES WHICH ARE IN EFFECT at the moment. so no change there!
     
  13. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    SUMMARY:
    i tried to incorporate those rules into the existing ruleset. just check and comment (i hope i didnt forget anything).
    i also tried not to change anything on the old rules but instead append the new ones. only thing i had to change was the usage of the word "gold" which was changed to commerce.

    ------------------------------------------------------
    1. Might makes right. The despot starts out with everything and everybody else grovels at his feet.

    2. As territory grows it gets beyond the ability of one character to control. New nobles are raised to run these territories. They are sworn to allegiance but rebellions have been known to happen. The despot can actually give away land but this generally only happens as a reward to a long time loyal follower. More often the lesser nobles are running the despot’s land in service to him.

    3. It’s possible for there to be more than one despot. If a revolt succeeds and is not put down by the despot that territory is then a separate entity. Note that newly acquired territory in the demogame still goes to the despot who holds the demogame capital.

    4. In a monarchy new land goes to the most logical king. That is the royal character that has adjoining lands, nearby capital, etc.

    5. In republic and democracy new land is offered for general sale to the populace.

    6. In communism all land reverts to control of the government.

    7. Land provides a number of commerce, shields and food that it would generate if worked in a city. If no city controlled by the tile owner can access the tile it never makes more than what is shown when right clicking on the tile in the game.

    8. Cities produce the number of commerce, shields and food for the tile they reside on plus an additional commerce for each population point. City tiles can not be given away for usage.

    9. A single contiguous land territory that has at least 5 * P (where “P” is the number of provinces in the demogame) will receive 1 additional commerce per tile in the territory. If the territory has 10 * P receives 2 commerce per tile in the territory and one that has 15 * P receives 3 commerce per tile in the territory.

    10. shields and food may be held on stock in the item account for later use.

    10. commerce units are transferred into shields and food 1:1 before the discovery of currency. commerce units can not be held on the item account, and as such must be transferred into food or shield upon receiving them

    11. after the discovery of currency, the land manager will set a tranfer-rate for gold into any of the 3 resources (shield, food, commerce). this rate may vary.

    12. the owner of a tile can give usage rights to other people. this usage right can be limited by the owner and can be canceled at any time.

    13. the owner of a tile can not be the user of it at the same time. only exception is if the usage is given to a business

    14. the owner of a tile receives only(!) the commerce output of that tile. for city tiles he receives all output. as compensation he receives an additional commerce per owned tile.

    15. the user of a tile receives all non-commerce output of that tile.

    16. if a owner did not assign usage to a tile, any citizen can claim temporary usage of that tile. a citizen can never claim temporary usage of multiple tiles at the same time. the using citizen can build whatever he wants EXCEPT military units.

    17. The Land Manager has overall authority over land issues and is responsible for keeping track of ownership, territories and the base c/f/s values of the tiles.
     
  14. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,437
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    I don't like the idea of an owner not being the user of a tile simply because he is not currently using it. Land usage may be granted by the owner of the tile, but I don't think that someone should be able to use it without consulting the owner and receiving permission. I assume that one character could be the owner and the user of a given tile simultaneously.
     
  15. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    boot: but thats what it was like in ancient times :)
    people took what was not used. its the owners fault if he doesnt use the thing. and it wont harm him anyways.
     
  16. disorganizer

    disorganizer Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    ah and boot:
    no the tile owner cant be the user (rule 13).
    this forces us to not only concentrate on land owning (i really wouldnt like to see this game drift into a land mongering again)
     
  17. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    Good point, Bootstoots, but as Dis and Shaitan say, squatters were a presence throughout history. So if people are hungry, cold and tired and there is bountiful land being unused, they will use it. Just to survive, even to prosper.

    But....this brings up a point about the owner using the land even though the owner has not declared a use or assigned a Noble to look after it. If squatters are allowed in the game to support one idea, then they should be a constant factor. If the Despot owns a large amount of tiles, he should be able to collect the resources from those tiles in the form of military units. Drafting (shanghai-ing), and other forms of recruitment or mustering should be allowed from these squatters. This would be another form of the loosely defined commerce system. "You squatters can stay here and live off the land, but you need to protect it for the Despot" sort of thing. This would be trading the food and resources of the tile for military protection of the tile. You can't have it both ways. If there are to be unmanaged squatters allowed, then the Despot should be able to muster troops from them.
     
  18. Stuck_as_a_Mac

    Stuck_as_a_Mac Aptenodytes forsteri

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2002
    Messages:
    3,936
    Location:
    NYC
    I like my land voice
    Anyway...
    This is all fine with me. Id just like to sugest that there be a low rate for commerce to food and shield to keep it available for all people, not just the wealthy ones.
    Also, Rule 16
    If the owner of the tiles owns the city which the tiles belong to, he MAY be considered user for those tiles as well as the owner. This applies to every 2 out of 5 cities the owner owns and may be picked by the owner. For owners who own less then 5 cities, only 1 city will be worked.

    On another note, I WILL make efforts to break up any new Vanirs if I see them developing.

    other then that, good job Dis. Ill let comment run on and poll what we come up with.
     
  19. Stuck_as_a_Mac

    Stuck_as_a_Mac Aptenodytes forsteri

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2002
    Messages:
    3,936
    Location:
    NYC
    Gah.. a DP. Ignore it.
     
  20. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,437
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    Alright, though I originally opposed these rules, I will accept them now. They have been clarified, and I will support them, provided that Stuck's rule is added. I would like this to be polled in a day or two, and it should be approved by a standard poll rather than a manager vote (given that the last one had only one vote).
     

Share This Page