People said Id better suggest some ideas to improve the game instead of suggesting to scrap part of it, so here are some
:cute:
One of the problems I mentioned in my post that started this thread was that all production was derived from the land, the raw resources. And that this system, the further in time you go, makes less sense as most added value comes from factories, banks and research labs, to say it in civ terms, and no longer from raw materials.
The solution to this is in my opinion relatively simply, ties in well with elements already present in previous civ incarnations, and has been mentioned by many other people in several varieties in the past.
Civ3 has two elements that affect production. First: shields, which mainly represent raw materials which are then in cities converted to finished goods (units, buildings
). Second: strategic resources which are a precondition for building certain stuff. But those resources are also raw materials, so youre still stuck in the basic paradigm that raw resources are all you need to be a great power.
My suggestion would be to scrap the concept of shields, and instead:
a) expand and quantify the concept of resources,
b) add labour as a new requirement for producing stuff.
Quantifying resources has been suggested a lot before. Instead of controlling one of a resource being sufficient to provide your entire civilization with that material, youd for example need two iron to train a swordsman (besides also a amount of labour), ten iron to build a factory, or two coal as a fuel to maintain your factory. Similarly, a luxury resource would only make a fixed number of people happy.
A tile of iron could provide several iron per year, eg something between one and five, a number that could be improved by tile improvements and researching technologies. If you produce more iron than you need yourself, you could stock it to a degree or trade to other civs.
Besides resources, which are still tile-based, the second requirement for production would be labour. That would be mainly derived from people. Farmers, those who work the tiles in your city radius, could provide a small amount of labour. However to become a really big producer, youd need to appoint labourer specialists in your city, just like we already have scientists or entertainers. Those urban citizens would provide lots more labour than the rural tile-workers.
To make such a production system possible, tiles would have to provide more food, so you can support a, as the game progresses, bigger and bigger urban population that doesnt produce food. Also specialists should also be able to be unhappy-content-happy, unlike previous civ games where they were taken out of happiness calculation.
The basic labour production of your citizens could be increased by technology and city improvements. For example a guild in the middle ages or a factory in the industrial age. There could still be stuff on the land that would provide a labour bonus, eg a forest, a horse or cow special tile.. But the reason those would provide labour and speed up production would be because they help the people build things - wood as a fuel, or a horse to transport materials - not because they would be raw materials. So the main focus would be: people => labour. And not eg hills with mines producing shields or labour. :hmmm:.
With such a system you could simulate a Japan which has lots of citizens and factories, but no raw materials. They can still import them and be successful. This isnt possible with the shield production system.
***
Another issue I touched was that Civilization cant recreate trader countries such as Portugal, the Netherlands or Venice. Here Ive also got some ideas, but unlike the idea regarding labour above, this idea has little already existing roots in Civ3, so the possibility it could ever become reality is rather slim
In any case, just like in Civ3 inter-civ trade would happen in the diplomacy menu by selling or buying resources. The problem in Civ3 is that you only need to know each other and have a connection by road or harbour with each other to make trade possible, even if the trade partners live on the opposite sides of the world. This makes it impossible to represent in-between traders such as those mentioned above.
The solution could be to have trade routes actually running over the map, also an old often suggested idea. The AI could auto-calculate whats the shortest/fastest (or cheapest see below) trade route from one capital to another. Roads, rivers, available technology would play a role to determine the best route, and of course often sea routes would be preferred, in most of history the easiest way of transporting stuff.
To make sure theres an incentive to create a better road, harbour network etc, there should be a cost in gold to make an interciv trade possible. The longer the trade route between the two civs is, the more expensive it is to maintain. This encourages to trade with neighbouring civs instead of civs on the other side of the world, and encourages improving your infrastructure.
Another thing that could affect the cost of a trade route is how often it passes through cities, colonies or trade posts (a new tile improvement?). If the imaginary trade caravan or ship cant resupply at one of these every x tiles, the cost of the trade routes increases. So for example Portugal knowing a sea route to China isnt enough. To trade cheaply they would have to build a series of trade posts and supply points along the way where the trade route could pass through. Once the investment made, the Portugese could then trade the Chinese resources at a cheaper price to other European civs than if those tried to trade with China itself or with the muslims who have a land trade route with China.
A benefit for a civilization to let a trade route its no part of pass through its territory could be that each trade route provides a bit of gold to every city it passes through. That way those civs would too have an incentive to improve their infrastructure network and attract trade. This way for example cities on the Silk Route could be recreated. Or of course civs could embargo trade from certain civs and prevent some routes running over their territory.
Trade routes that run over the map open the possibility for pirates and raiders that could leech some gold off the trade route. This would in turn increase the use of navies to protect against piracy, and thereby solve the frequent complaint that navies dont serve the important role they played in history.
In any case, I think having a trade system a little more expanded than connect your capitals by road or harbour and youve got instant trade would add a whole new dimension to the game, and solve many of the current problems.
on your second post.
