Make Naval More Important
- Thread starter pat4
- Start date
Big Rob
Lord Protector and Heir
I wish they would bring back to caravan style of trade. With shipping, if the ship doesn't get there, the trade never happened.
moscaverde
Prince
Caravan units were a huge pain IMO. The naval part of the game got more important with the blockade button. I think that CIV could have more ship units, maybe one bitween ironclads and the more advanced ones (can't remember the names).
Hellfire
Prince
Hi all. Nice thread 
I think we could appease both micromanagers and automaters by creating a "merchant vessel" unit that you have to build, but give it automation like workers and work boats. You could set up a permanent link between two cities, or automate it to find it's own route, or have someone determine the best place to go. It would do something similar to what a great merchant does but on a much smaller scale. Then you have to build up protective fleets to deal with other countries and pirates. Start scattering some small 1 and 2 square islands in between continents where barbarians can spawn to make it interesting (like the caribbean or south pacific islands) and attack your caravans, either sinking them, or better, looting them! In midgame, you can take over those islands and use them as naval staging areas (make sure the is AI a little slow to go after these islands and doesn't jump after them right away). He who establishes trade routes sooner gets reaps whatever bonus this gives or something. You could adapt trade caravans to do the same thing over land and bring back the caravan unit.
The problem with disallowing similar units is that this allows you to set up peacetime blockades which I think is unfair, as well as the AI being generally annoying by putting a ship in your way that you have to go around. I always say that arguing gameplay trumps arguing physics and reality, because it's not reality, it's a game. Gameplay dictates zones of control and unit blocking are annoying and dumb in peace time. However, in Civ4 you can set a blockade deliberately, but you have to set it on purpose, which I think is nicer. I've not experimented but it would be interesting to see if this does what you are looking for, and disallows different units from different countries on the same square. This might be your solution. Otherwise, in peace time, I would think two ships could be on the same square.
Right now, oceans are large wastelands between continents which have a bad rep. Most pangea players hate oceans because they look at them as an obstacle. archepeligo players see the ocean as a challenge to overcome, not an opportunity to take advantage of. Continent players simply see the ocean as a way of separating civs into two distinct groups so that you don't have to deal with all the civs at the same time until late in the game. What we need are some options that really present us with opportunities to take advantage of what the ocean is about and make it a little more active and busy. We need more discussions like this
I think we could appease both micromanagers and automaters by creating a "merchant vessel" unit that you have to build, but give it automation like workers and work boats. You could set up a permanent link between two cities, or automate it to find it's own route, or have someone determine the best place to go. It would do something similar to what a great merchant does but on a much smaller scale. Then you have to build up protective fleets to deal with other countries and pirates. Start scattering some small 1 and 2 square islands in between continents where barbarians can spawn to make it interesting (like the caribbean or south pacific islands) and attack your caravans, either sinking them, or better, looting them! In midgame, you can take over those islands and use them as naval staging areas (make sure the is AI a little slow to go after these islands and doesn't jump after them right away). He who establishes trade routes sooner gets reaps whatever bonus this gives or something. You could adapt trade caravans to do the same thing over land and bring back the caravan unit.
The problem with disallowing similar units is that this allows you to set up peacetime blockades which I think is unfair, as well as the AI being generally annoying by putting a ship in your way that you have to go around. I always say that arguing gameplay trumps arguing physics and reality, because it's not reality, it's a game. Gameplay dictates zones of control and unit blocking are annoying and dumb in peace time. However, in Civ4 you can set a blockade deliberately, but you have to set it on purpose, which I think is nicer. I've not experimented but it would be interesting to see if this does what you are looking for, and disallows different units from different countries on the same square. This might be your solution. Otherwise, in peace time, I would think two ships could be on the same square.
Right now, oceans are large wastelands between continents which have a bad rep. Most pangea players hate oceans because they look at them as an obstacle. archepeligo players see the ocean as a challenge to overcome, not an opportunity to take advantage of. Continent players simply see the ocean as a way of separating civs into two distinct groups so that you don't have to deal with all the civs at the same time until late in the game. What we need are some options that really present us with opportunities to take advantage of what the ocean is about and make it a little more active and busy. We need more discussions like this
Big Rob
Lord Protector and Heir
That's what I love most about this website. There's always someone who's already thought it out.
And stuff you wouldn't have thought of. Powerful stuff, dude...
like, this is the Warehouse 13 of websites, brah !!!
And stuff you wouldn't have thought of. Powerful stuff, dude...
like, this is the Warehouse 13 of websites, brah !!!
Big Rob
Lord Protector and Heir
Fishing/whaling vessels
Marine/underwater research (techs, offshore labs)
you mean stuff like this ?
I have a problem around this.
I like the idea of sea trade routes, and the ability of an enemy to not only blockade ports, but also to seize or sink a ship in mid-ocean. It would make for a much more contested battle over key sea lanes. I would love to get a workable solution.
I like the idea of sea trade routes, and the ability of an enemy to not only blockade ports, but also to seize or sink a ship in mid-ocean. It would make for a much more contested battle over key sea lanes. I would love to get a workable solution.
I still stick to the idea of trade routes being visually represented, and being generally automated, although quite malleable. This allows for customisation of trade routes without the necessity for micromanagement for those that don't want it, whilst including the ability to visually see where a trade route is and disrupt it, as CivMyWay wishes.
But I don't want to see an abstract "trade route" and "disrupt" it; I want to see physical caravans with specific amounts of quantitative resources and be able to steal them. These are not directly equivalent mechanics. (What if you only want to do occasional piracy on one particular trade route, rather than cut it off entirely ?)
Hail
Satan's minion
pirating can be like raiding a caravan, while a blockade will "cut it [trade route] off entirely".
You can't raid a caravan unless there are caravans to be raided, not just an abstract trade route.
jsweeney
American
I think you should be able to control city ports. instead of the entire city just the trade that goes in and out of it. Its how the brits gained control of india. also being able to set up trading posts will be good.
Hellfire
Prince
The other problem with abstract trade routes is that they introduce an entirely new concept to the game that doesn't fit into current concepts. Creating a unit means you can create a unit and send the unit somewhere. Then you automate the unit, but also have to protect the unit when it calls for it. There are special rules to the unit, but it's still a unit.
Civ4 is great but it's biggest problem is that it is incredibly complex compared to the first 3. Adding new concepts that aren't simple is one thing I want to avoid.
Civ4 is great but it's biggest problem is that it is incredibly complex compared to the first 3. Adding new concepts that aren't simple is one thing I want to avoid.
Gosh. I'm not sure I've seen that argued for a while; Soren Johnson has said explicitly more than once wthat the design philosophy of Civ 4 involved not adding any complexity unless corresponding complexity went out somewhere else, and that seems to be at the root of most of what is wrong with it.
Hellfire
Prince
Well I know the team had good intentions, but what their philosophy is one thing, what was produced is quite another.
There are two perfect examples of this. One is improvements. In civ3 you had 4 improvements, a mine, a farm, roads and railroads. Now you have lumber mills, waterwheels, workshops, forest preserves, and cottages, not to mention improvements on strategic resources.
The second are promotions. In civ3 you had four levels, conscript, regular, veteran, and elite. Now you have XP, levels, and promotions which give you a multitude of different abilities.
Exactly what came out of the game when these two examples were put in?
And what about religion? That went in... what came out? You need to know how religions can affect your commerce to be successful in the game.
And civics? 7 governments in civ3, but now 25 civics in civ4 which you can mix and match.
I'm not saying I don't like it. HELL NO. I love it! It makes the game feel more like SMAC which had lots of options, units and buildings (though the unit builder is something we need to revisit one day because it was much fun!). But that doesn't mean it's not more complex.
I've only recently gotten back into Civ4 because I got a Mac that could run it, and BtS finally came out for Mac, so I'm catching up, but from what I've seen on these boards I've not seen anyone argue that Civ4 is not more complex than civ3.
Not sure I really agree with you here. It's neither an entirely new concept nor all that complex. Take workboats: You build a physical unit and send it to a particular tile, where it gets converted into a "fishing zone," "whaling zone" or whatever that operates autonomously for the rest of the game (or until pillaged).
How is that really different from creating something, call it a merchant vessel unit, that travels to another port and on arrival, converts to an active trade route that provides ongoing benefits and requires no further action on the player's part, but can still be pillaged or defended?
Hail
Satan's minion
do not mistake variety for complexity. however sometimes variety does add complexity. e.g. adding more unit types with different bonuses, etc.
true, such system is more complex than the 4 rank system, but is it better (e.g. better suited to the civ series)? i think that leaving the 4 rank system, but increasing the differences between the ranks would suffice.
armies, bombardment (mainly addressed to the navy as land bombardment was replaced with collateral damage, making navy even more useless), corruption, civil disorder (+ radically revamped happiness concept), replaced attack/defense/health with a single value (thereby a tank down to 40% strength becomes a knight).
by founding a religion and producing a great prophet? and yea, you have to spread your religion, or better yet, have neighbors convert to it. so they can spread it themselves.
not 25, but 19 (minus 5 default ones + Serfdom). To wage war one would choose "Police State" + "Vassalage"/"Nationhood" + "Theocracy".
"Caste System" + "Representation" can do wonders to science.
and i always end up using "Free Speech", and "Caste System" for the GP merchant farm.
i do not see a big difference between changing civics and switch from Democracy to Fascism to wage war and switch back, once it's over.
Hellfire
Prince
I think you misunderstand me, that's exactly what I'm suggesting. What I'm suggesting not be introduced is some kind of new window where you create and manage abstract trade routes which do not involve a unit, or where you display and manage non unit based routes right on the screen.
This could definitely be adapted into it. Just assign these visual caravans and merchant vessels (which you don't actually control) a particular value each, varying to a reasonable degree, and give the ability to raid an adjacent trade route as a move for a turn (kinda like bombarding mixed with pillaging), alongside the ability to complete disrupt and blockade the entire route.
The reason why I prefer what I outlined is also heavily to do with micromanagement. I'm 'out halfway on the micromanaging scale of 'love--->hate'. I love the possibility, but sometimes I just hate doing it. If I was forced to control heaps of merchant vessels and vehicles, I would be hugely detracted from the game.
Similar threads
- Poll
