wanderer6552
Chieftain
Hi Folks,
Great Flaming Arrows, Batman ... these folks have been busy!
At least Bobgote & Cracker seem to grasp what I've been trying to get at in my poor, bumbling fashion - thanx, guys (gals?).
(It appears that you were at least half right, Cracker, about Venger.)
Moderator Action: It appears that you are at least half-way to a ban with a comment like that. If you want to comment about another poster you do it in a pm to them or an e-mail. You don't post it on the forums.
- Gonzo
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Back to something constructive ... so far, none of the constructive, well-reasoned & POLITE comments I've read above have persuaded me that the concept of a 'maritime' civ is not a viable one.
I had originally thought that civs could have 3 traits, rather than 2, which would increase the no. of combinations by virtually an order of magnitude ... haven't done the maths, but there would be a lot. On reflection, just adding 2 more civ traits would increase the number of available combinations from 16 to 28, which I think almost everyone would agree is more than enough for the purposes of the game (see below).
CIV2 tribes - Romans, Babylonians, Germans, Egyptians, Americans, Greeks, Indians, Russians, Zulus, French, Aztecs, Chinese, English, Mongols, Celts, Japanese, Vikings, Spanish, Persians, Carthaginians, Sioux ... TOTAL = 21
CIV3 tribes - Romans, Babylonians, Germans, Egyptians, Americans, Greeks, Indians, Russians, Zulus, French, Aztecs, Chinese, English, (NO Mongols), (NO Celts), Japanese, (NO Vikings), (NO Spanish), Persians, (NO Carthaginians), (NO Sioux - replaced by ...), Iroquois ... TOTAL = 16.
Present Available Civ3 Traits:-
Co mmercial
Ex pansionist
In dustrious
Mi litaristic
Re ligious
Sc ientific
> 36 possible combinations
- 6 duplicates (e.g.: Commercial-Commercial)
- 14 copies (e.g.: Commercial-Industrious & Industrious-Commercial)
=16 practical combinations* (i.e. up to 16 Civs can have unique combinations until pattern repeats itself!)
* Co-Ex, Co-In, Co-Mi, Co-Re, Co-Sc // Ex-In, Ex-Mi, Ex-Re, Ex-Sc // In-Mi, In-Re, In-Sc // Mi-Re, Mi-Sc // Re-Sc.
The addition of only 2 extra civ traits (say, Maritime & Equestrian) would increase the available combinations to 28!
E.G.:
Proposed Possible Civ3 Traits:-
Co mmercial
Ex pansionist
In dustrious
Mi litaristic
Re ligious
Sc ientific
Ma ritime
Eq uestrian
> 64 possible combinations
- 8 duplicates
- 28 copies
=28 practical combinations* (i.e. up to 28 Civs can have unique combinations until pattern repeats itself!)
* Co-Ex, Co-In, Co-Mi, Co-Re, Co-Sc, Co-Ma, Co-Eq // Ex-In, Ex-Mi, Ex-Re, Ex-Sc, Ex-Ma, Ex-Eq // In-Mi, In-Re, In-Sc, In-Ma, In-Eq // Mi-Re, Mi-Sc, Mi-Ma, Mi-Eq // Re-Sc, Re-Ma, Re-Eq // Sc-Ma, Sc-Eq // Ma-Eq.
E.G.: Mongols could be Militaristic & Equestrian, Carthaginians could be Commercial & Maritime, etc.
I don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't like to play a game against *28* other civs in a hurry ... but having 28 unique civs to choose from would make the game just that much more interesting, don't you think?
Although it's really the place of another thread, I suggested 'Equestrian' as another new Civ trait because I think that this trait, as well as 'Maritime', have been unfairly ignored by all the previous makers of the Civ game genera, from I to III. Just as some civs seem to borne with water-wings and just love messing about with boats, other civs seem to be just about borne into the saddle (e.g. Mongols & their devastating horse-archers, who could chop a superior force to pieces from a distance ... fire-retreat-fire-retreat, etc.).
Anyone want to start another thread ""Equestrian' as a new Civ trait?" ... mm?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by cracker
Self-actualized (extra happy)
Maritime
Agricultural
Hunter-Gatherer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the thoughts, Cracker, but with all due respect, a couple of comments ...
'Maritime' - thanx for the vote;
'Agricultural' - this is really taken care of by 'Industrious' - e.g. the industrious Chinese irrigates just that much faster> more food;
'Self-actualized' - sorry, but this just sounds too much like U.S. West Coast psyco-babble;
'Hunter-Gatherer' - from an anthropological standpoint, this should really be 'Fisher-Hunter-Gatherer'(FGH) - ALL of our Civs share this trait ... huh?
Let's just go right back to first principles & the very beginning of the game, before we've established our first city ...
All civs start with 'irrigation, mining & roads', along with 2 others, depending on their civ traits ... all these are NOMADS until they start their first city.
As Nomads, they can already fish-hunt-&- gather (otherwise they would already have starved to death), they can build roads (i.e. they can follow trails ... more on that below, briefly, I hope), they can mine (i.e. they can dig for stone,flint & obsidian with which to build tools).
It almost goes without saying, but they also should be specifically given the tech 'Wood-Working', which lets them build their basic tools.
Wood-Working would also let all civs build their basic 'Watercraft' unit - for want of a better name - which could describe any of the following: raft, dugout canoe, kayak, reed-boat, inflated-animal-skin, etc.
After all (1) Australian Aboriginals' ancestors had to have some form of watercraft in order to bridge the 100 mile gap which existed even at the time of the lowest Ice-Age sea-levels between Asia & Australasia 40,000 to 60,000 years ago! & (2) the Mongol armies used to cross supposedly impassable rivers using inflated-animal-skins/bladders, etc. while swimming their horses across.
This basic watercraft could, say, have 0A/0D/M2 & carry 1 with a 50 (75?)% chance of sinking other than in coastal squares (AND NO MAGIC AI CANOES ARRIVING IN HAWAII!). It could cost 20 shields & not be upgradeable. In other words, all civs should be able to build a basic watercraft unit from the beginning, just like they can build warriors from Day 1.
Now, 'IRRIGATION' ... IMHO the ability to irrigate should come with the tech advance of 'Agriculture' (including horticulture, viniculture, animal husbandry, etc.) After all, Nomads don't use irrigation because they're always moving on. E.G. the industrious Chinese could start with Agriculture as one of their free techs, while other less 'industrious' civs should have to discover it. It could, perhaps, allow the building of the Farm city improvement (cheap) which would allow fields to be irrigated > 1 extra food per irrigated square (rather than waiting for Monarchy as at present - which always seems to take FOREVER, in Civ3). Any thoughts, people?
A couple of other points, while I'm at it ... not quite on the thread, but related to the above ...
ROADS - anyone else apart from me puzzled by the fact that road-building technology seems to make absolutely NO progress until the development of RR? I would suggest the following:-
*'Basic roads' with 2 movement bonus (3 at present) from start;
*'Paved roads' with 3 movement bonus (same as present) - workers could be able to pave roads with discovery of, say, 'Construction - >straighter roads (with cobble-stone appearance like some of those custom Civ2 terrain files) ... this would make the effort to establish a decent road network more worthwhile & realistic ... E.G. one of the reasons for the early successes of the Roman republic was their building of their internal network of straight, paved, all-weather roads enabling them to move troops about quickly to where they were most needed. It should also take twice as long to pillage paved roads compared to basic roads.
*'Highways' with 4 movement bonus - workers could be able to build highways with discovery of, say, 'Automobile', again with different appearance ... E.G. German autobahns same as Roman roads above. Not quite cart-tracks, not quite RR?
*'Bridges' - for workers to link roads over rivers - with discovery of, say, 'Construction' or 'Bride-Building' - until then, crossing river takes 1 MP - to simulate ferries, fords, etc. - workers must 'build bridge' on each roaded square either side of river before bridge is complete ... FIRAXIS - please re-introduce 'Bridge-Building' for the sake of realism.
RAILROADS - Anyone think the whole concept of RR has NEVER been done properly? Am playing Trip's American Civil War at the moment - there, the RR look like RR ... widespread cities linked by single RR tracks, RR to mines, etc. but none of this RR EVERYWHERE business ... How's this ... ?
*In Civ 1, moving through a city by RR cost 1/3 (I think) of a MP - to simulate changing trains, reduced speed limits, etc., I suppose - this helped counter the 'travel-by-rail-at-the-speed-of-light' phenomena, but not by much;
*In Civ 2, building a RR thru a forest gave you an extra shield (RR better than bullock teams, after all) - GOOD - but no cash - BAD;
*In Civ 3, building road/RR thru a forest gives you extra cash - GOOD - but no extra shield - BAD. I tried to fix this in one of my experimental, modified .bic files where you could build mines in forest squares to get the extra shield - GUESS WHAT? ... it seemed like in every 2nd square the AI planted forests, then built mines! Talk about Greenpower!
*Have patience, folks, just trying to figure a way to cut back on the 'RR-cancer-effect' while at the same time allowing the unique benefits of RR ... How about ...
(1) RR ONLY provide shield bonuses thru (a) MINES, (b) SPECIAL RESOURCE SQUARES & (c) FORESTS;
(2) Plain & Grassland squares CANNOT be mined - to remove incentive for AI to mine/RR EVERYTHING;
(3) RR ONLY provide food bonuses thru SPECIAL RESOURCE SQUARES - same as 2;
(4) Increased food production (apart from RR thru SPECIAL RESOURCE SQUARES) is only thru construction of Civ2-Supermarket-type City Improvement along with Workers making Farmland improvement a la Civ2 (this could simulate improved agricultural production/reduced wastage brought by the farm machinery - until this time, agricultural production yields were much the same as in Roman times);
(5) Loading/unloading units from RR, whether in city or open country should take 1 turn(?);
(6) Until cities along a RR line have built the RR Station City Improvement, RR between cities without Stations only function as Highways (i.e. 4 movement bonus as above).
Enough for now ... sorry for the length, it jus' grewd, Massa ... any comments, folks?
Cheers
Great Flaming Arrows, Batman ... these folks have been busy!
At least Bobgote & Cracker seem to grasp what I've been trying to get at in my poor, bumbling fashion - thanx, guys (gals?).
(It appears that you were at least half right, Cracker, about Venger.)
Moderator Action: It appears that you are at least half-way to a ban with a comment like that. If you want to comment about another poster you do it in a pm to them or an e-mail. You don't post it on the forums.
- Gonzo
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Back to something constructive ... so far, none of the constructive, well-reasoned & POLITE comments I've read above have persuaded me that the concept of a 'maritime' civ is not a viable one.
I had originally thought that civs could have 3 traits, rather than 2, which would increase the no. of combinations by virtually an order of magnitude ... haven't done the maths, but there would be a lot. On reflection, just adding 2 more civ traits would increase the number of available combinations from 16 to 28, which I think almost everyone would agree is more than enough for the purposes of the game (see below).
CIV2 tribes - Romans, Babylonians, Germans, Egyptians, Americans, Greeks, Indians, Russians, Zulus, French, Aztecs, Chinese, English, Mongols, Celts, Japanese, Vikings, Spanish, Persians, Carthaginians, Sioux ... TOTAL = 21
CIV3 tribes - Romans, Babylonians, Germans, Egyptians, Americans, Greeks, Indians, Russians, Zulus, French, Aztecs, Chinese, English, (NO Mongols), (NO Celts), Japanese, (NO Vikings), (NO Spanish), Persians, (NO Carthaginians), (NO Sioux - replaced by ...), Iroquois ... TOTAL = 16.
Present Available Civ3 Traits:-
Co mmercial
Ex pansionist
In dustrious
Mi litaristic
Re ligious
Sc ientific
> 36 possible combinations
- 6 duplicates (e.g.: Commercial-Commercial)
- 14 copies (e.g.: Commercial-Industrious & Industrious-Commercial)
=16 practical combinations* (i.e. up to 16 Civs can have unique combinations until pattern repeats itself!)
* Co-Ex, Co-In, Co-Mi, Co-Re, Co-Sc // Ex-In, Ex-Mi, Ex-Re, Ex-Sc // In-Mi, In-Re, In-Sc // Mi-Re, Mi-Sc // Re-Sc.
The addition of only 2 extra civ traits (say, Maritime & Equestrian) would increase the available combinations to 28!
E.G.:
Proposed Possible Civ3 Traits:-
Co mmercial
Ex pansionist
In dustrious
Mi litaristic
Re ligious
Sc ientific
Ma ritime
Eq uestrian
> 64 possible combinations
- 8 duplicates
- 28 copies
=28 practical combinations* (i.e. up to 28 Civs can have unique combinations until pattern repeats itself!)
* Co-Ex, Co-In, Co-Mi, Co-Re, Co-Sc, Co-Ma, Co-Eq // Ex-In, Ex-Mi, Ex-Re, Ex-Sc, Ex-Ma, Ex-Eq // In-Mi, In-Re, In-Sc, In-Ma, In-Eq // Mi-Re, Mi-Sc, Mi-Ma, Mi-Eq // Re-Sc, Re-Ma, Re-Eq // Sc-Ma, Sc-Eq // Ma-Eq.
E.G.: Mongols could be Militaristic & Equestrian, Carthaginians could be Commercial & Maritime, etc.
I don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't like to play a game against *28* other civs in a hurry ... but having 28 unique civs to choose from would make the game just that much more interesting, don't you think?
Although it's really the place of another thread, I suggested 'Equestrian' as another new Civ trait because I think that this trait, as well as 'Maritime', have been unfairly ignored by all the previous makers of the Civ game genera, from I to III. Just as some civs seem to borne with water-wings and just love messing about with boats, other civs seem to be just about borne into the saddle (e.g. Mongols & their devastating horse-archers, who could chop a superior force to pieces from a distance ... fire-retreat-fire-retreat, etc.).
Anyone want to start another thread ""Equestrian' as a new Civ trait?" ... mm?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by cracker
Self-actualized (extra happy)
Maritime
Agricultural
Hunter-Gatherer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the thoughts, Cracker, but with all due respect, a couple of comments ...
'Maritime' - thanx for the vote;
'Agricultural' - this is really taken care of by 'Industrious' - e.g. the industrious Chinese irrigates just that much faster> more food;
'Self-actualized' - sorry, but this just sounds too much like U.S. West Coast psyco-babble;
'Hunter-Gatherer' - from an anthropological standpoint, this should really be 'Fisher-Hunter-Gatherer'(FGH) - ALL of our Civs share this trait ... huh?
Let's just go right back to first principles & the very beginning of the game, before we've established our first city ...
All civs start with 'irrigation, mining & roads', along with 2 others, depending on their civ traits ... all these are NOMADS until they start their first city.
As Nomads, they can already fish-hunt-&- gather (otherwise they would already have starved to death), they can build roads (i.e. they can follow trails ... more on that below, briefly, I hope), they can mine (i.e. they can dig for stone,flint & obsidian with which to build tools).
It almost goes without saying, but they also should be specifically given the tech 'Wood-Working', which lets them build their basic tools.
Wood-Working would also let all civs build their basic 'Watercraft' unit - for want of a better name - which could describe any of the following: raft, dugout canoe, kayak, reed-boat, inflated-animal-skin, etc.
After all (1) Australian Aboriginals' ancestors had to have some form of watercraft in order to bridge the 100 mile gap which existed even at the time of the lowest Ice-Age sea-levels between Asia & Australasia 40,000 to 60,000 years ago! & (2) the Mongol armies used to cross supposedly impassable rivers using inflated-animal-skins/bladders, etc. while swimming their horses across.
This basic watercraft could, say, have 0A/0D/M2 & carry 1 with a 50 (75?)% chance of sinking other than in coastal squares (AND NO MAGIC AI CANOES ARRIVING IN HAWAII!). It could cost 20 shields & not be upgradeable. In other words, all civs should be able to build a basic watercraft unit from the beginning, just like they can build warriors from Day 1.
Now, 'IRRIGATION' ... IMHO the ability to irrigate should come with the tech advance of 'Agriculture' (including horticulture, viniculture, animal husbandry, etc.) After all, Nomads don't use irrigation because they're always moving on. E.G. the industrious Chinese could start with Agriculture as one of their free techs, while other less 'industrious' civs should have to discover it. It could, perhaps, allow the building of the Farm city improvement (cheap) which would allow fields to be irrigated > 1 extra food per irrigated square (rather than waiting for Monarchy as at present - which always seems to take FOREVER, in Civ3). Any thoughts, people?
A couple of other points, while I'm at it ... not quite on the thread, but related to the above ...
ROADS - anyone else apart from me puzzled by the fact that road-building technology seems to make absolutely NO progress until the development of RR? I would suggest the following:-
*'Basic roads' with 2 movement bonus (3 at present) from start;
*'Paved roads' with 3 movement bonus (same as present) - workers could be able to pave roads with discovery of, say, 'Construction - >straighter roads (with cobble-stone appearance like some of those custom Civ2 terrain files) ... this would make the effort to establish a decent road network more worthwhile & realistic ... E.G. one of the reasons for the early successes of the Roman republic was their building of their internal network of straight, paved, all-weather roads enabling them to move troops about quickly to where they were most needed. It should also take twice as long to pillage paved roads compared to basic roads.
*'Highways' with 4 movement bonus - workers could be able to build highways with discovery of, say, 'Automobile', again with different appearance ... E.G. German autobahns same as Roman roads above. Not quite cart-tracks, not quite RR?
*'Bridges' - for workers to link roads over rivers - with discovery of, say, 'Construction' or 'Bride-Building' - until then, crossing river takes 1 MP - to simulate ferries, fords, etc. - workers must 'build bridge' on each roaded square either side of river before bridge is complete ... FIRAXIS - please re-introduce 'Bridge-Building' for the sake of realism.
RAILROADS - Anyone think the whole concept of RR has NEVER been done properly? Am playing Trip's American Civil War at the moment - there, the RR look like RR ... widespread cities linked by single RR tracks, RR to mines, etc. but none of this RR EVERYWHERE business ... How's this ... ?
*In Civ 1, moving through a city by RR cost 1/3 (I think) of a MP - to simulate changing trains, reduced speed limits, etc., I suppose - this helped counter the 'travel-by-rail-at-the-speed-of-light' phenomena, but not by much;
*In Civ 2, building a RR thru a forest gave you an extra shield (RR better than bullock teams, after all) - GOOD - but no cash - BAD;
*In Civ 3, building road/RR thru a forest gives you extra cash - GOOD - but no extra shield - BAD. I tried to fix this in one of my experimental, modified .bic files where you could build mines in forest squares to get the extra shield - GUESS WHAT? ... it seemed like in every 2nd square the AI planted forests, then built mines! Talk about Greenpower!
*Have patience, folks, just trying to figure a way to cut back on the 'RR-cancer-effect' while at the same time allowing the unique benefits of RR ... How about ...
(1) RR ONLY provide shield bonuses thru (a) MINES, (b) SPECIAL RESOURCE SQUARES & (c) FORESTS;
(2) Plain & Grassland squares CANNOT be mined - to remove incentive for AI to mine/RR EVERYTHING;
(3) RR ONLY provide food bonuses thru SPECIAL RESOURCE SQUARES - same as 2;
(4) Increased food production (apart from RR thru SPECIAL RESOURCE SQUARES) is only thru construction of Civ2-Supermarket-type City Improvement along with Workers making Farmland improvement a la Civ2 (this could simulate improved agricultural production/reduced wastage brought by the farm machinery - until this time, agricultural production yields were much the same as in Roman times);
(5) Loading/unloading units from RR, whether in city or open country should take 1 turn(?);
(6) Until cities along a RR line have built the RR Station City Improvement, RR between cities without Stations only function as Highways (i.e. 4 movement bonus as above).
Enough for now ... sorry for the length, it jus' grewd, Massa ... any comments, folks?
Cheers
)
