1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Migrations

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by sikandar323, Mar 2, 2018.

  1. sikandar323

    sikandar323 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    Argentina
    Considering the importance of the different migratory movements, I think that the game could include at least two very important ones, first the migration forced by the slavery, which would allow to incorporate population only for the exploitation of luxury resources, through the purchase of population from another nation or city state, or the diminution of the population of a conquered city. Later in the game through a civic advance this population becomes freedom, with penalties for nations that do not, but maintaining the limitation with respect to luxury resources and through special projects in the production queue in each city they would become citizens without limitations.
    The second is the immigration of free settlers from one country to another, as occurred between Europe and America in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, in this case the nations with excess population and problems of habitat or civil disorder, could offer this population to other friendly nations and in later ages trhough same advanced investigaton obtain a benefit with remittances to the country of origin.
     
  2. FearSunn

    FearSunn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2017
    Messages:
    189
    Gender:
    Male
  3. sikandar323

    sikandar323 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    Argentina
  4. Jarms48

    Jarms48 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2016
    Messages:
    288
    I think the simplest way to add this into Civ VI is to just give settlers the ability to "immigrate". Basically if you build or capture (representing slavery) a settler and move them into one of your cities their settle ability changes to an immigrate ability, where they instantly add +1 pop into that city.
     
  5. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,638
    Location:
    France
    +1 pop is not representing the same amount of food for different city size.
     
  6. sikandar323

    sikandar323 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    Argentina
    It´s simple way, and if I remember correctly, in CIv II you could do it. Following this way, if you could buy settlers from other civilizations, it would be complete all possibilities.
     
  7. Jarms48

    Jarms48 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2016
    Messages:
    288
    True, and it could be abused, the other idea would be giving the "immigrate" ability a food value equivalent to a food harvest (with the same restrictions as a food harvest). This would make it fairer, but still doesn't completely remove that issue.

    What would you propose?
     
  8. Naokaukodem

    Naokaukodem Millenary King

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,033
    Migration is indeed one a the key issue of a true Rise & Fall of civilizations. There, you would need means to grow rapidly, or to migrate totally your country without losing relavance, like the Franks did in France, or Europa in Americas. You could gain the ability to totally transfer the total population of one of your city in another location, be it already a city or virgin lands. Now the cultural part where if you go into an already existing city you don't know which culture will dominate the other, is going beyond my imagination in term of game design. Maybe that you could bring your culture with you, aka your culture points generation, that you had with building even if not all your buildings survive to the transfer. I know that for example creating from no where a unique building into a newly conquered city is nont realistic, but it should do the trick. Unless we admit that having more population allows for quicker rebuild. Not to mention slavery, in that slaves should be numerous in a conquered land. For that last part, I think the implementation of "unnative disease" could play its role, in order to have to trade slaves from another place like Africa to America in reality past.
     
  9. Phrozen

    Phrozen Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    714
    The whole population of Europe didn't travel to the Americas. In fact it was usually the poorer people in economically depressed or politically unstable areas that came. If you were relatively well off there wasn't a good reason to leave Europe unless you wanted adventure. Germans, English, Scots, and Poles in the 1700s. Irish, Jews from Eastern Europe, Southern Italians, more Germans, and Czechs in the 1800s. Japanese, Chinese, and other east Asians in the 1900s, etc.
     
  10. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,089
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Historically, there are two types of migrations to consider in Game Terms:

    Voluntary Migration. Historically, this was usually Internal, as in people migrating to the nearest City from the countryside for jobs, access to power, protection, etc. This is already in the game in the form of City Growth, since birthrate and survival was notoriously poor in cities for most of history: the population growth in most of our game cities is actually internal migration.
    The big 'external' voluntary or semi-voluntary migration has occurred in the past few hundred years, and involved primarily but not entirely migration of people to the Americas looking for jobs, land, freedom from persecution, etc. I call this 'semi-voluntary' because frequently the alternative to migration was to starve or be mobbed back home (or, in my family's case, be picked up by the local constabulary, since every ancestor we've found has been a crook of some kind and came to America one step ahead of the Law back in Europe!). So, this type of migration required both Bad Conditions back home and Open Borders and Open Land/Opportunity at the destination. There are also cases of Government-Sponsored Migration: Russia inviting Germans to settle and farm open lands under Catherine the Great, or the English forming a Ruling Class in Ireland and resulting in a distinctly 'mixed' cultural/genetic group there.

    Involuntary Migration: usually, getting Pushed Out of wherever you were with catastrophic results to gather folks living wherever you are forced to go. These date back to pre-history everywhere, as in the migration of the Apache from northeastern Canada to the American Southwest, the migrations of Celts, Germans, Goths, and Hsung-Nu (Huns) in historic Europe/Asia, the Indo-European groups before them in many of the same areas. They could be caused by changes in environment and climate, although the specifics of this are hotly debated, or by the actions of other Human Groups.
    In Game Terms, these would usually take the form of a bunch of Barbarian Camps being forced to relocate into or next to your borders, but there is no game mechanism for moving these Camps, nor any mechanism to put pressure on them to move.
    Note. Most of the so-called Migratory Civilizations were actually Pastoral: they did not drive their herds and people into new areas unless Forced, but stayed within a single, large area which they fiercely defended. It was only when the Chinese put pressure on the Hsung-Nu that they became Migrants, and brought their herds and families into entirely new areas and into conflict with the peoples of Europe.

    So the most important aspect for the Game would be how to model Pastoral Civilizations, with the potential to 'burst out' and crush their settled neighbors, or migrate and disrupt half a continent. This has been debated at length in other Threads all the way back to Civ IV at least. Suffice to say that many of the civilizations that are considered 'normal' in the game are in fact Pastoral and very badly modeled in the game because they were not city builders for most of their history: Mongols, Huns, Scythians, etc.

    What makes modeling the Pastorals difficult is that, as powerful and important as they might be in the Ancient, Classical or Medieval Eras, they dwindle into insignificance after that unless they settle down and start building cities and industry. Producing a mechanism for initial Pastoral Civ is not too difficult: finding a way for that to morph into a settled Civ with cities and factories without requiring them to 'conquer' an already settled Civ (as did the Turks) is more difficult, but necessary to make the entire Pastoral/Migrant Civilization concept worthwhile in game terms. Who wants to play a Civ that you can only play for the first third of the game?
     
  11. Naokaukodem

    Naokaukodem Millenary King

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,033
    Sorry if my phrasing let you understand that. I know that of course. Let's say here a part of.

    Not to mention an even bigger sign of migration : Homo Sapiens colonizing the whole Earth. I even remoted to animal migration in order to understand that, but I think that in definitive that was cultural pressure / clans splitting / food needs, when the first two may have been induced by the last. This form of migration must have had its relics in more modern eras, like Antiquity, classical era or middle age, and even beyond i suppose.

    With the system of dark/normal/golden/heroic age of Rise & Fall (but more importantly era points), one could imagine a top civ by era. Say each top 3 give Prestige points. At the end, the civ with more Prestige points wins, even if the civ has been obliterated from the map. (and it would certainly will at some point) In that perspective, one, two or three eras could assure a total victory. this include massive chaos in city ownership, be it influencial and nearly uncontrollable, or militaristic by aggressive wars, eventhough i'm not sure how we could go so with mere units. (and the AI couldn't handle it with basic units I imagine)
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2018

Share This Page

Ebates: Get Paid to Shop