money!

[elfstorm]

I was talking over a few things with a friend and we came up with a few ideas concerning money, plunder, etc. in Civ.

These are all with a view to making things a little more interesting.

1) Why do all military units cost 1gp (or what the currency is) to maintain?

Thats soooo unsophisticated! Even Master of Magic had different values attached to units. Lets face it, an Aircraft Carrier should be far more expensive than a warrior.


(And why no mercenaries? again MoM had loads of those, although you couldn't choose to hire them, they just showed up).

2) Plunder. If you plunder someones territory (roads, irrigation etc) you should get money. After all this is what armies have been doing for centuries. You opponent then has a problem, stay in his nice safe cities, or come out and face your troops.

The same problem governments and armies have face for centuries.

Now to my mind both these suggestions could be very easily implemented and would greatly enhance the gameplay - which, lets face it, can be a touch simplistic.

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

About the money thing: It would piss too many people off to play anything more than 1 per unit

About the plundering thing, you can always sell off improvements in cities but other than that you would have to talk to firaxis about it.

 

[Gastric ReFlux]

I am not satisfied with strictly gold coinage. I would like some silver coins, for change purposes.

And where's the tech advance of paper currency? Huh huh?

Now where's my 6050 year virtual reality simulator?

 

[sabo]

and if the English for instance plundered France would they get a fair rate on the Euro to Pound transfer?

 

[murewa]

just face the fact that CivIII doesn't exactly portray the true reality of things.

case in point: Travelling around a CivIII world even when on a battleship will take half a millenium. Even Magellan sailed around the world in less than a hundredth of that time and in rickety wooden ships no less.

 

[Japher]

I just want to state that MoM was the best game ever made. I still play it today, and compare all other games to it...

On your complaints:

Yes, in a perfectly honed game your complaints may or may not be justified. I do agree that certain units should require more to upkeep than others. Yet, in a game that is already so full of data structures that one more may of toped the scales. In which case the playability of the game would of slid into the gutter. Heck, people are already complaining that turns take too long and every little bit more of reality added to the game would most likely make the game take forever just to go from 4000b.c. to 3950 b.c., agreed?

I think they did a pretty good job overall. One could "pretend" that the upkeep of the unit is payed in full when the unit is created, or one could "pretend" that these units are smart enough to take care of themselves, or that additional required upkeep is managed through intricate infrastructure that is a civilization.

On your plunder for cash idea... I totally disagree. If you allow it to happen, you have just created another problem similar to the complaint above. For, if I blow up a building, bridge, road, etc. or torch a field, or collapse a levy, what sort of monitary gain do I receive? I feel that the plunder is more of a raze and not plunder in the sense of the word that it is defined as. Yet, if adding plunder to a list of unit activities were possible, that would be cool.

"Kill the women, and rape the horses!..."

 

[elfstorm]

Originally posted by Japher
I just want to state that MoM was the best game ever made. I still play it today, and compare all other games to it...

Master of Magic was great wasn't it?

Originally posted by Japher


Heck, people are already complaining that turns take too long and every little bit more of reality added to the game would most likely make the game take forever just to go from 4000b.c. to 3950 b.c., agreed?

I do agree, but I'm not talking about adding lots more to the game, just some simple little additions. But later on the game does take far too long to play - something Fireaxis seriously need to address.

This failing in the game is more to do with how you are forced to micro-manage everything. It should be corrected and it certainly shouldn't result in new features (like improved combat) not being introduced simply because things take too much time.

Maybe a Grand Vizer could be introduced to handle the boring stuff, like a more powerful city govenor (but not so stupid!).

Originally posted by Japher



On your plunder for cash idea... I totally disagree. If you allow it to happen, you have just created another problem similar to the complaint above. For, if I blow up a building, bridge, road, etc. or torch a field, or collapse a levy, what sort of monitary gain do I receive? I feel that the plunder is more of a raze and not plunder in the sense of the word that it is defined as. Yet, if adding plunder to a list of unit activities were possible, that would be cool.

I think we have misunderstood each other here. You're quite right you shouldn't gain any money from blowing up a bridge or road. My thinking was more along the lines of the money your troops would gain from plundering crops and farmers homes.

So I agree, you should get the chance to plunder or raze.

 

[Reboot]

There was talk of a possible MOM2, if anyone cares to know... Infogrammes has the license. Last I heard QSI (doing MOOIII) may have a shot at it, but I guess a lot depends on how MOOIII sells.

 

[elfstorm]

Originally posted by Reboot
There was talk of a possible MOM2, if anyone cares to know... Infogrammes has the license. Last I heard QSI (doing MOOIII) may have a shot at it, but I guess a lot depends on how MOOIII sells.

MoM2??? cool! If its related to Moo3 sales then thats a pretty big incentive to buy Moo3!

 

[Reboot]

Actually MOOIII looks pretty good thus far... although recent cuts meant some of the special features in the game would be gone. Still looks good though. Hopefully it does a better job as a sequel than CivIII.