Natural Disasters

[Tboy]

I find it strange that the only natural disaster featured in C3C is the volcano. I suggest there should be earthquakes along fault lines, which have randomly generated strength which determines how much damage is done and what the radius of effect is, and, if the earthquake is in the ocean and strong enough, it could create a tsunami, its range and strenght again depending on the strenghth of the earthquake. Meteorites should also be a disaster, with perhaps a small wonder in the modern age which detect them a few turns ahead of their actual impact, in which time you could launch nukes against them to destroy them. However, meteorites are rare, so they should be on the game.

Let me know what you think.

 

[Ivan the Kulak]

Well... people already avoid building cities near volcanoes like the plague, as they are prone to get roasted. Earthquake fault lines would cover more turf, and affect people's decisions on where to build over a larger area, so I would suggest that earthquakes only destroy city improvements and maybe a few pop points, rather than level the city.

BTW, what is the latest in the game that a volcano will erupt? I thought they were all done by around 500AD, but in my current game I saw a volcano active warning right next to the Roman city of Jerusalem in 1710, and next turn it got torched by a lava flow. Wierd. I accidentally built a city by a volcano once, and spent the next 2000 years biting my nails and shrieking at my monitor whenever smoke started pouring out of the cone, but in that game I got lucky.

Not to make light of recent events, but it is clear that tsunamis are a potent natural disaster and should be included in any future catalog of disasters for civ. For earthquakes and tsunamis, you don't get a warning as you do with volcanoes.

 

[Civrules]

Now with the new engine, I imagine that there will be more possibilities as far as disasters go, but, of course, we aren't sure if more will be included. I’m just saying that more interactions between the environment and your empire might be possible.
For me, this is not such a big deal, but if more are added (which is pretty possible), it would be great.

 

[Turtleneck]

They should make that to a lesser degree or optional, though, in my mind I see this as detracting from building too many strategic areas if it happens to be in a place where the city will lose so and so once every -this-many- turns. But to a lesser degree sounds ok. Or maybe just have the damages paid out directly from the treasury or have some sort of per turn payout to pay for the disaster rather than actually going through the rebuilding process since the majority of disasters won't annihilate the infastructure. But you could have one that once in a while does and you can't just 'pay it off'... Hmm..

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Well, first up Earthquakes will normally just be a nuisance, with the occasional one being dangerous, and only very rare ones being DEVESTATING!! What would be VERY interesting, is if you can't initially SEE fault lines or volcanoes, and have to guess where they might be and try and avoid them! Of course, once you get into the late industrial age, you can see most-if not all-fault lines and geological 'hot spots'!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Synergy67]

I was thinking about this recently too. I’d like to see some disasters based on location and climate introduced into the game. I use a Mac, so haven’t even yet gotten to enjoy the volcanos in the Windows-only C3C.

Volcanos could appear in certain mountain ranges, some recognizable from the get-go, but some might appear by surprise from a normal-looking mountain. If you were foolish enough to build a city right next to a volcano, you’d have a fair chance of it being destroyed by eruption after a few thousand years have passed. If you built it a couple tiles away, you’d be likely to get eruptions occasionally destroying farmland and improvements nearby the mountain, but your city might only suffer economic and health problems in those cases rather than destruction. Building a city right next to a volcano would basically be a long-running game of Russian Roulette. You would eventually find the bullet. It shouldn’t be done.

Earthquakes would be great to add, and would tend most often to happen along coastal rim areas, but could be possible anywhere ultimately. Cities on coasts have great advantages of trade and sea-based food supplies, etc. but face increased likelihood of larger earthquakes which could either damage structures and cause monetary penalty or even knock down, say, your cathedral and cause it to have to be rebuilt, as well as your city getting knocked down a few population points. A tsunami would also possibly (but not necessarily) follow an earthquake on nearby costal areas and wouuld ruin farmland and improvements and maybe also knock down some city strutures and cause your harbor to have to be rebuilt, etc. Tsunamis would also affect cities further away, including ones in other countries, even if they were not affected by the earthquake itself.

In the grasslands, plains and deserts, tornados could appear and destroy terrain improvements along a path of travel. If a tornado crossed a city, similar results to those of an earthquake would result. Typhoons and hurricanes could also occur in appropriate coastal latitudes. Climate shifts over centuries or millennia could change some terrain...an entire region or latitude of grassland could become plains or vice-versa at some point, but also might shift back later. Forests would grow or go away. Ice or tundra might move down or up in latitude for a while. I’m thinking about the mini ice age in Europe in the middle ages, the year without a summer, etc.

I think this would be great fun and introduce these kinds of gradual or occasional variables into the Civ world, instead of knowing exactly what you can expect out of city once built for the next 6000 years because you can see the terrain around it.

 

[eddie_verdde]

synergy67

you seem to be very interested in the accuracy of climate and in ecological concepts. I also think that both should be major concepts in CIV4. We should start a thread on this issue.

I mean, it's the climate that ultimately shapes human evolution and consequently shapes the evolution of human communities and civilizations.

 

[Synergy67]

synergy67

you seem to be very interested in the accuracy of climate and in ecological concepts. I also think that both should be major concepts in CIV4. We should start a thread on this issue.

I mean, it's the climate that ultimately shapes human evolution and consequently shapes the evolution of human communities and civilizations.

This is a very significant point. There are good books on how climactic conditions coupled with a couple other factors are reliable predictors for how well a nation flourishes and how dominant it has become over the ages of history. It is a greatly determining and limiting factor. This is why I almost always restart a game if I begin in tundra or jungle. It is a tremendous disadvantage I am likely to feel for the next 6000 years.

I'd enjoy greater variation and realism relating to terrain and climate and nature for sure, especially relating to how big a city can become. One thing I really enjoyed about Civ Call to Power was the lovely physical world they created, including underwater rifts and volcanoes you could eventually harness for production. That was futuristic stuff, but great fun. It would be fun to watch the climate of the world slowly change over time affecting food production, etc.

Start another thread and I'll chip in if you think it would help.

Cheers,

Doug

 

[sir_schwick]

Instead of climate zones causing infrastructural and population damage, they should have effects that are continually felt. Some examples:

Fault lines would make growth slower and buildings more expensive: Effect is that the food storage box increases by 20% and shield costs for improvements increase by 10%. More or less based on intensity of fault.

Volcanoes would be the only immediate and dangerous zone taht could level cities.

Hurricane zones would have similair food growth and building penalties.

Droughts would reduce food production in an area.

Tsunamis would also be immediate and dangerous things, but based upon climatic change and earthquake zones.

 

[Drakan]

I accidentally built a city by a volcano once, and spent the next 2000 years biting my nails and shrieking at my monitor whenever smoke started pouring out of the cone.

very funny

 

[Princeps]

Here are some natural disaster that i would like to see in civ:

Earthquake ( Very common. Damages city improvements and kills citizens)
Famine ( Common, can be prevented. Decreases food production in the tile )
Flood ( Cities that are in near rivers could damaged by flood perhaps )
Tornado ( Some areas have tornados all the time. Damages cities )
Forest fire ( Very common in large dry (in plains) forests. burns the forest, but the forest can grow back)
Meteor strike ( Very VERY Rare. destoroys cities, if it hits city)
Supernova ( maybe... who knows...)

some of my ideas...

oh, and tsunamis too....

 

[DirkHartog]

another one for Synergy67 and eddie_verdde...

Volcanos provide very fertile soils. Squares adjacent to a volcano (even if extinct) could be highly food-producing. If food was made tradeable (in a manner not too similar to Civ2 etc.), then cities near volcanos would be an attractive, though risky, proposition.

As has been mentioned earlier in this thread, a volcano needn't look like a volcano. Take for example the Greek island of Santorini. It is assumed to have been the volcano which brought about the end of the Minoan civilization, primarily because there was a major trading port in the middle of a nice, round harbour - the centre of the volcano. Another is Naples where there are, today, densely populated settlements at the base of Vesuvius.

As for natural disasters, how about plague? Spreading amongst trading civilizations and across war-zones. Reduce the effects by building hospitals, even more if you get to build some relevant world wonder.

How about unnatural disasters? If you build airports, there may be the chance of an aircraft accident destroying something you have built in your city, or irrigation etc. When you have enough airports, build a small wonder - the air-traffic control centre and the chance of air-accidents drops dramatically.

 

[Synergy67]

I like Dirk’s thoughts, especially about volcanoes. They would create highly fertile surrounding land, maybe each with an extra shield as well. You’d want to place your city a couple tiles away from one and not right next door. You’d still run the risk of pyroclastic clouds or ash fallout hitting your city upon eruption, causing damage or population loss, but not the loss of your city. If lava flows were bad enough, they might extend out one or two tiles and reach your city gates. In a very rare extreme eruption, you might see a wide swath of land devastated in one or more directions from a volcano, and it might even bury your city. I’d love to see the animations for all this, heh. I live in western Washington state and was here in 1980 when Mt. St. Helens blew. I was very glad to be in the Seattle area away from prevaling winds which carried massive amounts of ash into eastern WA, Montana, and eventually all the way around the globe. Mt. St. Helens has become active again. It’s making me just a little bit nervous. Who knows which way the wind will be blowing if it blows up again.

 

[brinko]

i actually hate this idea. when was a great military campaigne ever effected by tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamies.etc. the only thing that has ever affected military campaignes was probaly winter. this should be considered if anything, but i wouldnt miss it if it wasnt. i think if someone puts any of this into civ 4 game, they should at least have a feature to turn it off. this natural disaster stuff beongs to sim city. volcanoes are cool, metoer showers would be nice every once in a while for effects but shouldnt do anything. since im used to floods and volcanoes in civ's they should be included...

if volcanoes happen around ocean, they should build to the landscape
if floods happen around the sea, they should swallow land,(civ 2)

 

[sir_schwick]

-15th century BC, earthquake causes Jordan river to back up allowing the Israelite nomads to cross into Palestine
-12th century AD, tsunami wipes out Mongol amphibious fleet on its way to invade Japan
-20th century AD, major Pacfic hurricane keeps many US carriers from returning to Pearl Harbour days before the Japanese attack

But I do agree the current proposals are not good. It is not fun to be hit by a random event which you cannot plan for or consider strategically. I think if anything, high probably disaster zones should increase the food cost for growth and shield cost for buildings. That is a realistic cost that would make players carefully consider developing in Tornado Alley or the Ring of Fire.

 

[Tboy]

Wow, what a response...

 

[Princeps]

As for natural disasters, how about plague? Spreading amongst trading civilizations and across war-zones. Reduce the effects by building hospitals, even more if you get to build some relevant world wonder.

How about unnatural disasters? If you build airports, there may be the chance of an aircraft accident destroying something you have built in your city, or irrigation etc. When you have enough airports, build a small wonder - the air-traffic control centre and the chance of air-accidents drops dramatically.

Well there is a Plague already, but I do agree with you on the plague.

Unnatural disasters... well there is the meltdown. Air accidents are completely insignificant considering about how meny times they happen and
how much damage they really cause.
But if there would air accidents, why not train accidents they happen far more often. And air-traffic control is not really a small wonder, every large airfield has one.

Now what comes to the weather disasters. I think that there should be weather system of someshort in civ. Like winds, warm water flows...

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

This is yet another idea that needs to be copied from SMAC. I like the idea of "[random event] gives you 1 extra food/1 less trade/a large wooden rabbit in each square in your city for each turn" that showed up every once in while. This should be done as to not severely unbalance you, but force you to adapt to minimize damage/maximize advantage.

 

[sir_schwick]

In SMAC the events happened because of being ecologically friendly or unfriendly. I would prefer that.

 

[Kayak]

In SMAC the events happened because of being ecologically friendly or unfriendly. I would prefer that.

I think that is too mystical for Earth history. I can be argued that no nations have been truly ecologically freindly, they have just been too small in population to make a bib negative impact.