New terrain types

[Amenhotep IV]

I haven't been here for a long time, so I'm not sure if this topic was discussed... but new terrain types is what I already wanted for Civ3, so Civ4 must surely include at least the variety of terrains from Colonization.
What do you think?

 

[Pounder]

I haven't been here for a long time, so I'm not sure if this topic was discussed... but new terrain types is what I already wanted for Civ3, so Civ4 must surely include at least the variety of terrains from Colonization.
What do you think?

I would like to see Canyons, Fjords and Plateaus.

Impassable Canyons,

Fjords where you can not unload troops.

Plateaus to add elevation.

 

[Vizurok]

I'd like to see a bonus forest (as bonud grasslands), cause all of the forests get cut by the end of the game... that's not real!

And of course, channels!

 

[E-Raser]

I'd like to see a bonus forest (as bonus grasslands), cause all of the forests get cut by the end of the game... that's not real!

Unfortunately, it is real - but more for Jungles imo. Nevertheless, if it continues this way Afrika will be CIV-like forestless pretty soon.

 

[Vizurok]

Unfortunately, it is real - but more for Jungles imo. Nevertheless, if it continues this way Afrika will be CIV-like forestless pretty soon.

I know, and that's a very bad thing. That's why I would like to see BF-s...

 

[Beloyar]

We need swamps and marshes as new terrain.
It would dramatically slow down movement of most units.
You can't build roads or cities on it until discovering engineering or something.

 

[ShADoW^HawK]

Yes, new tipes of terrain would be nice. But, what values would they have?

Also, I agree that forests and jungles should have more value to them, since, thesedays, not everything is grasslands, plains, desert, hills, tundra, and mountains. Maybe, jungles and forests (especially jungles) could have a high trade value, because of tourism and zoos needing animals. This could also open up for a Great wonder like the World Wildlife Federation or something like it. Wouldn't be too sure what it would do though.

 

[Ultraworld]

I agree. I would like to see new types too. However I heard it was impossible because the tyle sets would become to big.

 

[Garbarsardar.jr]

I think it all depends on Civ4 going 3D as it is rumored
Anyway new terrain and worker actions associated would be avery welcomed alteration if it does not impair our ability to mod the game
see also http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=89119

 

[davecheeney]

Why not drop the idea of hexes and go to the concept of land provinces and sea zones?

1. You can assign a general type of terrain and one city to a province. It represents a geographic area that supports one city and it's economic hinterland;
2. It "fixes" the time scale problem of moving units so slowly - now you move 3-4 provinces in a (10 year) turn instead of 3-4 hexes;
3. Sea zones are also larger areas that allow faster movement of ships over vast ocean terrain in a typical 10 year turn;
4. This idea is used effectively in the Paradox game system (Hearts of Iron, Europa Universalis, Victoria. Go look at their site & compare). It just makes more sense once you see it in action, and it makes for a beautiful map. Now mountains can look like real alpine terrain, forests cover vast provinces, rivers and swamps look so natural in their correct setting.

As an example - England would consist of about 10 provinces, the English channel would be one sea zone, a smaller nation like Belgium might be 2-3 provinces, while a larger one like France might be 20. The Med. sea would consist of 5-6 zones (western, Adriatic, Ionian, eastern, etc), the North Sea 2 or 3 zones.

 

[searcheagle]

What about tourist terrain squares?

Mountains? (Pikes peaks, Mount Everest, etc)
all types of terrain can have some sort of tourist draw. These would increase the trade to the square to which they belong.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

OK, my thoughts:

1) It should be possible to edit and add terrain types. In addition it should be possible to edit and add terrain improvements. This ability to change and add should be almost totally 'Open Ended'!!!

2) It should be possible to 'mine' forests. i.e. it should be possible to build a 'mine like' terrain improvement that allows you to extract more shields than forest alone (to reflect a lumber operation). It should still be possible to get more shields at once from 'cutting down' the forest, but the remaining terrain should be less productive than standard grassland, and any forest replanted in its place should be less productive than a 'normal forest'.

3) Connected to (2). Perhaps there could be different 'forest types'. You could have a 'plantation forest' which is easier to plant, but isn't as productive (unless you 'mine' it) as 'native forest' which is both MORE productive AND also has a chance of spawning bonus, luxury and strategic resources.

4) It should be possible to 'plant' a native forest, but it should take a LOT longer to do than a plantation. Also, native forests-along with mountains, jungles, marsh and hills-should allow you to build a 'National Park' Improvement. This improvement will generate tourism and, therefore, income for your city! A plantation forest could NOT become a 'National Park'!

5) The number of hexes that contain jungle and/or forest should effect how quickly pollution levels rise-at the city, regional AND global level. This could become VERY important when global warming becomes a problem!

Anyway, just some thoughts. It would DEFINITELY make forests, and most importantly NATIVE forests, more worth keeping around!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Chaos_BF1942]

I like the idea. I also think there should be unhappiest by cutting down forests (don't know if this been said before)

 

[Beloyar]

We need snow-covered hills, like snow-capped mountains. This would improve the look of geography.

 

[rcoutme]

Ok, in response to some of these requests:
1. Marsh was added in C3C, stats are 1 food and cities can not be built on it until cleared to grassland.
2. You can adjust forests in the editor to allow mines (I do this routinely to simulate logging operations).
3. I agree that some coastlines should disallow debarkation of troops. Perhaps this should be set for mountains, volcanoes and hills, not sure.
4. I believe that deforestation should be a much, much more significant factor in global warming than all of the pollution generated. Scientific research is starting to show that all of the 'greenhouse gasses' produced by men have about a 0.23% affect on the overall weather. Lack of trees...that is another story.
5. I would like to see the clearing of forests bonus (i.e. the 10 shields) be allowed once ever 50 turns or so. If the trees are replanted, then you should be able to harvest them more than once.
6. If lumbering operations (i.e. putting mine in forest) is adopted, then clearing the forest should no longer give any bonus shields.
7. I would like to see desert hills and wooded hills. CTP had desert hills and I thought that this was a very good observation on the part of those developers. Desert hills would not provide food (could still create mines for shields though).
8. I would like to see dune deserts. These would be much, much harder to irrigate. They could even allow desert and jungle creep to overtake certain areas (give a small % chance like with volcanoes blowing). This would make it harder to turn the Sahara Desert into the Great Plains.

 

[Beloyar]

Good points, rcoutme.
Desert-covered hill and snow cov. hills would both be great.
I think dune deserts should not allow any development on them, even roads. They are to be left as wild nature. Speaking of which, certain tundra terrains should also be left uninhabitable and undevelopable.

Terrain that doesn't allow units to disembark there from a ship should also work the same inland. Certain cliffs and mountains are completely impassable, even by modern vehicles. Such geographic terrain should add a lot of fun to fighting strategy.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I agree with all the ideas that Rcoutme has put forward, and I'd also like to thank him for clearing me up about mines in forests!
In fact, speaking of C3:C, I've thought about the possibility of the 'strategic resource' of Natural Heritage. This would appear in forest, hill, jungle and marsh squares and, if it is within your city radius, then that city can build a 'Wilderness Park' improvement.
The other possibility is to allow a 'National Parks and Monuments' Small wonder if you have ANY 'Natural Heritage' resources anywhere in your nation.
Anyway, sorry for being slightly OT !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.