Plate Tectonics

Graadiapolistan

Gradiapolistan
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Messages
251
I think that the map on a civ game should be geographically correct, Although during 4000 years that you play nothing inviolving plates would be formes, but to haveisland chains ddue to "hot spots" in the mantlel, like hawaii and the emperor chain. Or volcanoes and different sized mountains and faults in places where plates collide. You wouldn't see the plates or anythinmg, it would just make it scientifically acurate
 
Yeah, like for a natural diasaster, eg; title wave; tsunami or something like that.
Nice Idea :goodjob:
 
Even though the plates shouldn't be visible. they should have definite boundaries along which volcanoes take place, islands are formed, et cetera. You shouldn't be able to map the fault lines until the modern age, but cities built upon them should be periodically wrecked/destroyed by earthquakes.
 
Great idea.. they should take this into account when designing their Random map generator and stuff.
 
Bad idea. Tectonical plates move no more than 3cm a year, calculating for 4000 years that would make 120 meters. Thats almost nothing! However, I have nothing against volcanoes, earthquakes or tsunamis even if they are a product of tectonical plates.
 
@GeneralZed I don't think he wants the plates to move, but he wants them to be 'visible' through Island chains (as the Hawaiian islands for example), through volcanoes placed according to them (like the ring of fire around the pacific ocean) and to include (semi-)random events like earthquakes or tsunamis that happen in places where they would in a real world according to the plate-tectonic theory.

mitsho
 
GeneralZed said:
Bad idea. Tectonical plates move no more than 3cm a year, calculating for 4000 years that would make 120 meters. Thats almost nothing! However, I have nothing against volcanoes, earthquakes or tsunamis even if they are a product of tectonical plates.

All i mean is that the maps are scientificall accurate. The computer generates a plate system and then places land over that accordingly. This would cause maountain ranges rings of fire, earthquakes and such

The plates wouldn't move, it would just make the mountains and volcanoes make sense scientifically instead of being hap hazard
 
And mitsho, you're correct i don't want the plates to move

Perhaps over the 4000 years that you play, the most that would happen in the real world would be a new island or two forming, or volcanoes going extinct, so the plates being calculated 3cm evrey year would make the coputer slow

So, the plates shgouldn't move
 
I STILL think its good, survival of the fittest are the CiViLiZaTiOn GaMeS Speciality, No? And besides, WE lived 4000 years, in fact 35000 years to studies, and we have survived very long.
 
Of coarse natural disasters wouldn't be random, they would be on plate boundries. Tsunamis and earthquakes and volcanoes would exist, and work with the game
and MAKE SENSE scientifically to the world you're in
 
So how would they happen:
Volcano: destroys everything on the tile it affects, has range of two.
Tsunami: Affects everything on the coastline tiles: all Units killed, city inhabitang number reduced by 1 and occasionally tile improvements destroyed.
Earthquake: Tile Improvements, some city buildings and some units killed, has a range of 2.
Are there other natural big disasters? There are some small ones: Floods, Famine, Drought. If they are included, then there certainly need to be their opposites too!

mitsho
 
GeneralZed said:
Bad idea. Tectonical plates move no more than 3cm a year, calculating for 4000 years that would make 120 meters. Thats almost nothing! However, I have nothing against volcanoes, earthquakes or tsunamis even if they are a product of tectonical plates.
Yeah forget tectonic plates moving but concentrate on volcanoes (which CIV III brilliantly produced) and tsunamis and earthquakes (especially).
 
I think volcanoes should occasionally create new, desert islands.
 
Just to say you play 6050 years, not 4000. from 4000 bc to 2050 ad. Take a math course.
Back on topic, it should be included, but not necessarly as "tectonic plates", just seismic danger spots. Maybe after a certain tech, you see tectonic plates, but in 4000 bc, you don,t even know what they are, you just know there are lots of volcanoes there, and earthquakes there. btw, tsunamis are just results of earthquakes, it would happen if there is one in the sea.
 
And we the player would be able to quickly figure it out... so why hide the fact?
 
Maybe when there is an earthquake somewhere you can see, you know there is a risk there. It would radomly it near the plates, but also in more distant places, but it would be least likely long way of the plate. When you have the tech, you can see where exactly is the plate.
 
Outside of fulfilling a curiosity, and perhaps adding something of a psuedo-realism to the game, I honestly don't see how this would add anything to the game. Tectonic Plates are something that, with the style of game Civ is, should be transparent. I don't disagree that there should be more natural disasters (some randomness is good), but going as far as the plate tectonics doesn't add to it.

Besides, I don't want to be restricted when I make my maps. (even though I try to design maps with these concepts in mind). I'd hate to go place a Volcano and be told it was in an invalid spot. That would really frustrate me.
 
I still don't quite see the point as to what it would add. Given that the science behind plate tectonics is not perfect, and we don't have too much example beyond good 'ol planet earth for it, how would the computer know where to place the plate boundaries on anything but an Earth map??

Too complicated and too unnecessary, I think. A cool and neat idea, but not for Civ.

Now, if it was a game like SimEarth (from waaaaaaay back in the day), then I could see it being included.
 
Back
Top Bottom