Version 2.6 discussion

[jm_dracolich]

Hey I really like those new levels, though I must admit the colored thing on the right confused me a bit... Is that the tenth level, or is it a combination of all of the levels shown on the same diagram?

But overall it's a good idea. Personally, I've never had a cultural victory [I always do domination ] so I wouldn't know how easy it is to get Legendary status, but the idea is nice. I'm always up for expanding.

I need to ask though, why did you change the 3rd and 5th levels to squares instead of the diamond-ish shapes? And what is the growth rate?

Oh, and I'm digging the names.

 

[Big Heb]

The attrition concept is a good add-on for the game, I guess, and it has relation with the Unit Feeding and Supply Wagon. So, if these two would added, I vote for Attrition to be added together in the same package.

One thing I noticed and absolutely hate is playing the GEM and being buddies with every civilization in the Old World at 3000 BC. Exploration needs to be slowed down, and I think the attrition idea will do just that. It also adds a new strategy element to warfare and increases the incentives to build forts, which I hardly ever build but have been built throughout history.

I didn't fully comprehend your idea about MinorCivs. In what cases they would appear and which would be the effects of it in the game?

They would appear like barbarian civs when you leave barbarians alone for a while, and are just like barbarian civs. The only difference is that they are friendly and concentrate more on peaceful things like building improvements and buildings than military units. They are there to represent the "civilizations" that have never been powerful in history but still existed and were periodically conquered. For example, modern countries like Bangladesh, Lithuania, Montenegro, Uzbekistan, Brunei, Switzerland, ETC. would be minor civilizations. Generally neutral nations, but throughout history have been kicked around or left alone.

About naval changes, I agree with that too. But your idea should be necessarily be combined with mine of rising the tiles a ship can travel per turn. Otherwise, they will sink at the middle of the New World discovery travel.

True. However, my idea was not to require port every turn but to require porting after a certain number of turns. The number of turns without porting will depend on what kind of unit it is. To use the GEM as a model, a Galley going from Spain to Egypt would probably have to port in Rome and in Carthage as it would have to port often. A Galleon could go from Britain to Boston, but would have to port in Bermuda if they were headed for the West Indies or southern United States

Other thing that has been discussed and settled in this thread is the so-called "double-tap tech prerequisites". This is more a bug-preventing measure than a new concept, but it is also worth of implementing, in my humble opinion.

I agree these should be included. They are not major, but free up a lot of memory.

 

[Complex]

1. Religion - I really like the idea of having something similar to a civic board for religion, but how would that work when you have more than one religion? Would there just be multiple pages for all the religions, or would you just have one for the most influential one? Can you only change the "civics" when you control the holy city, or can any civ with that religion ultimately change the religion [which would cause a schism I'm guessing.]?

Well this has the potential to get a bit complicated but I think it makes sense best like this....You would control the religious civics for your state religion. You can change them no matter if you control the holy city or not however running religious civics contrary to those of the civ that DOES control the holy city would generate "religious unhappiness" and could lead to a split as I discussed in my earlier post. If the civ that controls the holy city is running a different religion, then you can run w/e civics you want with no penalty, however there should be an immediate (religious) unhappiness penalty on account of the holy city being in infidel hands.

2. Disease - would make for a much more realistic game, but I guess some of the issues would be the early expansion of some of the diseases which would make them ultimately die out before they're useful as weapons [I'm curious to see how this can be implemented with Bio Warfare ]. By that I mean like as something to diminish the populations of new civs or distant civs, like the Native Americans via Columbus and the other explorers. It could mostly be solved with game testing though I think, if the idea is ever implemented...

I hadn't even really considered the integration with Bio-warfare but it makes sense in a way. However, what happened with Columbus and the Native Americans was the result of something far more fundamental than the actual disease. Almost everyone knows that the Native Americans were especially susceptible to European diseases due to a lack of antibodies. What most people don't consider is why they lacked them. These antibodies developed in Europeans due to their close proximity with farm animals and livestock. Native Americans did not posses domesticated livestock as none of the common species were native to the Americas. Because Europeans co-existed with animals at such close ranges for nearly 5000 years by the time of Columbus they had exchanged 5000 years of germs and antibodies with them, including many of the diseases that decimated the Native Americans which had jumped from animals to humans millenia earlier. In Civ however, it seems highly likely that most civs would have at least one livestock resource and in any event I think it would be hard to factor such a condition into the code. New diseases & current diseases should still jump from civ to civ based on trade routes, contact with other civs, etc...

3. Unit Supply - Fantastic idea, would greatly decrease one sided wars, and would make it historically accurate. I like the idea of forts that Complex brought up. The only thing would be that if each fort created 20 , then everyone would build forts instead of farms and create super cities. Obviously, the would only be able to count for units. Other than that, Complex, you seemed to hammer out that issue pretty well.

Thank you and yes, about the forts I did intend that the 20 be for unit supply purposes only with none of it able to go over to the city. Actually it wouldn't really "provide" any food, rather the first twenty resident units on a tile ignore supply costs.

Not sure if any of these can be done or not.

- Make it so wooden naval units have to "port" in a city or in a natural harbor after so many turns or it will sink. Stuff like Work Boats and Galleys would require porting often, and Caravels and Galleons as well (would make island cities much more useful and is historically accurate). Steam and diesel ships would not need to port.

- Natural harbor terrain, which would be the same as a coastal tile but gives +1 more commerce and can port ships.

As mentioned, this could create issues for wooden ships trying to circumnavigate the globe.

Perhaps something like the fatigue mechanic I talked about in my supply wagon idea could be applied. A ship can go X turns before needing to port, for each turn it does not it suffers a cumulative -10% to it's odds for any combat it undertakes that turn. In addition, bring back an oldie from Civ III and throw in the chance to sink event for each turn after X w/o porting.

I don't think natural harbor should be required for porting however. Any coast should be sufficient. Historically, if a ship needed supplies (lumber, water, etc..) and could not dock at a real or "natural" harbor, they could still get to shore in tender boats and bring back supplies that way, it just took longer. Maybe include the natural harbor terrain and allow ships using the natural harbor to port in one turn but still be able to use regular coast at a cost of two turns? Needless to say, actual ports and harbors would only take one turn.

I agree, diesel and steam ships and beyond should not be required to port.

Also, the navigation line of units should be expanded by one more level and each promotion in the line should add one more turn to the initial X that determines the ships operating range.

Last thing: did you guys read my thread about New City Culture Levels?

More cultural levels sounds great to me!! Often a time I have wished a city would expand it's borders just one more space only to realize i have many thousand culture points to go lol... More levels would mean more frequent expansion, which would have to be tested and balanced but seems like it might be a cool idea.

Personally, I would vote for straight up political borders and ditch these POS cultural borders, but I think that would be asking a bit much from a mod. Just imagine firm borders that don't screw you out of a vital food resource cause the guy across the street built a cathedral. Imagine borders that could be adjusted during peace negotiations, or territory exchanged for techs/money. I'd also like to see forts apply at least one square of territory just for those hard to get to resources that you'd rather not invest in a city for.

 

[Complex]

They are there to represent the "civilizations" that have never been powerful in history but still existed and were periodically conquered. For example, modern countries like Bangladesh, Lithuania, Montenegro, Uzbekistan, Brunei, Switzerland, ETC. would be minor civilizations. Generally neutral nations, but throughout history have been kicked around or left alone.

Check your history books dude, the Swiss might be neutral now but they did their fair share of ass kicking back in the day and had one of the finest armies in Europe for a period of time.


Anyways, your idea sounds good, though I have no idea how to implement it or any of these other ideas lol...

Any thoughts?

 

[c0d5579]

You would control the religious civics for your state religion.

QFT.

Perhaps something like the fatigue mechanic I talked about in my supply wagon idea could be applied. A ship can go X turns before needing to port, for each turn it does not it suffers a cumulative -10% to it's odds for any combat it undertakes that turn. In addition, bring back an oldie from Civ III and throw in the chance to sink event for each turn after X w/o porting.

I don't think natural harbor should be required for porting however. Any coast should be sufficient. Historically, if a ship needed supplies (lumber, water, etc..) and could not dock at a real or "natural" harbor, they could still get to shore in tender boats and bring back supplies that way, it just took longer. Maybe include the natural harbor terrain and allow ships using the natural harbor to port in one turn but still be able to use regular coast at a cost of two turns?

Natural harbor should give some sort of commerce bonus; however, as you point out, it's not that hard to beach and careen a ship even in the absence of a natural harbor. Heck, both Greek galleys and Norse longships were designed to be run aground and maintained pretty much anywhere. You didn't really run into the requirement for dedicated naval facilities until RoM-equivalent Grand War technology levels, where ships would develop structural problems if not supported while being maintained.

For that matter, you could just as easily build a fleet-tender ship type that does much the same as your proposed supply wagons (an idea I don't totally agree with, incidentally, but for reasons I haven't fully developed yet). After all, British ships of the line could spend literally years at sea without an extended docking period, provided they could get fresh food and water out to the ships.

More cultural levels sounds great to me!! Often a time I have wished a city would expand it's borders just one more space only to realize i have many thousand culture points to go lol... More levels would mean more frequent expansion, which would have to be tested and balanced but seems like it might be a cool idea.

Personally, I would vote for straight up political borders and ditch these POS cultural borders, but I think that would asking a bit much from a mod. Just imagine firm borders that don't screw you out of a vital food resource cause the guy across the street built a cathedral. Imagine borders that could be adjusted during peace negotiations, or territory exchanged for techs/money. I'd also like to see forts apply at least one square of territory just for those hard to get to resources that you'd rather not invest in a city for.

Might just be me, but it does seem like my borders eventually stabilize in-game around rivers. I admit I haven't evaluated the new culture level suggestions, but I'll take a look at them tomorrow, since my input was requested.

Oh yeah, minor suggestion for buildings and stuff - Forced Labor Camp. Behaves a lot like Slave Market, only with no bonus gold (the Soviet camps were hideous economically). Requires that you be running one of the modern totalitarian civics (Fascism, Communism, can't remember any of the others off the top of my head). Should be able to steal graphics from Asio^3's WW2 mod.

 

[jm_dracolich]

Well this has the potential to get a bit complicated but I think it makes sense best like this....You would control the religious civics for your state religion. You can change them no matter if you control the holy city or not however running religious civics contrary to those of the civ that DOES control the holy city would generate "religious unhappiness" and could lead to a split as I discussed in my earlier post. If the civ that controls the holy city is running a different religion, then you can run w/e civics you want with no penalty, however there should be an immediate (religious) unhappiness penalty on account of the holy city being in infidel hands.

That seems like it could work, and it's a good idea to just use the state religion. It simplifies things a lot. However, what happens when you lose your state religion when you take Secular/Atheist [or if you go back to Folklore for whatever reason]? Do you lose the ability to control and benefit from religious civics? That would greatly lower the usefulness of the religious-less civics, so perhaps you can only alter the religion that you had right when you switched to no religion? Or maybe it freezes when you take no religion. I don't know, something to throw around.

I hadn't even really considered the integration with Bio-warfare but it makes sense in a way. However, what happened with Columbus and the Native Americans was the result of something far more fundamental than the actual disease. Almost everyone knows that the Native Americans were especially susceptible to European diseases due to a lack of antibodies. What most people don't consider is why they lacked them. These antibodies developed in Europeans due to their close proximity with farm animals and livestock. Native Americans did not posses domesticated livestock as none of the common species were native to the Americas. Because Europeans co-existed with animals at such close ranges for nearly 5000 years by the time of Columbus and had exchanged 5000 years of germs and antibodies with them, including many of the diseases that decimated the Native Americans which jumped from animals to humans. In Civ however, it seems almost highly likely that most civs would have at least one livestock resource and in any event I think it would be hard to factor such a condition into the code. New diseases & current diseases should still jump from civ to civ based on trade routes, contact with other civs, etc...

You're right, I hadn't thought of that point. But maybe for the sake of game mechanics, each culture gets a different disease, or something along those lines, based on where in the world they originated. That way it still has a similar effect.

And on a similar note, I would like to see something done about the new world on Terra maps, where the civs on the new world seem to be just as advanced as the civs in the old world. That doesn't seem feasible, but hey, I'm just looking for easy conquest....

Personally, I would vote for straight up political borders and ditch these POS cultural borders, but I think that would asking a bit much from a mod. Just imagine firm borders that don't screw you out of a vital food resource cause the guy across the street built a cathedral. Imagine borders that could be adjusted during peace negotiations, or territory exchanged for techs/money. I'd also like to see forts apply at least one square of territory just for those hard to get to resources that you'd rather not invest in a city for.

Finally someone says something about that. I would much prefer to be able to control my own borders via diplomacy or other means. Granted, I do like the mechanisms of cultural boundaries [mostly], but I definitely would like to see political boundaries. I get tired of owning an entire area except for that one random grassland plot on the coast that hasn't entered my cultural reach yet... Unfortunately, I think that's a bit much for a mod, but hopefully not too much for Civ V!

 

[jm_dracolich]

Check your history books dude, the Swiss might be neutral now but they did their fair share of ass kicking back in the day and had one of the finest armies in Europe for a period of time.

I think he means more like civilizations that act like civilizations, but aren't actually in the game. Sort of like the independents from RFC. That would be a nice addition, because it would add more people to the map and keep one civ from expanding too far too early.

Of course, that's what I think you meant, Heb.

 

[Big Heb]

I think he means more like civilizations that act like civilizations, but aren't actually in the game. Sort of like the independents from RFC. That would be a nice addition, because it would add more people to the map and keep one civ from expanding too far too early.

Of course, that's what I think you meant, Heb.

Precisely. I borrowed the idea from RFC.

Here's a list of things a minor civilization can and can't do.

CAN:
- Produce military and nonmilitary units.
- Found a religion. (Israel?)
- Convert to a religion.
- Build buildings, national wonders and world wonders.
- Change civics.
- Build improvements and collect resources.
- Make defensive pacts.
- Gain culture and expand cultural boundaries (could make for problems for major civs if on an isthmus).

CAN'T:
- Declare war (not strong enough, but you can declare war on them (Georgia/Russia))
- Make trade agreements.
- Make open borders agreements.
- Become or have vassals. (Then they all would be vassalized and it would defeat their purpose of being buffers and independent flavor.)
- Make permanent alliances.
- Build more cities.
- Expand into major civilizations. (Debatable)
- Have leader traits and unique units.

They should be relatively common (more so than barbarian cities) and should spawn in logical locations (e.g. not in the middle of tundra or oasis/river-less desert). Rather than being a unified civilization like the barbarians, the minor civilizations (or independents if that is a better term) are all just one city and are all completely independent of each other. Also just like RFC.

Also, to further take from RFC, something in the Revolution mod could be modded in so that when a major civilization falls into disarray only the capital will remain in that civilization's control and the rest of the cities will become minor civilizations/independents.

 

[Complex]

That seems like it could work, and it's a good idea to just use the state religion. It simplifies things a lot. However, what happens when you lose your state religion when you take Secular/Atheist [or if you go back to Folklore for whatever reason]? Do you lose the ability to control and benefit from religious civics? That would greatly lower the usefulness of the religious-less civics, so perhaps you can only alter the religion that you had right when you switched to no religion? Or maybe it freezes when you take no religion. I don't know, something to throw around.

That is a good point. To be honest, from a historical perspective it makes the most sense to lock the religious civics at the last point before the society went secular. I could explain fully why this makes the most sense, however I would have to write you a small paper to do so lol. Suffice it to say, that there have been very few truly secular societies when compared to the number of civilizations that have existed throughout history. Of those that have existed, they almost without exception maintain the "values" that are "created" by the dominant belief system(s) amongst their people. The words in quotes are the concepts that would be difficult to succinctly explain, but basically it comes down to the concept that although leaders, governments, and beliefs change, cultural traits and society-wide behaviors rarely change. Instead, what you find is that the changes that are most easily adapted and absorbed into existing behaviors are the ones most likely to stick around while conflicting ones tend to fade quickly.

A great example of this is the Christian Eucharist. There were a myriad of cult/minor religious movements in Rome during the rise of Christianity, however they all fell by the wayside, whereas Christianity thrived. Though there are many reasons, the Eucharist in particular demonstrates how like concepts adapt well. It was already established practice in Roman society to remember the dead by going to their grave/tomb and having a meal there amongst the dead. Hence, the idea of a communal meal in remembrance of a dead man was not a far stretch for most people to make and made sense to incoming converts. Although it would seem simple to say that it was just Constantine's decision to legalize Christianity that caused it to spread, it had to get to the point where it was large enough for the Roman emperor to take notice. From here I could go on to point out other commonalities between Roman culture and Christian theology that helped it spread and more importantly differences between Roman culture and Jewish theology that caused it to never catch on in Rome like Christianity did but I promised I wouldn't write a paper and I've already probably typed more than anyone wanted to read (sorry I can't help it sometimes)


Annnnnnyways, the point being that religion is generally so subconsciously and ubiquitously present in a society that changing the laws, becoming a secular society, even flat out banning religion all fail to remove the values and core beliefs ingrained over the course of countless generations. That said, should your civ adopt secular/atheist, freeze the religious civics in their current state and lock them until a state religion is opened again.

 

[jm_dracolich]

Precisely. I borrowed the idea from RFC.

Here's a list of things a minor civilization can and can't do.

CAN:
- Produce military and nonmilitary units.
- Found a religion. (Israel?)
- Convert to a religion.
- Build buildings, national wonders and world wonders.
- Change civics.
- Build improvements and collect resources.
- Make defensive pacts.
- Gain culture and expand cultural boundaries (could make for problems for major civs if on an isthmus).

CAN'T:
- Declare war (not strong enough, but you can declare war on them (Georgia/Russia))
- Make trade agreements.
- Make open borders agreements.
- Become or have vassals. (Then they all would be vassalized and it would defeat their purpose of being buffers and independent flavor.)
- Make permanent alliances.
- Build more cities.
- Expand into major civilizations. (Debatable)
- Have leader traits and unique units.

They should be relatively common (more so than barbarian cities) and should spawn in logical locations (e.g. not in the middle of tundra or oasis/river-less desert). Rather than being on unified body like the barbarians, the minor civilizations (or independents if that is a better term) are all just one city and

Also, to further take from RFC, something in the Revolution mod could be modded in so that when a major civilization falls into disarray only the capital will remain in that civilization's control and the rest of the cities will become minor civilizations/independents.

Hmmm I agree with most of those things. I'm curious as to how minor civs would conduct diplomacy for defensive pacts though, since they are not an actual civilization and do not have leaderheads [talking from a technical standpoint more than a historical one.] But if that could be worked out then that's great. Maybe there could be a set of predetermined minor civs with flags to represent them.

I don't think they should be able to expand into a major civilization. There would still be the civs that actually do become the major civs. But I do think that they should be able to conquer other cities and expand. Possibly only barbarian cities though, or a city that once belonged to them. Maybe. Just a thought. That would make them strong enough to not be taken over immediately. Of course, not too many cities to become an empire...

 

[jm_dracolich]

That is a good point. To be honest, from a historical perspective it makes the most sense to lock the religious civics at the last point before the society went secular. I could explain fully why this makes the most sense, however I would have to write you a small paper to do so lol. Suffice it to say, that there have been very few truly secular societies when compared to the number of civilizations that have existed throughout history. Of those that have existed, they almost without exception maintain the "values" that are "created" by the dominant belief system(s) amongst their people. The words in quotes are the concepts that would be difficult to succinctly explain, but basically it comes down to the concept that although leaders, governments, and beliefs change, cultural traits and society-wide behaviors rarely change. Instead, what you find is that the changes that are most easily adapted and absorbed into existing behaviors are the ones most likely to stick around while conflicting ones tend to fade quickly.

A great example of this is the Christian Eucharist. There were a myriad of cult/minor religious movements in Rome during the rise of Christianity, however they all fell by the wayside, whereas Christianity thrived. Though there are many reasons, the Eucharist in particular demonstrates how like concepts adapt well. It was already established practice in Roman society to remember the dead by going to their grave/tomb and having a meal there amongst the dead. Hence, the idea of a communal meal in remembrance of a dead man was not a far stretch for most people to make and made sense to incoming converts. Although it would seem simple to say that it was just Constantine's decision to legalize Christianity that caused it to spread, it had to get to the point where it was large enough for the Roman emperor to take notice. From here I could go on to point out other commonalities between Roman culture and Christian theology that helped it spread and more importantly differences between Roman culture and Jewish theology that caused it to never catch on in Rome like Christianity did but I promised I wouldn't write a paper and I've already probably typed more than anyone wanted to read (sorry I can't help it sometimes)


Annnnnnyways, the point being that religion is generally so subconsciously and ubiquitously present in a society that changing the laws, becoming a secular society, even flat out banning religion all fail to remove the values and core beliefs ingrained over the course of countless generations. That said, should your civ adopt secular/atheist, freeze the religious civics in their current state and lock them until a state religion is opened again.

Excellent! I loved reading that. That sort of thing is what I live for, being a history/theology major and all, and the reason I play Civ in the first place haha.

But maybe for that reason, the religion altering could be expanded to encompass culture too [I think someone brought that up before], or at least one of the columns on the religion board could be "culture", and could be tweaked even after taking Secular. That would make for a slight change in religion even after taking no religion, and would explain the shift from Lutheran and Puritan beliefs to Evangelist and Fundamentalist beliefs in America, even after the separation of church and state.

 

[Big Heb]

Perhaps under Secular and Atheist the religious civics will randomly change, perhaps tying it to the Revolution mod?

This credit should go entirely to Rone, who made this list. This was suggested in the Civic Mini-Mod thread as a revamp of the civics Religion Column. However, we stuck to a more socio-political model that remains largely untouched in RoM 2.5 beta to this day. These civic ideas are mostly theological and I think fit the bill exactly for the idea of cultural "religious civics." And I am sure Rone put a lot of time into making these so they would be great to take a look at. Take note mostly of the names and the descriptions rather than the proposed effects.

Folk -- starting civic. Tends to be animistic, nature-oriented, oral tradition (storytelling). Fairly simple. No upkeep.
Mystic/Reform -- Tends to enhance personal renewal, increases personal happiness. (Happiness bonuses to population) Low upkeep.
Orthodox -- Tends to enhance tradition. Discovered with Code of Laws (similar to Organized Religion). Low upkeep (maybe medium)
Structured -- Tends to utilize pomp and ceremony. Lavish construction of religious buildings (perhaps -25% cost of building temples and monastary). Medium upkeep.
Evangelical -- Tends to be missionary-focused (spread religion/growth). Missionary units are cheaper to build.
Ecumenical -- Tends to be social reform focused. (Health bonuses to population). Perhaps Health increasing buildings can be built at discount (like aqueduct or healer's hut or doctor's offices).
Philosophical -- Tends to focus on education. Discovered with education (Reseach bonuses to population).
Dogmatic -- Tends to focus on intolerance of other religions. Inquisitor units are cheaper to build. High upkeep.
Syncretistic -- Tends to focus on tolerance of other religions. Discovered with Liberalism. Happiness bonuses per non-state religion.

 

[jm_dracolich]

Perhaps under Secular and Atheist the religious civics will randomly change, perhaps tying it to the Revolution mod?

This credit should go entirely to Rone, who made this list. This was suggested in the Civic Mini-Mod thread as a revamp of the civics Religion Column. However, we stuck to a more socio-political model that remains largely untouched in RoM 2.5 beta to this day. These civic ideas are mostly theological and I think fit the bill exactly for the idea of cultural "religious civics." And I am sure Rone put a lot of time into making these so they would be great to take a look at. Take note mostly of the names and the descriptions rather than the proposed effects.

Hmmm what do you mean by randomly change?

But I like those ideas for religious civics. Obviously, some of them were used for 2.5, and worked great.
Maybe the other ones could be implemented into the new religion civic board.

Of course the new board would need columns like the normal civic board.
But I have no ideas, nor do I really think it needs to be discussed at length at the moment. But if anyone has ideas, go ahead and say 'em.

 

[Big Heb]

If we want to fill an entire set of columns with civics, I think it should be expanded to Cultural Civics rather than just religious. Religion could be one of the columns. The civics we have now could be called the Socio-Political Civics.

The Cultural Civics would have less meaningful effects than the Socio-Political Civics and are mainly for flavor, but they will have some effect on war, building costs, commerce, and Revolution.

Here are some random ideas for civic columns.

Art - The style of art painted or sculpted at the time. The art generally reflects upon the peoples' attitudes toward the world at the time. It also includes architecture.
Examples:
- Ancient (default) - Art with basic interpretation of nature.
- Religious (available w/ Polytheism) - Art with emphasis on religion.
- Classical (available w/ Aesthetics) - Art with emphasis on human perfection.
- Geometric (available w/ Mathematics) - Art with emphasis on geometrical shapes and patterns. Examples are mosaics and Islamic art.
- Renaissance (available w/ Perspective or Oil Painting) - Art with emphasis on reviving the classics and building upon them in new ways.
- Romanticism (available w/ Free Artistry) - Art with emphasis on emotion and imagination. Contrasted with Realism.
- Realism (available w/ Realism) - Art with emphasis on depicting things exactly how they are in nature.
- Modernism (available w/ Radio) - Art with emphasis on rejecting traditional art and mixing and using new artistic ideas.

Philosophy - The type of social philosophy accepted at that time. It has some overlapping with the Society civic column, but that column deals more with the social structures while this deals with social outlook on life.
- Apathetic (default) - The people are not concerned with any social outlook on life as they are too busy trying to survive or dare not think of it or else they would anger their gods.
- Statism (available w/ Slavery) - Dominant philosophy is the belief that all people and morals are subordinate to the state. Examples are Chinese Legalism, French nationalism, and the more modern Fascism.
- Rationalism (available w/ Aesthetics) - Dominant philosophy is the belief in using logic and reason when looking at social outlook. There is little use of emotion, creativity and empathy and only truth.
- Theological (available w/ Theology) - Dominant philosophy is the belief that truth and morals come largely or exclusively from religion.
- Pacifism (available w/ Philosophy) - Dominant philosophy is the belief that war and conflict are morally wrong and that humans should try to achieve peace in society and in their own lives.
- Puritanism (available w/ Fundamentalism) - Dominant philosophy is the strict belief in following a specific moral code with intolerance and social ostracism toward people who break the code.
- Individualism (available w/ Liberalism) - Dominant philosophy is the belief that individuals should be allowed to live their lives as they see fit with little regard to society or community. Examples are classical liberal philosophy, Social Darwinism, and Objectivism.
- Collectivism (available w/ Social Contract) - Dominant philosophy is the belief that helping society as a whole should rule over individuals' personal decisions. Examples are nationalism, Marxism and progressivism.

 

[jm_dracolich]

Those are good ones. I like that it's been expanded to encompass culture, but I think that its main focus should still be religion, because the whole idea was to expand the religion mechanism. Of course, those work, and I like those. I especially like the philosophy one. It could represent what the religion [or lack thereof early in the game] teaches or how its followers think.

 

[jm_dracolich]

Well here are some of my ideas for the columns. I don't know how to fill them as of yet, so I'll just put the topics up and go from there.

-Philosophy [like what Big Heb said]
-Culture [art and music, maybe split into two categories]
-Expansion/Spreading/Conversion [how the religion moves around the world and gains converts]
-Tolerance/Superiority [how well the religion deals with other religions and how it views them]
-Deities [druids, polytheistic, monotheistic, dualism, trinity, none]
-Society [how the religion thinks society should work]
-Universe [what happens when you die, what else is out there]

Those last four fall under philosophy technically, but they can be fleshed out a bit more.

 

[Complex]

I like cultural civics too, but I also think they should be separate. As for religion, here is what I have come up with after some thinking.

#1 - There is a "Master" religion civic called Identity, this controls the overall disposition and outlook of your civilization toward religion.

Atheist: This is enabled by default. Represents the complete absence of all organized religion. Enabling this civic locks all other religious civics.

**** A note on atheist --- Sounds unfair, but in reality there is no way to give religious based modifiers to an atheist society, but I don't feel that this means you can't give bonuses to those that do pursue religion. Honestly, there is not a single society in the history of organized human civilization that I can recall that was actually a legitimately atheist society. Even in cases of religions being outlawed, people don't stop believing, they just stop outwardly practicing. For those looking to run a non-religious civ, see secular below.

Secluded: This represents a civilization whose religious views look only inward and care nothing for outsiders. Xenophobic & hateful of others, but non aggressive and content to leave alone and be left alone. This is available upon establishing your first religion, the rest are researched.
Evangelical: This represents a civilization whose ultimate religious goal is the conversion of every person and spreading it's faith to every corner of the globe, for better or worse.
Intolerant: This represents a civ completely closed off to other beliefs and outwardly hostile to non-believers.
Pious: This represents a civ in which religion is seen as a tool for doing good and each man humbles himself to his faith in the name of serving the greater good, even gladly sacrificing their own health or happiness to do so.
Secular: This represents a civ that takes a hands off approach to religion. The state is seen as the ultimate authority on all matters and the church (if any exists) has no legal powers.

**** A note on secular. I figure the easiest way to answer your earlier question is allow to religion to be completely organic and evolve into whatever you want it to be. That said, the possibility of a society going through a secular phase cannot be ruled out. Therefore, better to build around it than ignore it. To do this, I propose that with secular enabled choices in the remaining religious civics will be limited to choices that are more compatible with secularism. Each category below has choices that are allowed with Secular. Obviously any bonuses assigned to those should be synergistic with w/e bonuses are assigned to secular itself.


After Identity, the first sub-category is Structure. At what level is the faith organized?
Individual: Enabled by default, allowed with secular. Each person is responsible for their own faith. People may or may not go to central worship locations but it is a private affair with no public services. Most worship is done at home or away from others.
Family: Allowed with secular. Extended families form clans, and clans group together to form tribes. Religious education and worship is mostly handled within the family with none to some intercession from a religious body.
Local: Religion is centered around the community. A community has it's parish/district/temple/etc.. and it is the center of all religious activity. The leader of the local religious establishment is ultimately responsible for all matters of faith in the community and have discretion over their parishioners.
Regional: Like local, except that groups of communities are organized into regions, each with it's own central leadership. The regional leader is the final authority in his region on religious matters.
Centralized: Control is asserted through a centralized structure, with authority delegated out to several levels of clergy below an executive authority. There are no regional or national boundaries that limit the central authority.

Next category is Message. This category is different because all options are enabled upon founding your first religion. This is meant to essentially sum up the core meaning of your religion in a single concept. Bonuses for this should be minor at best since no research is required. Since these are meant to really signify the ingrained behaviors and values I was talking about earlier, all are allowed under secular.

Improvement: Represents a faith based around self improvement and happiness. Minor happiness bonuses and/or minor % to improvement or building speed.
Salvation: Represents a faith based around the idea of forgiveness and redemption. Minor production or GP % bonus.
Knowledge: Represents a faith based on the pursuit of knowledge. Minor science or commerce bonus.
Glory: Represents a faith based on conquest and victory over adversity. Minor military unit production or great general emergence%
Tradition: Represents a faith based on honoring the past and that which is established. Minor bonuses to religious buildings, monuments, cetain wonders.


Next category is Belief System. This describes what the people worship.

Tribal: Enabled by default. Allowed with Secular. This represents basic, loosely defined mysticism. No creator god.
Druidism / Nature Worship: Allowed with Secular. Represents a faith based around the worship of the Earth or it's various components as spiritual or divine. No creator god.
Ancestor Worship: Allowed with Secular. Represents a faith based on the reverence of one's ancestor's and living one's life in honor of their memory. No creator god.
Polytheistic: Worship of a pantheon of gods/goddesses.
Monotheism: Worship of a single god.

Next is Influence. This attempts to define how the religion interacts with society as a whole.

Oral Tradition: Enabled by default. Allowed with secular. This shows the earliest and most basic form of religious influence, with stories/legends being the primary source of information relayed by word of mouth over the years.
State Church: Religion is controlled and funded by the state, but the church remains an organization within a larger government.
Free Church: Allowed with Secular. Religion is privately controlled and funded.
Theocracy: Not only is religion controlled and funded by the state, it IS the state. Civil government does not exist, the church is the law.
Rational: Allowed with secular. Religion is viewed as a guide and counselor but not always to be taken literally. People in this model prefer science and logic when a firm answer is required.

Finally, last category deals with Afterlife
Mystical: Enabled by default, allowed with Secular. Represents a very basic and primitive concept of life and death.
Reunion: Allowed with secular. Represents a concept of becoming one with the earth and/or one's maker.
Reincarnation: Represents the concept of rebirth either indefinitely or finitely defined by some criteria.
Spiritual: Allowed with secular. Represents the idea of life after death but with no organized afterlife. Dead people come back as spirits and those spirits inhabit the earth along with the living.
Paradise: The traditional "heaven" if you will.



Anyways, that's all I got for now, it's reallllllllly late so i'm sry for any spelling errors or crap grammar, my internal "give a crap" switch got stuck off awhile ago

 

[jm_dracolich]

Hahah I was actually working on this just now and I came up with a lot of things similar to what you had. Yours is a little more in depth though... I'm tired and my brain just doesn't want to work.

Here are some of my ideas for the columns. I don't know how to fill them as of yet, so I'll just put the topics up and go from there.

-Philosophy [like what Big Heb said]

-Culture [art and music, maybe split into two categories]

-Conversion/Mythos [how the religion gains converts, spreads, and records itself]
- Oral Traditition
- Written Epics/Mythology
- Scripture
- ?? [anything else]

-Tolerance/Superiority [how well the religion deals with other religions and how it views them]
- Evangelism
- Superior
- Passive
- ??

-Deities [who or what is the higher power]
- Nature/Druids
- Pantheon
- Dualism
- Monotheism
- Trinity
- None
- The Way

-Society [how the religion thinks society should work]
- Caste
- Divine Rule
- ??

-Salvation [what happens when you die, how to be saved]
- Personal Works
- Belief
- Birth
- Nirvana
- ?? [running out of ideas at 1 in the morning.... will edit tomorrow...]

Those last four fall under philosophy technically, but they can be fleshed out a bit more.

I shall finish tomorrow
Hopefully with descriptions of each, if anyone wants them.

 

[jm_dracolich]

I like cultural civics too, but I also think they should be separate. As for religion, here is what I have come up with after some thinking.

#1 - There is a "Master" religion civic called Identity, this controls the overall disposition and outlook of your civilization toward religion.

Atheist: This is enabled by default. Represents the complete absence of all organized religion. Enabling this civic locks all other religious civics.

**** A note on atheist --- Sounds unfair, but in reality there is no way to give religious based modifiers to an atheist society, but I don't feel that this means you can't give bonuses to those that do pursue religion. Honestly, there is not a single society in the history of organized human civilization that I can recall that was actually a legitimately atheist society. Even in cases of religions being outlawed, people don't stop believing, they just stop outwardly practicing. For those looking to run a non-religious civ, see secular below.

Secluded: This represents a civilization whose religious views look only inward and care nothing for outsiders. Xenophobic & hateful of others, but non aggressive and content to leave alone and be left alone. This is available upon establishing your first religion, the rest are researched.
Evangelical: This represents a civilization whose ultimate religious goal is the conversion of every person and spreading it's faith to every corner of the globe, for better or worse.
Intolerant: This represents a civ completely closed off to other beliefs and outwardly hostile to non-believers.
Pious: This represents a civ in which religion is seen as a tool for doing good and each man humbles himself to his faith in the name of serving the greater good, even gladly sacrificing their own health or happiness to do so.
Secular: This represents a civ that takes a hands off approach to religion. The state is seen as the ultimate authority on all matters and the church (if any exists) has no legal powers.

**** A note on secular. I figure the easiest way to answer your earlier question is allow to religion to be completely organic and evolve into whatever you want it to be. That said, the possibility of a society going through a secular phase cannot be ruled out. Therefore, better to build around it than ignore it. To do this, I propose that with secular enabled choices in the remaining religious civics will be limited to choices that are more compatible with secularism. Each category below has choices that are allowed with Secular. Obviously any bonuses assigned to those should be synergistic with w/e bonuses are assigned to secular itself.

Hmm I guess this raises the ultimate question of what this new civic option is essentially. Is it the civilizations view on the religion, and therefore an ultimate expansion of the religion civic option? Or is it the religions view on civilization, where you control the beliefs of the religion independent and regardless of the civilization? I guess a simpler way to put it is are we looking at it through the eyes of civilization at religion, or through the eyes of religion at civilization? I think it should be the second one, where we focus more on what the religion views as right and correct.

Anyway, on with my confusing rant... that would mean that it doesn't have much to do with the state, and more to do with the church. So as much as I like the idea of Identity, I have to say that it wouldn't work as a modifier of religion, especially since no religion is technically atheist. But the Identity modifier would actually come from the religion civic column in the normal civics [folklore, prophets, divine cult, etc...] . So I like the idea, it's just already there.

As for how to deal with Atheist and Secular, since they're already on the civic board, I think that's a great idea to only limit the religion to a few civics, or none at all. And then Identity can become another column equal to Structure, Message, and so on.... since those seem to coincide pretty much with my idea of tolerance/superiority.

After Identity, the first sub-category is Structure. At what level is the faith organized?
Individual: Enabled by default, allowed with secular. Each person is responsible for their own faith. People may or may not go to central worship locations but it is a private affair with no public services. Most worship is done at home or away from others.
Family: Allowed with secular. Extended families form clans, and clans group together to form tribes. Religious education and worship is mostly handled within the family with none to some intercession from a religious body.
Local: Religion is centered around the community. A community has it's parish/district/temple/etc.. and it is the center of all religious activity. The leader of the local religious establishment is ultimately responsible for all matters of faith in the community and have discretion over their parishioners.
Regional: Like local, except that groups of communities are organized into regions, each with it's own central leadership. The regional leader is the final authority in his region on religious matters.
Centralized: Control is asserted through a centralized structure, with authority delegated out to several levels of clergy below an executive authority. There are no regional or national boundaries that limit the central authority.

Great ideas! I agree with all of them. I would have more to say, but it's late...

Next category is Message. This category is different because all options are enabled upon founding your first religion. This is meant to essentially sum up the core meaning of your religion in a single concept. Bonuses for this should be minor at best since no research is required. Since these are meant to really signify the ingrained behaviors and values I was talking about earlier, all are allowed under secular.

Improvement: Represents a faith based around self improvement and happiness. Minor happiness bonuses and/or minor % to improvement or building speed.
Salvation: Represents a faith based around the idea of forgiveness and redemption. Minor production or GP % bonus.
Knowledge: Represents a faith based on the pursuit of knowledge. Minor science or commerce bonus.
Glory: Represents a faith based on conquest and victory over adversity. Minor military unit production or great general emergence%
Tradition: Represents a faith based on honoring the past and that which is established. Minor bonuses to religious buildings, monuments, cetain wonders.

This is probably the best and most important one, even though it's the least impactful one. This makes for an easy shift to whatever you need at the time, and eliminates the biased religions [Confucianism with millions of gold over Nagualism with only a few culture].

Next category is Belief System. This describes what the people worship.

Tribal: Enabled by default. Allowed with Secular. This represents basic, loosely defined mysticism. No creator god.
Druidism / Nature Worship: Allowed with Secular. Represents a faith based around the worship of the Earth or it's various components as spiritual or divine, perhaps even as deities. No creator god.
Ancestor Worship: Allowed with Secular. Represents a faith based on the reverence of one's ancestor's and living one's life in honor of their memory. No creator god.
Polytheistic: Worship of a pantheon of gods/goddesses.
Monotheism: Worship of a single god.

Great ones, has a lot of culture potential. Possibly add a few more. Or not.

Next is Influence. This attempts to define how the religion interacts with society as a whole.

Oral Tradition: Enabled by default. Allowed with secular. This shows the earliest and most basic form of religious influence, with stories/legends being the primary source of information relayed by word of mouth over the years.
State Church: Religion is controlled and funded by the state, but the church remains an organization within a larger government.
Free Church: Religion is privately controlled and funded.
Theocracy: Not only is religion controlled and funded by the state, it IS the state. Civil government does not exist, the church is the law.
Rational: Allowed with secular. Religion is viewed as a guide and counselor but not always to be taken literally. People in this model prefer science and logic when a firm answer is required.

This seems to mimic the religion column of the normal civics. So it's probably not necessary, but some of them, like oral tradition and rational could be placed elsewhere, like into my mythos category?

Finally, last category deals with Afterlife
Mystical: Enabled by default, allowed with Secular. Represents a very basic and primitive concept of life and death.
Reunion: Allowed with secular. Represents a concept of becoming one with the earth and/or one's maker.
Reincarnation: Represents the concept of rebirth either indefinitely or finitely defined by some criteria.
Spiritual: Allowed with secular. Represents the idea of life after death but with no organized afterlife. Dead people come back as spirits and those spirits inhabit the earth along with the living.
Paradise: The traditional "heaven" if you will.

And a final flare to the religions. Great job thinking all those up! Kudos.
I sure hope Zap considers these.

 

[tomekpe]

The idea with fort producing food for units is very, very good. You build them at your borders to keep "limes" safe.

This is my proposition about transfer food from city to city.

I don't like micromanage a lot. (This is a reason why I don't like Colonization very - enormous micromanage stuff which is nice at start, but finally is very boring.)

My proposition is to link food transfer with trade routes (which is in my opinion historical accuracy - strong trade made transfer food possible)

You should have button in every city screen to set how many slices you to want to export/import.

Maximum level of export/import slices will be related to trade points.
Example:

In city A you have 2 coins from national trade routes, so you can export/import 2 slices.
In city B you have 3 coins, so you can export/import 3 slices.
In city C (capital) you have 5 coins.

So... you set city A to export 2 slices and city B to export 3 slices.
Now you have 5 slices to import to cities trade linked with them. So you can import them to capital.
If you don't set them food is not wasted but back to home cities (so you don't need look at trade points every turn).

You don't have to micromanage every "food trade". It is automatic like trade routes. Also in beginning your trade roads are weak, so you cannot exploit food trading to make 1 mega huge capital city.

Also as your cities natural growing there will be option to import/export more slices because of more trade routes.

What do you think about?