[GS] Why nothing about earthquakes (and fracking)?

[acluewithout]

It wouldn’t be hard to give earthquakes a gameplay benefit. Maybe a 10 turn production bonus while you rebuild. Or tiles grant faith or culture or science. I think maybe they just hadn’t got their yet.

 

[Deggial]

Earthquakes could get some artificial benefits (some might call them “gamey” ) though:
They could create new mining ressources like copper, diamonds, iron, ect. ... or gold as completely new ressource (add it to the main game already! )

As more realistic benefit, they could create lakes/oases where initially was no source of fresh water and add suitable settling locations (or improve existing cities).

Regarding their predictable locations: As others mentioned already, continents (and their boarders) are in the game and perfectly valid earthquakes locations.

 

[Inhalaattori]

I personally would like to see them in game in one form or another. I mean players could always turn them off or use option that makes them really rare. Or they should at least make a scenario where there are tsunamis, earthquakes etc.

I would also like to see pandemics. And actually it seems thats what we have in "The Black Death" scenario. Sounds very interesting. I think its important to remember that "black death" actually did lead to renaissance and age of prosperity in Europe. It would be cool that during dark age there would be greater possibility of black death or other pandemic. At the moment dark ages are not really dark enough IMO.

 

[acluewithout]

I personally would like to see them in game in one form or another. I mean players could always turn them off or use option that makes them really rare. Or they should at least make a scenario where there are tsunamis, earthquakes etc.

I would also like to see pandemics. And actually it seems thats what we have in "The Black Death" scenario. Sounds very interesting. I think its important to remember that "black death" actually did lead to renaissance and age of prosperity in Europe. It would be cool that during dark age there would be greater possibility of black death or other pandemic. At the moment dark ages are not really dark enough IMO.

If we’re going to have disaster, then yes we should earthquakes. The animation would look awesome. I don’t think a buff would be that hard to figure out. Era score. Culture. Honestly. It’s not that hard to find something that would be okay.

I’m guessing we’re not going to get forest fires either.

Honestly. I don’t have a problem with disasters, but other than the climate change aspect I’m not really all that excited about it. To be clear, I am excited about the expansion - it’s just the disaster bit (outside of climate change) is not that interesting.

Honestly, Volcanos feel a bit silly. But it’s cool. I’m not complaining. (Hang on. I am complaining... er, yes, well, you know what I mean.)

 

[Inhalaattori]

I dont understand the idea that natural disasters are so horrible if all Civs would suffers from them and there would be ways to prevent them or make them less harmful. In real life countries like Japan have developed ways to prevent bad damage from earthquakes. Also because earthquakes are more common in certain parts of the world players could avoid settling those places if they so choose. I mean we have barbarians in Civ VI. It wouldnt really be much different from them.

I think one issue is that some people would just reload if purely negative things happen to them. So game makers want to always give some type of reward also, but I personally dont feel its necessary.

 

[Uberfrog]

I dont understand the idea that natural disasters are so horrible if all Civs would suffers from them and there would be ways to prevent them or make them less harmful. In real life countries like Japan have developed ways to prevent bad damage from earthquakes. Also because earthquakes are more common in certain parts of the world players could avoid settling those places if they so choose. I mean we have barbarians in Civ VI. It wouldnt really be much different from them.

I think one issue is that some people would just reload if purely negative things happen to them. So game makers want to always give some type of reward also, but I personally dont feel its necessary.

The idea behind Gathering Storm is to make the natural disasters a part of the decision making process, and not just an arbitrary random event as in Civ IV Beyond the Sword. You choose to settle the floodplain or the land around the volcano to reap the benefits, and suffer or manage the occasional disaster as a tradeoff.

Earthquakes have the problem of a) not being tied to a meaningful feature on the map (continental boundaries exist, but there’s nothing special about settling on the boundary itself), and thus b) not having a good enough tradeoff to make the danger anything more than a nuisance.

 

[Victoria]

there’s nothing special about settling on the boundary itself)

So you never think “ah mountains, great, I will settle there for powerful campus adjacency.”?

 

[Uberfrog]

So you never think “ah mountains, great, I will settle there for powerful campus adjacency.”?

I suppose there is that

 

[KnightModern]

The idea behind Gathering Storm is to make the natural disasters a part of the decision making process, and not just an arbitrary random event as in Civ IV Beyond the Sword. You choose to settle the floodplain or the land around the volcano to reap the benefits, and suffer or manage the occasional disaster as a tradeoff.

Earthquakes have the problem of a) not being tied to a meaningful feature on the map (continental boundaries exist, but there’s nothing special about settling on the boundary itself), and thus b) not having a good enough tradeoff to make the danger anything more than a nuisance.

well, make mining resource have more quantity in earthquake area

and definitely tie earthquake with volcano

 

[Myomoto]

Earthquakes have the problem of a) not being tied to a meaningful feature on the map (continental boundaries exist, but there’s nothing special about settling on the boundary itself), and thus b) not having a good enough tradeoff to make the danger anything more than a nuisance.

There's plenty of reasons to settle near continental borders. First of all mountains that offers defense vs land units, science and faith adjenciency bonuses, and easy to make natural parks from high appeal. Secondly, from the new map generation, hills are likely to be more nearby mountains (I assume). Thirdly, luxury resources are divided as 4 per continent, so starting by the continental split lets you grab up to 8 different luxuries early (in theory at least).

The addition now of geothermal features (amenities to aqueduct/Roman bath, science, geothermal power station) and volcanoes near the continental borders adds even more advantages to those areas.

This is without adding even any direct bonuses after earthquakes directly.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

This. Risk-reward is fun, but I think civ history has shown that the majority of people don't like pure disasters.

The "Risk-Reward" could simply be that locations that could be prone to Earthquakes (Geothermal Vents, Extensive Mountain Ranges etc) might have exceptional yields associated with them, in a similar fashion to volcanoes.

I'd apply a similar argument to Plagues. Disease Outbreaks might well be associated with overcrowding, proximity to certain terrain types (flood-plains, marshes & jungles) & the number of trade routes running through your cities. However, all of these elements have benefits attached to them as well......so it becomes a question of how much risk you're prepared to take. Will you sever a trade route with a foreign city within which a disease has appeared-& risk losing the benefits of that trade route and/or a potential grievance with that foreign power?

The other issue has to be-can some or all of the impacts of Earthquakes/Diseases be avoided. As long as the answer is "yes", then I see no reason why both can't be in the game.

 

[Civbra]

This. Risk-reward is fun, but I think civ history has shown that the majority of people don't like pure disasters.

I read and I don't know if anyone said something similar like that. So with earthquakes risk-rewards, since varible yields are already confirmed, WHAT IF, some kind mechanics with earthquakes that modify the terrain? They said now maps are better build, principally with regards a continetal borders, so on that places will occur for example more tectonical activities and therfore more earthquakes wiyh the possibility with the terrain change. Where was a planice, the earthquake cause the damage but after that there is a chance to became a hill or a valley or even form a canyon and give cultural, faith, gold yields instead of just food and production. It probably take a lot of coding to do that (or not I realy don't Know) but it will be nice.

 

[Deggial]

One thing though: It's not only risc vs. reward that matters.
It's also player agency to control/avoid (or at least migitate) the disasters' effects as the game advances.

Simple risc/reward evaluation can suck the fun out of some places to settle or things to do.
If the only thing to consider is: "Am I willing to deal with the dangers that come with my action?" then any action is tainted by doubt. This is not really compelling.

This is thre rerason (or so I believe), that Firaxis added dams and flood gates and clean power to counteract the dangers.
Something players can actually DO instead of just avoid something (= actually NOT DO something)!
That's an important difference.

Hence the question:
If earthquakes are part of the disaster pandemonium - what active meassures can the player take in order to counteract them?

 

[Martinus]

I guess earthquakes are all risk and no reward, as others have said. Slightly odd given that they have added tectonics but it still makes sense from a gameplay perspective.

Couldn't earthquakes reveal new resources, for example?

Also, I may be wrong, but I could swear I heard a mention of earthquakes happening along the continent fault lines in one of the reveal videos.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Couldn't earthquakes reveal new resources, for example?

Also, I may be wrong, but I could swear I heard a mention of earthquakes happening along the continent fault lines in one of the reveal videos.

That could work. It does feel like a glaring omission, unless they're saving that for a later reveal. I thought I heard them mention it too but my mind might simply have wandered when they discussed the new tectonics for map generation.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

The idea behind Gathering Storm is to make the natural disasters a part of the decision making process, and not just an arbitrary random event as in Civ IV Beyond the Sword. You choose to settle the floodplain or the land around the volcano to reap the benefits, and suffer or manage the occasional disaster as a tradeoff.

Earthquakes have the problem of a) not being tied to a meaningful feature on the map (continental boundaries exist, but there’s nothing special about settling on the boundary itself), and thus b) not having a good enough tradeoff to make the danger anything more than a nuisance.

Tiles on Continental boundaries could also provide extra yields *or* give a higher chance of certain resources turning up (like gems, gold or coal).

 

[acluewithout]

If earthquakes are part of the disaster pandemonium - what active meassures can the player take in order to counteract them?

Have a civic or tech that once you unlock it earthquakes cause less damage. Or you build a city centre building called an early warning station. Or you have a project you run that makes all your buildings more earthquake resisitant reflecting that you now use materials and architure more resistant to earthquakes.

As to the benefits of earthquakes, just give a bonus to effected cities - era score or culture.

 

[PeterChu]

Most earthquakes occure between the boundaries of two tectonic plates. If it's a convergent boundary the territory will feature mountains and hills, the best tile in the game. So while the DLC won't give a direct benefit from earthquakes the tiles where they can occure are very valuable whether it's for production or adjacency bonuses. Like this hill and mountain regions will be high risk, high reward rather than just be better than plain regions.
Also as the game advance techs will allow to mitigate the damage from earthquakes by unlocking earthquake engineering so at some point most earthquakes will do negligeable damage.

I think this is the game-wise point for adding earthquakes into the GS expansion.

 

[Hajee]

I hope EQ make into the game. Like people are saying why would I settle on a fault line? I think that you would not know there was a fault until an EQ happened there. So you settle city then Quake happens, and that is just life

 

[Deggial]

... As to the benefits of earthquakes, just give a bonus to effected cities - era score or culture.

Oh yeah ... "RUIN VALUE"!

(Okay, sorry. This was evil. )