New Idea for Civ 4: Supply Lines

[UnityScoutChopper]

As I mentioned in another thread, I've proposed a similar idea before, although it was "crueler" in that it downright killed units that ran out of supply.

I see only one fundamental dilemma: do we trace supply routes for supply sources?

If we don't, we're sacrificing realism for gameplay (with turns lasting 50 years, it's not what's IN a supply unit that's important; rather, the supply unit is representing a supply line, which must actually be fed somehow).

If we do, we're sacrificing gameplay for realism: I don't think any Civ lover wants to see the game become alienating for the masses, for all Civ lovers entered the world of Civ from those same masses once.

I'd go with the first option: please the mass market (and the AI for that matter) by not checking for supply routes. One can argue the realism aspect of that as follows: a supply unit, though it appears in the game as a unit, represents a supply line (just as the old Civ II caravans "touchably" represented the logistics of getting a trade route going, and the Diplomats "touchably" represented espionage activities, albeit rather sillily*). Its upkeep cost (see below!) represents the expense involved in keeping that supply line open during the very large time units used in Civ, even though nothing is visibly going on on the map.

Ideally, Civ 4 would implement variable unit upkeep (hey, CTP did it without falling apart -- well, OK, it did fall apart, but not because of variable unit upkeep). In that case, supply units could have:
1. A fairly high upkeep cost representing that though shown as a unit, they represent an ongoing investment. In fact, I would propose a low build cost, since the main cost of supply lines lies in their maintenance rather than their setup. If point #2 below is implemented, the base upkeep can be low, since the real real cost of supply lines is when they run outside friendly territory.
2. [Optional, since it's a complication] a. An increase in a supply unit's upkeep if it leaves its civ's cultural borders; b. [Double-optional] a growing increase as distance from one's cultural borders increases, to reflect the greater cost of supply lines outside one'; c. [Triple-optional] a second flat or growing penalty as supply units enter hostile territory.

I don't agree with any ancient units having an infinite Range Factor. 4x or not (in deference to jimmytrick), if range factor exists, then we have an excellent chance to keep the Romans from visiting China in 2000 AD, i.e. to feed realism -- and thus immersion -- with no loss in gameplay. The only disadvantage is that you eliminate the "Kon-Tiki" scenario, which arguably happened in real life, where some daring individuals really did go way off somewhere deep in the BC's, "with a settler" no less. But then their civilization split. :-)

I agree with the poster who mentioned that this can make the age of discovery more exciting -- it can make it more "real," by giving the units in that age a sudden tremendous jump in range factor. However, this still doesn't address what the CivIII haters of the world have called "settler diarrhea" -- that is, that the whole world tends to be settled by the time the age of discovery arrives.

As far as the AI aspect, I say: let 'em have it. Computer graphics improvement seems to be slowing down (e.g. Civ II is graphically closer to Civ III than to Civ I) and new graphics development tools are slowly becoming a commodity, so we can only hope that Firaxis will take a breather and focus on what marketing hates but what everyone who's fallen in love with Civ loves: AI development.

I don't like the idea of the AI absolutely refusing to exceed its range factor. The very least that could be done is to use (range factor+ RAND(c)) as the farthest it will go in a certain time factor or (may I dream?) strategic-planning time-ish unit ("excursion"), where c is some reasonable number. If players know it will always go out to its range factor and not a step farther, you can be sure that'll be exploited.

BTW Willem, weren't you also the one with the brilliant ship-rebasing idea?

In that light, if any good compromises on gameplay and realism occur to you regarding the following (IMO) "key realism flaws of civ", I'd be thrilled to read and discuss them (ideally in separate threads):

1. No real-life Civ is planet-spanning, or probably ever could be -- too many transportation and "corruption" issues in the past; too many diplomatic issues in the present. Yet it's easy to create a planet-spanning civ in Civ.
2. No real-life civ has continuously grown in power since 4000 BC; perhaps none even could.
3. No real-life civ is still "fielding spearmen" today.
4. No real-life civ ever paid or probably even could have paid another civ money to teach it the secrets of e.g. Monarchy or Free Artistry; these things tended to be disseminated "for free" through trade, conquest, and contact. On the other hand, there are other techs like Rocketry that certainly have and can be bought.
5. Abe Lincoln (et al.) could never reach the ripe old age of 6050! (And even 500 would be pretty nice. ;-) ) OK, OK, it wouldn't be Civ without that part!

Cheers,
USC

* Yes, I realize this is not a word. But it should be.

[Plotinus]

I'd like to add my voice to the chorus of support for Willem's idea. What a very simple and intuitive way of adding an interesting and plausible new element to the game. I too like the way that this ends or at least curtails the "Warrior roaming the planet for 1500 years" situation.

Presumably ships would have a much longer range than land units, to simulate the fact that you can go much further in a ship than on land (even though they don't go all that much *faster* than land units in the game). But it's still nice to see something that would simulate, for example, the rather battered state that the Pilgrim Fathers and their ilk were in by the time they reached the New World.

I like the idea of units devolving but it might be a bit silly - after all, a tank can't really devolve into horse-riding cavalry. Perhaps it might work if just some units devolved in this way, as a special ability, as opposed to dying when their supplies run out - thus, a Knight could indeed devolve into a Medieval Infantry, whilst a Musketman would just die. It wouldn't make sense to have, say, a Medieval Infantry devolve into a Swordsman, because a Swordsman doesn't have fewer supplies than a Medieval Infantry - he has different ones.

I especially like the new role that this gives Forts, if they are to serve as supply bases. It simulates, in a way, one of the historical purposes that castles have served in the past - to consolidate a ruler's hold on the land. For example, Edward I built shedloads of sodding huge castles in Wales after he conquered it, to show the damnable Welsh precisely who was boss. Similarly, building forts under this system will extend the player's power over regions that have not yet been settled. I can imagine a situation where a region is subdued - either by clearing out barbarians or by conquering (perhaps razing) enemy cities, and then forts are built to maintain a military presence before the settlers move in, using the supply lines that have been set up in this way.

[Nikolai]

Good to have new ideas. But Willem; you should post this in the Civ4 ideas forum(Civ future forum), where we are making a new List. Then it will be organized and sent to Firaxis like the old List!

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hmmm, I had a very similar idea to Willems-though even more simple! In fact, in my opinion, I thought it was simple enough to be implemented in Civ3-rather than waiting for Civ4!!
Basically, as Willem suggests, each unit has an Operational Range (OR), with Scouts, Workers, Settlers and Spec Op units having the best, and motorized units having the worse (though they do move faster, motorized units also require a lot more maintainance than either mounted or foot units)
Tech Level and Terrain should also be a factor in a units Operational Range! For instance, deserts, mountains and Jungles should reduce OR, wheras Forests and Plains might increase it! In addition, you could have units which ignore the OR cost of certain terrains-like Guerillas who operate in Jungles, or cavalry that works best in Deserts!! Also, Modern Era units should, on average, have higher OR's than their counterparts in earlier eras.
In a nutshell, OR determines the number of squares outside friendly territory that your unit can operate-just as Willem suggests! Friendly territory includes captured cities (with a barracks/Granary), anywhere within your own borders, or the borders of an ally or someone you have an ROP with and fortresses (connected to a city by road/RR) Some naval transports could also act as friendly territory for land units on foreign shores!
Just as Willem has said, any unit outside their OR will, during the turn-over period between turns, suffer 1hp damage AUTOMATICALLY!! This kind of system could help to simulate such historical situations as Napolean's attempt to invade Russia (whilst Cossacks harrassed his supply lines !) or Hitlers attempt to capture Stalingrad and the oil fields of the Caucuses!!
As I've said, though, the changes needed to be made to the game, to incorporate this concept, are not too complex, and in my opinion could be brought into Civ3 as part of another XP!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

I'd just like to explain a few additional things about the idea for supply lines which I mentioned above.

1) The important thing about operating within foreign territory is that, unless you're using Spec Op units (like paratroopers or geurillas) you will be very limited in how deeply you can penetrate into an enemy nation.

2) The only way to extend this range is to either build forts (supply depots), and connect them up to a 'friendly' city (via roads or RR), or capture an enemy city with an intact granary and/or barracks-and use this as a new 'base of operations'

3) Of course, this will add a new tactical level to the game because, like the aforementioned example of the Cossacks, you can defeat a much stronger opponent by using fast units to disrupt their lines of supply (e.g. by sitting on or pillaging their connecting roads/RR, or capture their forts), which will leave them stranded outside their OR-'withering away' until they can get back within range of a supply point! (This was, of course, also the way that Soviet tanks were beaten in Afghanistan !)

4) Point (3) means that, aside from your SoD, you will also have to allow for a 'garrison force' in order to protect your vital supply lines-when staging an invasion!!

Oh, and on a final, unrelated note, I feel that RR's, rather than giving infinite movement, should act as a 'rebasing' facility between two connected cities, or a city and a fortress!! The maximum number of rebases a unit could make per turn would be equal to its MP's, with each rebase costing 1mp! This way, a tank could move instantly from one city to another-two cities over-but would only have 1mp left (so long as each city in the sequence was connected by RR)! This, I believe, would still allow RR's to facilitate the rapid movement of units through your empire, whilst still limiting the players response to an incoming invasion! If used in any other fashion, RR's would simply give the standard movement bonus granted by roads!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[UnityScoutChopper]

I'm sorry, The_Aussie_Lurker, but,

a. while I myself would like the idea, it would turn a lot of people off to the game. It is not less complicated than Willem's; it's more complicated.
b. we can forget about either idea being implemented in an expansion pack -- look at the radicalness of the idea and the conservativeness of what was implemented in Conquests, and you'll see what I mean.

USC

[Willem]

Originally posted by UnityScoutChopper


BTW Willem, weren't you also the one with the brilliant ship-rebasing idea?

Once again I have to say that it wasn't my idea. I was just reiterating something someone else brought up, which I thought was a good proposal.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Nikolai
Good to have new ideas. But Willem; you should post this in the Civ4 ideas forum(Civ future forum), where we are making a new List. Then it will be organized and sent to Firaxis like the old List!

I just don't have time to wade through all the post that are sprouting there. I figured if I started a new thread, any discussion generated would stick with this idea, not wander off into all sorts of tangents.

[Willem]

One thing that occurred to me last night, if units had a range limitation built in, it would go a long way to simplifying the pathfinding that needs to be done. As a result, the turn times would be considerably shortened.

[Antrine]

This last point is a cannon ball!! Every step of the way HAS TO CONSIDER IMPACT ON PROCESSING LOAD. That, even if you sport a fast computer today. Once the game gets a going it is so easy to just keep adding one thing then another.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hi USC,

You know, I don't think that my idea is that complicated, and would not add too much micromanagement to the game! Maybe if I gave a working example, it would help show how simple my idea is!
Basically, lets say that, in the ancient era, non-combat/spec op units would have a standard OR of 8, foot units would have an OR of 6, and mounted units would have an OR of 4. Each age, these basic OR's increase by 1, and Replaceable Parts would grant an additional +1 to OR.
So, lets say that you're in the ancient age, and you want to invade your neighbour with your ancient cavalry (move:2). Well, this will be fine-just so long as your target lies no more than 4 squares from your border! If not, then either a) you'll have send out a worker to build a fortress (and connect it to your empire by a road), b) capture an enemy city closer to your border-to serve as a launching point or c) take your chances and hope that you can capture your objective BEFORE your units hp run out!!! The issue of terrain is quite simple, if the path between you and your objective passes through hostile terrain (like marsh, mountain, desert, tundra etc), then your effective OR is HALVED!! As I mentioned above, though, it would be possible to have units which can 'Ignore OR Costs'-in the same way they currently ignore movement costs of terrain! In many ways, my idea is not that much more complicated than choppers in Civ2!!
The reason that I feel such a feature is sooo important-not just for civ4, but for Civ3-is that, in spite of improvements to the games combat tactics between Civ2 and Civ3 (most notably via the concepts of 'resistors', nationality and culture/movement rates), the game still seems to reward an unplanned, 'Stack of Death' mentality!! My supply line idea would actually force a player to more carefully plan an invasion, by laying the appropriate ground work as they go (either by invading cities within range, or by building 'supply depots'!) It will also give weaker opponents a better way of defeating an invading force-which does not simply entail throwing your units, suicide fashion, against the invaders SoD's!!!
Anyway, that's just how I feel, what do the REST of you think of my idea? Is it too complex??

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[YC4B4U]

Okay, call me confused....

Is it just me or is the title of the thread incorrect. It seems to me that we are talking about supply range and not supply lines.

Supply range is a circle around a supply source where you do not get any loss of hit points. Outside of this range the bad things happen (loss of hit points).

A supply line would be like CTP2 trade routes where there is a line on the map that joins a unit to a supply point. In this case if the supply line is cut or stretched too far the unit starts to lose hit points.

A third alternative is carried supply. Almost like hit points except it decreases each turn that a unit is away from a supply point. Now that could get really annoying because you would have to manage the amount of supply for each unit each turn. Then imagine you have one hundred units in the field! This may work for ships though... Only problem is trying to code it for the ai.

So please confirm what we are talking about here (feel free to type slowly for me )

[ratster]

Yeah, well thats the problem when you try to implement supply rules, it tends to get pretty muddy pretty quick. Thats prolly why they're(supply rules) not implemented(except abstractly) in CIVIII.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

The problem, Raster, is that they don't have ANY rules for Supply!!! I think that either a 'supply range' system, like Willem and myself have suggested, or a 'supply line' system like YC4B4U has mentioned (in the first part of his post), would be the best way to go!! Anything more than that would simply require TOO much micromanagement!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[Willem]

Originally posted by YC4B4U
Okay, call me confused....

Is it just me or is the title of the thread incorrect. It seems to me that we are talking about supply range and not supply lines.

Supply range is a circle around a supply source where you do not get any loss of hit points. Outside of this range the bad things happen (loss of hit points).

A supply line would be like CTP2 trade routes where there is a line on the map that joins a unit to a supply point. In this case if the supply line is cut or stretched too far the unit starts to lose hit points.

A third alternative is carried supply. Almost like hit points except it decreases each turn that a unit is away from a supply point. Now that could get really annoying because you would have to manage the amount of supply for each unit each turn. Then imagine you have one hundred units in the field! This may work for ships though... Only problem is trying to code it for the ai.

So please confirm what we are talking about here (feel free to type slowly for me )

All of the above.

Basically it's about including a range limitation with units, and discussing ways that it could be implemented. Ideally for myself, there would be a specific supply line, but it's also a discussion of other ways of looking at the range issue. Whatever might work the best in the game, both from the perspective of the player and the AI.

When I first came up with the idea I thought of supply lines because I was thinking of a string of Fortresses to provide for the range. But in essence I have been discussing supply range.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Antrine
This last point is a cannon ball!! Every step of the way HAS TO CONSIDER IMPACT ON PROCESSING LOAD. That, even if you sport a fast computer today. Once the game gets a going it is so easy to just keep adding one thing then another.

But if adding range reduces the calculations required for pathfinding you're reducing processing load, not adding to it.

[Antrine]

Your right Willem, my comment was not meant in the negative. My apologies.

[Plotinus]

Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
The problem, Raster, is that they don't have ANY rules for Supply!!! I think that either a 'supply range' system, like Willem and myself have suggested, or a 'supply line' system like YC4B4U has mentioned (in the first part of his post), would be the best way to go!! Anything more than that would simply require TOO much micromanagement!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I agree, but I'm dying of exclamation mark overload!!!

[okblacke]

Originally posted by Willem
First a preamble; Civ games have never had any sort of provision for supply lines, units have always had unlimited food/ammo/fuel, no matter how far they are from their home bases.

Civ 3 prohibits use of roads and other improvements in enemy territory. It also doesn't allow healing in enemy territory (until Battlefield Medicine). The deeper a unit strikes into enemy territory, the more it's at the mercy of said enemy, provided of couse the enemy has the wherewithal to attack, at least a little.

Those are the current abstractions of "supply lines"--the main problem with realizing anything more concrete is the classic Civ problem of scale.

Despite the presence of war (near constant in some cases), Civ is not a "war game". That's a non-trivial point. Civ 3 is the most war-like of them all, but I don't think that's necessarily a trend to be encouraged.

Having said all that, are there some good ideas here (and in other supply-line-based threads on 'poly)? Maybe. Or is this something that could be abstracted a little bit more "cruelly" (than movement reduction and non-healing) to get the point across. Maybe.

Basically, I see your suggestions resulting in a stack of infantry/supply wagons being generated along with any attack troop. I can see some fun in trying to attack those supplies rather than the assault force, I guess, and I could see it requiring navies to be beefed up (a very important point to some). I also see greater management being required.

I dunno. It doesn't seem terribly exciting. Perhaps because when I go to war, I focus on clearing a path to the intended target, so that my troops are always in my territory.

But then, I don't play C3 like a war-game. I like culture, science, commerce, diplomacy, and building. I'd probably use more espionage if it wasn't so weak. War is something I do out of necessity (said necessity increased by C3C), and occasionally greed. And, okay, occasionally revenge.

Aaaand, okay, rarely, opportunity. (When the AI decides it's time to wipe out one of the weaker AIs, I'll very rarely join in to prevent future trouble from an upstart. Normally I'll let culture flipping handle it or be poised to pluck the fledgling city when war does break out.)

As for a "lot of people" wanting a change like this, I suspect (and hope) Firaxis is not unduly influenced what turns Apolytoners on. We are a minority. A probably statistically insignificant, if very vocal minority. And only a small portion of Apolyton has weighed in on this matter, if I'm not mistaken.

None of what I say should be construed as trying to curb the dialogue, though. It's interesting and (who knows?) may actually affect Civ 4.

[ok]

[steven8r]

Ok, so now you can also build Supply Wagons to help your troops away from home. What's to keep a player from just (also) building 'wagon loads' of Supply Units to incorporate into their Stack O' Death? You'd still have the SOD issue--just the composition would change.

Steven

[Antrine]

Remember okblacke, minority interests at least, most often 'rule'. Whoever screams effectively, wins by default, 'the majority' follow as the sheep their programmed to be...

That said, I effectively play from the position of culture, science, commerce, diplomacy and especially 'building' however this is where I depart, 'all for to have a kick-ass war game'.

Happy gaming

[Willem]

Originally posted by steven8r
Ok, so now you can also build Supply Wagons to help your troops away from home. What's to keep a player from just (also) building 'wagon loads' of Supply Units to incorporate into their Stack O' Death? You'd still have the SOD issue--just the composition would change.

Steven

No, there'd be nothing to stop players from stacking a column with supply wagons, but at least there'd be a bit more decision making and planning involved in the process. The way it is now, you could almost play the game on auto-pilot. Just set a rally point near your enemy, wait until you get a sizable stack then attack. Having some sort range limitation would force the player to plan instead of just sitting back and waiting.

And it would eliminate a few things in the game that I myself find annoying. For instance, there'd be no more cavalcades of AI troops wandering across the continent in order to wipe out some stupid little barb camp. Or at least much less.

And it would allow for more defensive strategies. Attacks would come from the nearest city/supply source instead of just anywhere out of the blue. It would probably even help the AI in that regard since it would no doubt have more troops stationed in your line of attack, just waiting for some supply unit to give them more range. It would change the whole nature of combat in the game.

[shuttleswo]

I'm personally in favor of the civ2 chopper-esque idea The_Aussie_Lurker proposes - i think the AI could handle that pretty well, as it currently does know enough to withdraw units when HP gets too low (currently only from battle damage). I would suggest though that a better method than supply lines, or supply units (neither of which i think the AI, barring MAJOR improvement could handle effectively) Would be the old pillage button. When in enemy territory just pillage an improved tile and fill your HP back up. Just like Sherman & Hannibal!
It could be either just the pillaging unit getting the benifits, or all the units on that square, or a certian improvment yeilds different amounts of HP that can be divided between units (roads being the least, farms the most mines somewhere inbetween) I imagine that testing would need to be done to determine how powerful to make that feature.

As for naval units, add the ability to pillage costal squares to refresh HP, and have increasing range with tech, nuclear powered units would be unlimited range (e.g. no HP loss) I can already imagine a viking UU that's special feature would be a high success rate of pillaging costal squares.

These features are easy to understand and use; and reflect reality in a good way (for those who like reaility in the game) It also could make ROP agreements really interesting as your units could move thru that territory without HP penalties.

It would also put an end to the 'zulu choke' the more i think about it the more i personally like that idea.

[Antrine]

shuttleswo, I think you have hit a wonderful nail with a great hammer (idea). This, maybe COULD BE DONE NOW in CSC updates now in the works!?!

Are you listening Firaxis, my philosophy is on the line.

[okblacke]

Originally posted by steven8r
Ok, so now you can also build Supply Wagons to help your troops away from home. What's to keep a player from just (also) building 'wagon loads' of Supply Units to incorporate into their Stack O' Death? You'd still have the SOD issue--just the composition would change.
Steven

Almost. Except that, due to the limited range proposed, you'd have to divide your forces the deeper you struck into hostile territory.

So, yeah, you start out with Supplier in your stack of doom, and you start your march into enemy territory. But wait, your supply wagons won't supply more than three squares away from a friendly source.

So, now you gotta leave at least one Supplier behind if you want your troops to go any further without damage.

Move three more squares and, same thing. You need to leave a Supplier behind. And, of course, more infantry to protect it.

What it adds is an element of strategy, such that rather than attacking your main force, your enemy can attack your suppliers.

Some other thoughts:

* This is obviously for people playing larger maps. Suppliers would hardly be relevant on a tiny map.

* It's also obviously for people targetting cities deep inside others' territories. I generally don't do that because of the culture flipping and the difficulty of holding those targets. It would probably work best with some other rule mods, like "sacking the Capital results in instant capitulation" or something.

* Pillaging to refresh is a historically accurate concept. But that wouldn't include roads.

* #1 problem I see with it is that it's not an intuitive concept and might be very difficult to get across to newer players. No one wants to see their troops weakening without knowing why.

* Some troops should/could be self-contained, making for some interesting UU possibilities.

[ok]

[Willem]

Originally posted by okblacke


* This is obviously for people playing larger maps. Suppliers would hardly be relevant on a tiny map.

Not necessarily. Even on a tiny map it will put an end to a Warrior or Archer wandering the landscape to the other side of the continent. The early units would have to stay fairly close to home until you get a few supply units built, you can't just gather a large early force and wipe out your neighbour right away, you'd have to plan for it.

[Tattila the Hun]

How fast would conquered cities be incorporated into the supply schemes? Possibly with smaller rate...

This could also be an addition to diplomacy screen, ie, if you don't have the time, or the resources to expand supply ranges for fast advancing attack, you could "persuade", or bribe another civ to lend its lines, or even chip in for the needed supplies.

It would make paratroopers useful... For example, normal unit, moving into the path of a supply line, would implement 1/3 decrease in available supplies for the units on the business end of the army. Fortified units would stop 2/3. Paratroopers would have a flag, something like "full interdiction"...

[shuttleswo]

Originally posted by okblacke


* Pillaging to refresh is a historically accurate concept. But that wouldn't include roads.

* #1 problem I see with it is that it's not an intuitive concept and might be very difficult to get across to newer players. No one wants to see their troops weakening without knowing why.

* Some troops should/could be self-contained, making for some interesting UU possibilities.

[ok]

I don't think the concept is that strange - the idea that you can't use roads in enemy terratory seems intuitive, that you would slowly loose health when essentially engaged in combat (which invading armies essentially are) seems intuitive. If HP were described as stamina it almost explains it's self. when actually DOING something a unit has costs.

I agree with the UU possibilities, particularly with naval units, I'm not going to go as far as say that they would make a civ useful for having a naval UU, but it's certainly more intresting than a man-o-war currently is.

[okblacke]

Originally posted by Willem
Not necessarily. Even on a tiny map it will put an end to a Warrior or Archer wandering the landscape to the other side of the continent. The early units would have to stay fairly close to home until you get a few supply units built, you can't just gather a large early force and wipe out your neighbour right away, you'd have to plan for it.

On a tiny map, you'd end up feeling rather cramped by it. But perhaps a little cramping is in order.

Hmmm. Military supply could be an ancient era tech requiring warrior code, the wheel...logistics, call it. Suppliers would start as carts and get upgraded to wagons, then trucks, and perhaps have their range increased by writing, printing press, computers....

One thing I do like about the supply range idea is that it plays into some of the ideas I was contemplating for culture.

The idea that you're going to send settlers out in 3,000 BC on a thousand year trek to a new city site, and when they get there, those people are going to fold neatly into your civ--it's a bit far-fetched, to say the least.

REX and rushing are probably the key weaknesses of Civ going back to the beginning.

[ok]

[Skanky Burns]

Reminder:
The Civilization Games General/Future forum is a much better place for Civ 4 ideas. Particularly because similar ideas are being made and sorted by catagory so, should Firaxis choose to read them, they will be able to see what we would like in Civ 4.