EC3 New Idea #4 - REGION BOUNDARIES

[raingoon]

"Easy transition from Cities to Regions for mid- to late-game play. Based on government. Incorporation of Region Capitols, region-wide improvements, and cultivation of resources inside region boundaries." - EnochF

[Matthevv]

Seconded.

[korn469]

EnochF

if asked why out of the five things to put on the new ideas thread why would this idea belong? what are the greatest strength in adding this idea? and what if any weaknesses or exploits does this idea have?

how large would regions be? would they be limited by a number of people, or a number of cities, or a number of squares? is there any difference between regions and super cities?

[ember]

I havn't been around in a while, but let me take a stab at this.

The strength of regions (this includes the other two similiar threads) is the ability to make micromanagement less of a chore.

The idea is to keep the number of destinct entinties around 6 - 12 throughout the game, which for most people is their comfort level.

Regions encompase a certain area. Any cities contained within contribute to overall production(labour) and taxes.
Developed squares contribute resources and food. THis is all pooled and redistributed based on priorites set in a menu, and when stuff is built, the location is selected.

I would say that it belongs in the five most imortant ideas because it is (in my opinion) the best compromise for micromanagment, which is probably the largest issue facing the empire builder genre.

------------------
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced,
is indistinguishable from magic"
-Arthur C. Clark

[EnochF]

During the late game, perfectionists like me want to colonize the entire world, which means building engineers, building tiny cities, then building small improvement after small improvement... on a given turn, nearly fifty things could be built... mind you, it's kind of nice to hear the people cheer fifty times, but it's also distracting. In all the confusion, it's easy to lose track of where a particular engineer is going, or where a particular military conflict is going on.

To help ease gameplay in the late game, combining cities into regions would cut down on the amount of management is required on each turn.

Now, what's a region? Well... the way I see it is a region is a number of squares "claimed" by a player, the shape of which is also up to the player. The squares must be within one's own borders. I also assume that each region should at a minimum be able to contain three whole city radii. Once one has colonized a region, the region acts essentially as a city. Citizens can be placed on any of the squares inside the region, and tile improvements can also be built on them. "City improvements" are then built within the region, as region-wide improvements.

The problem is how to manage the transition from cities, in the early to mid-game, into regions. I figure when one reaches a level of government higher than Republic (either democracy or communism or what have you), one should be given the opportunity to form one's cities into regions. At that point, the player will go through one single fairly complex turn, designating his regions, dividing his empire. The region will take its name from the largest city within its area (which will be its "capitol" city).

Another bonus: As long as one's military units are within a region's borders, there will be no unhappiness.

[raingoon]

I'd like it if you could distinguish between these types of regions:

Region/State (standard, established by the player within one's own borders)
Colony (overseas, i.e., not on the same landmass as capital of Civ?)
Protectorate (a region or colony defined by another player that now asks to join your civ)

Also, I think the player should be able to name their own regions if they want, as it is with cities now.

Lastly, does this mean there will be a "region" screen? And if so, what in general would it show?

[Matthevv]

I think you should only be able to combine cities into a region if the communications (e.g. travelling time) between them is below a threshold level. Otherwise it would be possible to supply a city that is on the opposite side of a mountain range, without having to build roads/rails to it, just by including it in a region.

[Glostakarov]

Something I read brought up a real interesting idea. Historically, vast tracts of land were often claimed long before anyone got around to seriously settling the area. Now admittedly, in many cases there were already idigenous people there, but the first claimers were the first to have the opportunity to kick them out. This would be a neat thing to incorporate.
Now that I'm brainstorming, a way to add indigenous, nomadic populations would be cool too. Center them around slow moving camps, sort of like cities with no improvements but occasional unit production. That would add a whole different feel to expansion in these areas.
Heh, I realize I'm way off topic, but the other idea this sparked is closer. Another thing that has been done historically has been the buying and selling of territories (cities included) between countries. This would be an interesting additon to the game, and a way to expand non-violently. You could build up a powerful economy, then buy territory/cities from other civs. Obviously they'd have to be pretty happy with you, and strapped for cash, unless you were strongarming them into the deal. That would add a bit more depth to the diplomacy system, and I'll stop rambling now.

[Youngsun]

Hello EnochF

"Region" is really good idea and it will reduce lots of micromanagement that players have to face.(I totally support this idea! )

I wonder why we don't start with the region system from the beginnig? and why should it be allowed after we have something higher than Republic? You mean Monarchy or Despotism can not have "Region" as their administrative system? Or simply you wanted give some more bonus to the Democracy or Communism?

I reckon it's better to have the system right from the beginning so as our empires grow we can set many cities into somewhat less number of regions.

Matt has good point. Merging cities into a region should be affected by current communication tech. or infrastructure(Road,etc) How would you like to simulate this matter to the game?

Glostakarov's "nomad idea" is interesting. I know many people have posted similar ideas and hope this can be included in CivIII.

[Einherjar]

Regions are a very good idea. To determine a region, I would suggest two main criteria.

1) Overall level of corruption in civ at time. Corruption could be reduced by designating a region around a regional capital. effective size of regions would vary under different Govt's.

2) Geography. Areas which seperated by Mountains, Deserts or which are overseas colonies, could be regionalised as per above.

These ideas could be enhanced much further subject to other new features which Civ3 may ultimately contain. Culture, ethnicity faith ect. could have a part if distinct racial characteristics were incorporated in to the game, ie MOOII.

Comments?

[ECHELON_VIRUS]

I fully agree with the idea of regional boundaries. This should make things easier for the player in some ways as well as more interesting in other ways.

One thing I would like to see in Civillization 3 developed is something like a loyalty bar similar to a health bar for units and cities. E.g. The lower the loyalty bar, the more likely the unit is likely to desert, the less control the player or AI has over that unit (the unit can do unpredictable things that a player does not want it to do), which could also mean less money is needed to bribe that unit.

For cities, it simply means that low loyalty is more likely to cause rebellion and problems for the player such as not building the right unit or structure that the player requests, pulls out military units supported by that city or region from a war (which can be disastrous in a military campaign) or doing any number of things behind a player's back such as acting as spies for an enemy civillization. The old unrest or civil disorder concept in Civillization 2 could act as a warning to the player.

This could lead to interesting development within that civillization or empire such as certain regions or cities becoming more autonomous or independent of central control (federal control). Take a look at Russia, for instance. The regions have different degrees of autonomy or federal control imposed on them. Chechnya is rebelling most of the time and is a major drain of manpower and resources for the central government. Successful secession could lead to independence for the region and possibly the total collapse of the government or empire.

Therefore, it would be easier for the player to govern certain regions compared to other regions in the same empire. Internal diplomacy or domestic affairs would become more interesting within the empire. Tax rate can also be different in all the different regions. Some regions would have democracy (can be a communist democracy) while other regions could have dictatorship (e.g. capitalist dictatorship) imposed on them (these regions would also be most of the time rebelling against federal control). This should also act as a measure to limit an empire from constant expansion through conquest.

Other interesting developments: This would allow the player to be able to interact with all the different representives from all the different regions. The larger the empire, the more representatives it should have (unless the player doesn't want to know what is going on in his own backyard.....or just wants to deal with foreign policy). This should also allow something like rival factions to develop within the government (something that I find to be missing from Civillization 2). Different factions coming to power can also mean relocation of the capital city and vice versa.

Representatives:

Monarchy Style : Barons, Nobles
Democracy Style : Members of Parliament, Upper House, Senate, Congress,

Independent states can also combine to form a new nation with loose federal control for whatever reasons (such as facing external threats) and break up again after the threat is over. The whole idea of regional boundaries is going to be interesting here.

Outdated wonders should also act as extra income generators or source of happiness.

Last request: Please allow the Civ 2 scenarios or saved games to be played, upgraded or changed in Civ 3.

I hope this helps......

[The Mad Viking]

I think cities of the same civ should automatically merge into on window and act as a region as soon as they're connected by rail. At this point, the improvements window can show how many of each time of improvement you have. Food, trade and shields are automatically pooled. You can build more than one unit or improvement in a turn, and work on a wonder without shipping freights in. New improvements could be limited to one of each type per city linked together, with proportional effects; four cities linked, two with libraries, 25% bonus to the total science of all four cities.

For island areas, regions were harder to create, unless the islands were very close. But I think some sort of shipping lane should be possible without the transport units for purposes of creating regions.
;-)
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by The Mad Viking (edited March 07, 2000).]</font>