Ics?

[Father Beast]

if that city screen thing is true... let me check...

2 city view screens on civ3.com both have size 40 foodboxes. one size 11, one size 12.

of the 2 screenshots at bonusweb, one is for a size 8 city, it doesn't have the 40 box, but it looks as if the graphics are unfinished. the other one is a 40 box, size 12.

having trouble finding any other city view screenshots online. I do have an old one from the CGW preview way back, and it seems to have the stacked sheaves we're all used to, then we have the computer games magazine preview from last month. it has perseopolis, size 10, with the 40 box.

I think you may be right!! If so, this is the biggest kick in the head ICS ever got!

[Ozymandous]

Hi all,

Having never used ICS (never knew what it was till I saw this thread), but after having read these threads I'd like to throw out a consolidated idea I had after reading this thread.

How would the following hamper ICS while still allowing a "traditional" player to still grow as normal?

1. Allow each city to only have one tile worked per population point. A city, when founded can ONLY work the tile it is located on, if you place the city in a tile with low/no food then your city will quickly disappear due to starvation.

Proposed fix: By limiting the amount of squares worked an ICS player would no longer have a "free tile" over a non-ICS player. A size three city and three size one cities would have the exact same area worked.

Good or bad?

2. Have the same amount of food for city growth regardless of city size for each "era". Cities in the "ancient era" might take 20 food for each size of growth to get from size 1 to size 2 and also from size 7 to size 8, at least until they hit a population halt due to need of aquaduct, etc. Once a different "era" is reached via technology research a city would automatically take more food to grow.

Proposed fix: Another factor encouraging ICS seems to be that smaller cities grow faster than larger cities. With this solution the larger a city becomes the faster it (potentially) can grow. This would directly benefit the cities with larger populations.

3. Change tile resources per "age" and not government type. When the game starts initially, grassland may only give 1 food (all grassland) with the only "shield" produced being where the city is (if-then statement, if no shields within city radius, city center has ONE), and as each age progresses the tiles give additional food and production until by the end of the game grassland may give one extra food and a shield in every tile (example). Only mines and farms would moderately increase this initial starting condition.

Proposed fix: This idea goes hand in hand with idea #2 above. Less advanced cultures couldn't possibly use the land as efficiently as more technologically advanced cultures could. Growing wheat in the American mid-west is a potential example of this. What might take 100 people and 50 acres of land can now be done with 5 people, some nifty machinery and half the acrage of land. As people learn more they are better able to "exploit" the resources around them.

The possible drawback would be someone far enough ahead technologically wise would likely stay dominant due to better "everything" but this could still be balanced.

----

There you have it, three ideas, mostly rehashed from what others said with a little of my thoughts to them. Anyone think they could work if added to the additional rules Firaxis has already implemented?

Let me know!

(Oh and thanks for the insight on ICS, it sounds like a definite game im-balance that should have been fixed long ago, but who cares about making the guts of the game better when they can add all these nifty new graphics to make the fanatics happy? )

[Father Beast]

Hi Ozy,

the one tile per citizen has been debated a couple of times. I like it, but it has been shot down by others. the one I take seriously is metamorph on page 2 of this thread. I've given it up for the moment.

the non changing food box very well may be a reality. good news.

linking food production to tech would be counterproductive to stopping ICS, since an ICSer typically just explodes with money and tech. that would make it easier for the ICSer to prosper.

[Ozymandous]

Hi FB, thanks for the reply.

I went back and re-read what Metamorph said about how he thinks eliminating the "extra" worked tile would break the game, but he provides no actual figures on why.

Maybe he will post and say why this would break the game when all it would seem to do from my viewpoint would be to make people pick a good place to put their cities, either through a good natural spot of somewhere they have terraformed the land.

I like the limited food boxes also, would seem to balance the scale a bit. Let's hope it's true as it would allow the bigger cities to grow as fast as the ICS cities.

Hmm, ok, tying the food production to tech would be a bad idea, but how about linking it to city size? Once a city has ten worked tiles in it's radius then the bonus goes up? Maybe at 15 worked tiles and then 20? This would seem to make people want to make cities further apart and with less overlap because they would get more bonuses. For example, maybe at the "10" bonus all grassland got 2 food instead of one, hence growing the city faster and then at size 15 all grassland got one extra shield per production, and at 20 it got another food?

There has to be a way to tie in some bonus or equalizer for people who spread their cities out and have less cities than someone who plunks all the cities down on top of one another.

[Madine]

I think that the bonus tile the city automatically works is the primary reason that ICS is a powerful and desirable strategy. Eliminating the bonus tile combined with the 2 pop for a settler would put ICS at a disadvantage in terms of number of tiles worked.

[Triped]

I tend to fashion my ISC's after Coruscant...probably a bit too close together, but it works for me.

[Takeshi]

Ok, if you think eliminating the free tile could work, try this:

-Start a normal game of CivI or CivII

-Whenever you make a city, immediately turn one citizen into a scientist/taxman/entertainer

-If you're not surrounded by grassland, see how much slower and unfun the game becomes.

[Father Beast]

OK, ICS seems to be taking several boots to the head lately, let's try to list them.

1. the 2 pop settler (usefulness debatable)

2. resources and culture encourage (not force) players to develop their cities.

3. no "we love the president day" for free pop.

4. the same size food box (can this be verified?) (If true, then largere cities will expand faster than smaller ones, and working the land counts too)

The acid test of course, is when we play. we have so little hard data from these guys sometimes. and the game is coming within a month??

[OneFootInTheGrave]

It seems that ICS will be much harder if nothing else..

[Triped]

I could accept it being harder, because I'd just feel more rewarded when I pulled it off.

[korn469]

if the fixed size foodbox is in civ3, then ICS will be much less powerful than in civ2! i hope this is the case, and if it is, then good job firaxis!

what we are asking firaxis to do is to balance ICS, so that quantity of cities are balanced with quality of cities...this was not the case in civ2, where quantity always won out (except when you popped more huts, which is cheesy in my opinion)

it sounds like they just might have balanced ICS, and while people could still pursue it, using ICS wouldn't give those players such an advantage that other players would either have to use ICS too or would lose the game, this is all we have asked for, and it sounds like we have got it

if there is a fixed size 40 foodbox (size 20 with a granary) then ICS as we know it would be dead, and while something else might replace it, i don't think it would be as unbalanced as ICS in earlier civ games

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Takeshi
Ok, if you think eliminating the free tile could work, try this:

-Start a normal game of CivI or CivII

-Whenever you make a city, immediately turn one citizen into a scientist/taxman/entertainer

-If you're not surrounded by grassland, see how much slower and unfun the game becomes.

Who said you have to be surrounded by grassland? You'd just have to make sure your city is on GOOD terrain to begin with, something that doesn't bother ICS at all apparently due to the "extra" worker they can put onto good land.

Even with only one food comming in per turn it doesn't take that long for a city to grow to Size 2, at least in Civ & Civ2. A little slow-down (doubtful of even a slow down at all) would still be preferable to ICS killing the game.

I still like the idea of linking tile productivity to city size as it would be a definite way to favor quality (large size) cities as opposed to quantity.

[korn469]

Ozymandous

if you remove the extra square from the game there is a huge downside, as long as your government is in despotism you cannot collect more than 2 food and your city will remain at size one for the entire game, even after you switch to monarchy or republic, unless you have a food bonus in your city radius you cannot frow your city past size one, so i think that getting rid of the extra square would present many problems, and it sounds like firaxis has actually got ICS under control

[gremalkin]

So what's the final opinion on the death of ics?

Does the 2 pop settler and the 40 food box solve the problem once and for all?

Thanks for a fascinating thread guys!

[Skanky Burns]

ICS is dead in the beginning of the game. An ICS player will expand at exactly the same rate as a non-ICS player*, with just their cities closer together. If ICS does show up, it will likely be towards the middle/end game area, and is likely to develop like this:

The ICSer, and non-ICSer, will build settlers whenever possible, and make cities. They will both place their cities with not too much overlap, therby increasing the territory they control faster than pure ICS. Once all available land is occupied, the non-ICSer will focus on other areas, depending on playing style. The ICSer, however, has only just begun their expansion. Each city they have will continue to build settlers, and now start filling in the 'gaps' between cities, eventually getting a thick carpet of cities. Each city will only need a temple to produce culture, getting a 1 square culture radius, and with cities only 2 squares away, their total territory will be within their cultural border.

Im not sure if a late ICS will give enough bonus to be worth the effort, though. Hopefully not.

Which reminds me, the Indians look like a good candidate ICS civilization (much like in real life ), due to their UU not needing resources... therfore not needing a road network.

* - An ICS player will have a slight advantage, as their settlers need to move only 2 squares before settling, as opposed to 5 squares to reduce overlap. However, this bonus is likely to be offset by reduced quality of land (previously built ICS cities would grab the 'good tiles' first)