building obsolete buildings

Vrank Prins · December 1, 2000, 08:39

I’ve just read the idea’s about Monotheism by Dark Cloud. I have the same idea about this but have "extrapolated" things. (I had already put some thoughts into writing before having read D.C.’s post.)

Here I go.

Every time in the endgame I’m vranticly building new cities to increase my endscore. IMO it’s a kinds of strange that when your building city-improvements, your also building things which in realtime would have by far lost their function.

Just think of it, a city being build around 2000 ad. and the first thing being build in it is something you can associate with ancient polytheisme, in monotheistic terms "heathenish idolatry", that is . . . . an ancient temple.
Then you build a granary (if you don’t have the Pyramids), a marketplace and a library. All okay, but when you look at the citypicture you see these ancient, antique and no modern buildings.
Your population grows and to let it expand above cityseize 8 you must build an . . . . . . aquaduct. "Yeah, sorry, but our watercompany is still using roman engineers".
Your population needs to be entertained, and you build a . . . . colosseum. "Oh well, Ajax, Feyenoord, F.C.Haarlem ?! . . , sorry, never heard of football, but we’ve got a bit more bloody entertainment for you, and how about the roman engineers ?".

Etc..

What your population wants/needs (in 2000 ad. !!) is:
work (factory/mfg-plant)
education (school/library)
sanity (waterworks/sewer system)
health & social care (hospital/social services)
consumption (supermarket/marketplace)
entertainment (broadcasting station/stadium)
a place to worship (church/cathedral)

It shouldn’t be possible to built certain city-improvements after they have "expired".
It should be possible (a bit like in COLONIZATION) to upgrade/extend buildings.
It should also be possible to maintain the old buildings and to build new modern ones besides the old ones, that costs but would give you a tradebonus because of touristtrade

Just an idea for a possible chronological buildinghierarchy
tempel > church/monastery > cathedral
workshop > mill > factory > mfg plant
market > shop > supermarket
colosseum > theater > stadium + broadcasting station
monastery > hospice > hospital > academic medical centre

[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited December 01, 2000).]

airdrik · December 1, 2000, 12:57

I totally agree. you can add aquaduct->water works in there, too.

Tical_2000 · December 1, 2000, 17:17

Hey, if temples and aqueducts serve a purpose in GAMEPLAY, then who really gives a flying &*%#! if you're building them in 2000ad! If it really bothers you, then DON'T build them!!! My point is: You think too much! Civ is certainly not made to exactly simulate real earth history. If it was, you'd be paying eighty grand per copy and need a computer the size of Baltimore to play it on.

N35t0r · December 2, 2000, 01:53

the colosseum is actually MEANT to be a stadium:

There are signs on top of its icon, and after electronics it entertains one more citizen. (TV?)

Vrank Prins · December 7, 2000, 12:27

quote:

Originally posted by Tical_2000 on 12-01-2000 04:17 PM
If it really bothers you, then DON'T build them

Yes it does bother me, because in the long run it could mean civil uproar in your cities, and where does that take you. Ever thought about that ?!

Dauphin · December 7, 2000, 12:53

It seems to be a cosmetic problem that would be solved by replacements. If afer a certain tech is obtained just have the computer automatically change (I hesitate to say upgrade) a building that isn't appropriate. Gameplay is unaffected if the effects don't change.

Eg replace Aqueduct with waterworks - as distinct from sewer systems. Replace Coliseums with Stadia. Replace Marketplaces with Shopping Malls.

------------------
Pax Vobis.

beyowulf · December 7, 2000, 15:31

Granaries -> Warehouses?

Somehow 'On The Waterfront' just wouldn't look right with dockside granaries.

Vrank Prins · December 9, 2000, 01:01

quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch on 12-07-2000 11:53 AM
It seems to be a cosmetic problem that would be solved by replacements. If afer a certain tech is obtained just have the computer automatically change (I hesitate to say upgrade) Gameplay is unaffected if the effects don't change.

It could be made more than a cosmetic problem.
Now in CIV we have the situation that many city-improvements have an accumulating effect on one-another. That principle should be partially abandoned. It’s been said before CIV as we’ve got it now, knows more or less only progression, development moves only forward.
Instead we should have a situation in which city-improvements have, besides the accumulative effect, a substitutive, supplementary, reductive or maybe even counterproductive or other effects on one-another.

quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch on 12-07-2000 11:53 AM Eg replace Aqueduct with waterworks - as distinct from sewer systems. Replace Coliseums with Stadia. Replace Marketplaces with Shopping Malls.

This could be the situation.
The effect of a colosseum (circus as the Romans said would be a better term) could be undone by f.i. theology.
In lots of European cities Roman theatre’s/circusses have been demolished in the early middle-ages. Their stones were used to build houses, bridges, churches or whatever. It’s only very sporadic that a roman theater is still in use.
A temple and a church/cathedral should have counterproductive effects.
A guildhall reduces the effect of a factory and vice-versa.
A powerstation and a factory or mfg-plant are supplementary (as we’ve got now in the game)
A moderntime stadium could reduce the effect of a cathedral and vice-versa. And with a broadcasting station even make it obsolete. (over the last twenty years I’ve seen dozens of churches in the city where I live, being either demolished or turned into, yes !, chique appartementbuildings). Sportingfacilities have competition from internet. Etc.

There are lots of possibilities here which would make the game more interesting.

BTW Shopping Malls, from my dutch point of view, is a typicall american notion. We don't have them in the Netherlands like you have them in the US. But it's certainly a good one !!
[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited December 08, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited December 08, 2000).]

Grumbold · December 9, 2000, 01:18

I'd be all in favour of modern transformations to the ancient and mediaeval buildings taking place unannounced as you research key technologies. The reason to avoid superceding temples with cathedrals ratehr than allowing the two to have cumulative effects is the construction cost. Even a modern starter city has not got the production capacity to build a cathedral unaided in a short enough time frame. The cheap buildings are still desirable.

The temple could quietly have become a community centre, playground or something else once cathedrals are available to support the religious aspects of city life. An even more flexible game could even have several different buildings deriving from the same tech i.e. European city graphics = Christian church, Classical = Temple, Arabic = Mosque, Oriental = Pagoda. The buildings would have the same effect so this is a lot of extra graphics just for "flavour" but it is touches like these which turn an unoriginal game theme into a classic in its own right.

Even if the developers just left the expansion up to the players, provided the base tech supported the concept of different graphic sets someone somewhere would release a mod. Eventually every national style would even have subtly different unit styles for everything from settlers to modern armour units.

Dauphin · December 9, 2000, 01:25

quote:

BTW Shopping Malls, from my dutch point of view, is a typicall american notion. We don't have them in the Netherlands like you have them in the US. But it's certainly a good one !!

There are quite a few improvements that are culturally oriented. If you want it to be American you go to the Factory Outlets or the MegaMarkets. Whereas Malls and Thoroughfares are quite global.

PS I'm English.

------------------
Pax Vobis.

Vrank Prins · December 9, 2000, 01:36

quote:

Originally posted by Grumbold on 12-08-2000 12:18 PM
The reason to avoid superceding temples with cathedrals ratehr than allowing the two to have cumulative effects is the construction cost. Even a modern starter city has not got the production capacity to build a cathedral unaided in a short enough time frame. The cheap buildings are still desirable.

Okay ! good reasoning.

In that case it should be possible to start with building a church, and then later on enlarge this into a cathedral. That's one feature from COLONIZATION, which I think would be nice to introduce into CIV. Same goes for factory > mfg-plants.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · December 9, 2000, 21:17

I totally agree, I like this idea.

p.s. This has been discussed quite a bit before.

Vrank Prins · December 11, 2000, 04:53

quote:

Originally posted by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto on 12-09-2000 08:17 PM
p.s. This has been discussed quite a bit before.

Could you perhaps tell me in which thread or about what time ?!

Tical_2000 · December 11, 2000, 22:57

Oh God!!! What is the big deal?

Grumbold · December 12, 2000, 07:27

Mmm, you obviously disagree with the idea, and that is your choice. I can understand wanting to keep to the absolute minimum complexity to avoid confusion and clutter. However I don't see how it hurts you for the designers to leave hooks available to people who want to enhance these aspects. Being able to replay the game and build (for instance) bazaars instad of marketplaces is one of the frills that will extend the longevity of the game for me. Of course the basic gameplay must be got right first, but I trust Sid & co implicitly in that regard.

Vrank Prins · December 13, 2000, 12:47

quote:

Originally posted by Tical_2000 on 12-11-2000 09:57 PM
Oh God!!! What is the big deal?

Tical, please read my reply in the thread about spaceinvasion of mars etc.