Thread Tools
Old February 21, 2001, 20:15   #1
tmarcl
Warlord
 
tmarcl's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:46
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 146
A couple of ideas...
There are a few things that I'd like to see in Civ 3 that I haven't seen listed yet (it's possible that they've already been discussed-I haven't read everything yet! :-) ).

1) Include national borders. One of the things about SMAC that I like is that your nation doesn't stop at the city boundry-there's a buffer between the city limits and the actual national border. The advantage to this is that a rival civilization can't come up to the square just outside your city limits and place one of their own cities right next to yours. Also, it enables you to keep out rival military units from a larger area, as opposed to having to wait for them to enter your city limits.

2) A 'ghost image' of the area the city is going to control when you hit 'b' to build a new city, followed by the message: Are you sure you want to build here? (with a yes/no choice). If the new city is going to cross over the two square radius of another city, then that part of the image should be in red, to let you know.

3)The ability to disband a city, rather than having to build settlers to shrink it first. Many times when you conquer an enemy city, it crosses over your city limits, or you find an advanced tribe that is just way too far away from your capital, and you want to get rid of it, or even just relocate it. Disbanding the city would produce a number of settlers/engineers equal to the size of the city (with an upper limit of say, 3 or 4). Cities that are above a certain size (like 9 for instance) would be unable to be disbanded (they're very productive).

For enemy cities that are captured, and then disbanded, instead of producing settlers/engineers, have them produce partisan units-but two for every population point (no upward limit), to show how angry the citizens are at not only having been conquered, but disbanded.

4) Languages: I think languages should play a large part of diplomacy/conquering. Instead of instantly being able to communicate with a newly encountered civilization, the player/AI should be required to build a diplomat unit, have them enter a city, and have a new option-Learn Language. This could either be simultaneous (because of build time for the diplomat plus travel time), or require a certain amount of turns (not many, maybe 5 at most). Upon learning the language, a diplomacy screen would be opened, allowing you to establish relations with the new civilization.

In addition to requiring you to learn the language before being able to communicate, there should also be penalties to controlling a newly captured city based on the language barrier. Even after order has been restored, there should be a production drop until the citizens are taught the language of their captors. If you have a city relatively close to the newly captured city, or if there has been extensive trade between one of your cities and the newly captured city, the penalties wouldn't apply, or they would be less.
tmarcl is offline  
Old February 21, 2001, 20:47   #2
Roman
King
 
Roman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:46
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
Posts: 1,292
1) These will be included in Civ3 - Firaxis has already stated that on their website. They say the "borders are going to be even more advanced than in SMAC".

2) This is a good idea, simplifying city foundation.

3) I don't like this idea as it equals free settlers. I would certainly want to be able to destroy a city with editing tools unlike in Civ2 where you always had to do this using military units...

4) Firaxis said they want to simulate the cultural value of cities and I think that is very good. Languages as such are, however, not at all neccessary IMHO.
Roman is offline  
Old February 21, 2001, 21:09   #3
GaryGuanine
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:46
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 118
1: Great idea. I completely agree.

2: Great idea. I completely agree.

3: I would like some way to get cities out of the way quicker. Free settlers maybe isn't the best idea, but your point certainly needs to be brought up.

4: I don't think languages are that important. At least in terms of what you're talking about. I mean, how long does it take a diplomat to learn a language, a year of concentrated study? To be fluent, a year. The turns in the early game are many years long. And remember, if you've ever met the other civ, someone in your civilization must know the language, and therefore that's what you're paying for when you make the diplomat, the language training (as well as spy stuff).

I agree that there should be some difference in captured cities. They wouldn't necessarily like you at the outset. Then you would have a reason to rush and take back cities taken from you.

Gary
GaryGuanine is offline  
Old February 21, 2001, 23:53   #4
tmarcl
Warlord
 
tmarcl's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:46
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 146
quote:

Originally posted by GaryGuanine on 02-21-2001 08:09 PM

3: I would like some way to get cities out of the way quicker. Free settlers maybe isn't the best idea, but your point certainly needs to be brought up.





Maybe not multiple settlers, then, but at least one like in Civ 2. I only insist on settlers because there has to be *some* representation of the citizens of the city being moved. Disbanding through conquering is an easy enough concept-just include the option to raze a conquered city (though I like the idea of additional partisans at this point).

Marc
tmarcl is offline  
Old February 22, 2001, 01:51   #5
GaryGuanine
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:46
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 118
Marc,

Good idea. One isn't too much, but you still can get rid of a city you don't want.

Gary
GaryGuanine is offline  
Old February 22, 2001, 08:40   #6
Biddles
Prince
 
Biddles's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:46
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 404
quote:

Originally posted by tmarcl on 02-21-2001 07:15 PM
2) A 'ghost image' of the area the city is going to control when you hit 'b' to build a new city, followed by the message: Are you sure you want to build here? (with a yes/no choice). If the new city is going to cross over the two square radius of another city, then that part of the image should be in red, to let you know.


This was in CTP. Whenever your settler unit popped up it had the potential city radius there automatically. This coupled with the ability to switch on show city grids (and a solution to ICS) would be a good way to stop overlapping your cities (instead of counting).

Biddles is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:46.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team