Stone age time per turn

Ben Williams · June 8, 2002, 00:01

Does it strike anybody else as strange that a turn is fifty years at the beginning of the game? The instant you build a city you can see all the squares ajacent to it, meaning somebody can see that far from the town (or the place they work near the town, which can't be far away). Now if you send a warrior out and back at the beginning of the game, you just spent a hundred years sending him to the distance of your sight and back

. And don't forget settlers, say you build one and send it three squares away to found a city, there is no way they could still be alive when they got there. And when a worker builds a road on a mountain it's a job that would take hundreds of years. Thoughts?

-ben

Flip McWho · June 8, 2002, 00:15

i think it's more for gameplay issues than realism. imagine the game if each turn was a year. 4000bc to 2050ad = a long time. although that could be good if u want a micromanagement with heaps to do.

Cyclotron · June 8, 2002, 01:12

It is obvious. Inventions like the wheel and iron working took hundreds or thousands of years to master. If you made one turn elapse every year, you qould have techs that took about 200 or so turns to build. You would have an empire that spanned many continents by the year 0.

Simple equation:

Gameplay > Realism

August Borms · June 8, 2002, 07:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Williams
Thoughts?

You'll go insane if you start thinking about things like that...

Panag · June 8, 2002, 12:21

hi ,

it should be like 5 - 10 years , ....

have a nice day

AnnC · June 8, 2002, 12:46

I suspect that the years-per-turn scale is designed so that tech advances are achieved (in a typical game) at about the right historical time.

Panag · June 8, 2002, 12:48

Quote:

Originally posted by AnnC
I suspect that the years-per-turn scale is designed so that tech advances are achieved (in a typical game) at about the right historical time.

hi ,

we should have the ability to change that in the editor , ...every player wants something else , ...

have a nice day

Solver · June 8, 2002, 12:53

Techs in historical time? Most civ 2 players could launch a spaceship in BC, does that seem historical?

Just a note

AnnC · June 8, 2002, 12:57

I was referring to a typical game in Civ3. Naturally, a good player can advance up the tech tree much faster.

Panag · June 8, 2002, 13:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Solver
Techs in historical time? Most civ 2 players could launch a spaceship in BC, does that seem historical?

Just a note

hi ,

why not , ......

, imagine where we as humans could have been , if we did not spend all the time fighting , ....

have a nice day

Colonel Rhombus · June 8, 2002, 13:41

panag - A great many technological advances had their origins in military applications. A brief look through the Civilopaedia will confirm that.

kimmygibler · June 8, 2002, 21:08

Note: Civ is not real time strategy.

Ben Williams · June 8, 2002, 21:44

The whole point of Civ is to REWRITE history. If, playing with the same types of problems and forces as in real life, you launch a spaceship in BC then that's a real achivement. You've rewritting history.

Panag · June 9, 2002, 07:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Colonel Rhombus
panag - A great many technological advances had their origins in military applications. A brief look through the Civilopaedia will confirm that.

hi ,

so , just imagine where we would have been without going to war all the time , ....................;

have a nice day

Zachriel · June 9, 2002, 09:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Williams
Does it strike anybody else as strange that a turn is fifty years at the beginning of the game?
-ben

Progress was very slow in ancient times. For instance, it took Moses et. al. 40 years to cross Sinai. Think of it as a generation per turn.

Jon Shafer · June 9, 2002, 10:19

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
why not , ...... , imagine where we as humans could have been , if we did not spend all the time fighting , ....

You're right!

Hurry, to the guns my friends! We have techs to discover!

Panag · June 9, 2002, 10:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip

You're right!

Hurry, to the guns my friends! We have techs to discover!

hi ,

hardhead , ......

have a nice day

Jethro83 · June 10, 2002, 03:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Williams
The whole point of Civ is to REWRITE history. If, playing with the same types of problems and forces as in real life, you launch a spaceship in BC then that's a real achivement. You've rewritting history.

Even if all humanity were to be united right from the beginning, and working collectively towards building the perfect, rapidly advancing society, a spaceship in BC would still be impossible without extra-terrestrial intervention.

Zachriel · June 10, 2002, 07:40

Quote:

Originally posted by LordAzreal

Even if all humanity were to be united right from the beginning, and working collectively towards building the perfect, rapidly advancing society, a spaceship in BC would still be impossible without extra-terrestrial intervention.

A united humanity may very well be a stagnant culture.

Jethro83 · June 10, 2002, 08:04

Indeed a united humanity might be stagnant. I mean, there's nobody to surpass, so people will get lazy.

But as I was saying, space ships in BC are still impossible. Impossible because uniting all of humanity won't lead to it (since we'd all get culturally stagnant), and impossible because a divided humanity continually squabbles, and wastes resources fighting dirty little wars.

And even if the proposed united humanity were to be a perfect culture, it would still be impossible.

Whatever possibility is there, launching a spaceship in BC is always going to be impossible. Now I'm all for recreating history here, but only if it is kept within reason.

Panag · June 10, 2002, 13:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel

A united humanity may very well be a stagnant culture.

hi ,

not allways , ...

have a nice day

Jethro83 · June 10, 2002, 17:40

Quote:

Originally posted by panag

hi ,

not allways , ...

have a nice day

Why not always? The way I see it, since there is no other culture to surpass, a united humanity might grow lazy. I mean, if there's nobody else out there to impress, why bother?

Sava · June 10, 2002, 18:25

It's obvious that Firaxis didn't want to attempt to fix the unrealistic time passage. Gameplay > Realism, but Sticking With What Works > Programming New Time Model... programmers are the laziest people

...

It would be possible to have a more realistic flow of time, but that would require rewriting so much of the game that Civ 3 would still be in development.

Panag · June 10, 2002, 19:32

Quote:

Originally posted by LordAzreal

Why not always? The way I see it, since there is no other culture to surpass, a united humanity might grow lazy. I mean, if there's nobody else out there to impress, why bother?

hi ,

and that is the problem , ....we should do it for ourself's , not to impress an other nation , from planet earth , or from alpha centauri , .....

have a nice day

sabrewolf · June 11, 2002, 03:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Williams
And don't forget settlers, say you build one and send it three squares away to found a city, there is no way they could still be alive when they got there. And when a worker builds a road on a mountain it's a job that would take hundreds of years. Thoughts?
-ben

yep, on the other hand a city grows from 1 to 2 in 5 turns if it has cows or wheat near it. i modern times that would mean 5 years to double the population.... now i know some people like f-ing a lot, but this is ridiculous

i can only explain it with immigration.

generally it would be great to be able to change the years that pass. e.g. for a WWII-scenario (can't wait for that new patch

) 1 turn - 1 year? i can't even build a new tank in 6 turns, how should i build an army strong enough to win the way... 1 turn-1 month would be better...

Jaybe · June 11, 2002, 03:59

I have said it before, and now I will say it again:

It isn't that it takes so long to do something. Instead, it takes so long to make the decisions to do a particular thing, get the people organized and preparations made, THEN getting it done. Actually doing it may take a year or less.

If you want to play the tactical aspects with week-long turns, go play an operational/tactical game, not Civ3.