More emphasis on an age? - Page 2

rendelnep · February 7, 2004, 07:54

Only reason why I choosed prehistoric was so you colud better flesh out nomadism but the industrial - modren era particularly in the field of medicine should also in my opinion be improved too.

Lord_Davinator · June 24, 2004, 14:37

let the ages go by as htey did go by

GePap · June 24, 2004, 16:38

I would like the game to begin at the foundation of cities, which was not 4000bc, but closer to 8000 bc.

I say turns should be equal in time troughout the game- as long as a system was created that allowed one to skip all the turns in which nothing happened.

MrFun · June 24, 2004, 17:30

I think the ages could be improved -- not that it is awful the way it is in Civilization III, but I don't like the transition directly from the Middle Ages to the Industrial age.

here is what I think would be better:

Ancient

Early Middle Ages

Rennaissance (covers mid to late Middle Ages)

Imperial (of early modern era before Industrial age)

Industrial

Modern

lajzar · June 25, 2004, 05:00

I believe ages should exist, but they shouldnt be an ingame freature that affects gameplay. CTP and civ2 had this right - it affected graphics of cities, but the tech tree didnt force you to complete an age before starting on the next.

Historically, people didnt suddenly wake up one day to find themselves in a new age; it is only in retrospect (sometimes long retrospect) that we identified ages. We shouldnt be forcing our virtual citizens to be acting like virtual past historians.

Paddy · September 20, 2004, 01:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Dauphin
I'd rather have each age expanded by 25% than have an additional age.

And repair that damned tech tree to its former style!

Heresson · September 21, 2004, 05:00

Ancient or medieval for me.

Odin · October 2, 2004, 15:29

The problem with having the middle ages be dintinct is that it is just the time of barbarism after the fall of Rome and the recovery. It is simply a skip of 1000 years in tech funding in Civ terms.

Heresson · October 2, 2004, 15:57

I'm not so sure about that...
And even if there was a tech halt, this could be an interesting part of the game too!

Brent · October 5, 2004, 01:27

Age Emphasis Scenarios

Have some scenarios where the main idea is that the turn increments are different for the same eras. Maybe the main game would have similar increments to Civ3, but there could be one scenario where the whole game was 10 or 20 years per turn. There could be one with the smallest increments both at the beginning and the end, and one where these are the longest. Maybe if they keep a separate tech tree for each age, it would be possible to combine two ages if you want to sometime, with a different tree for the combined age.

Nikolai · October 5, 2004, 03:43

Something like the Cradle mod for CTP2 you mean?

I haven't tried the different scenarios there, but I have noticed that there is different scenarios with a longer or shorter timespan.

LDiCesare · October 8, 2004, 13:53

Cradle is good...
I'd like that ages as they exist in civ III would be gotten rid of. They are a nuisance and a proper tech tree can make the same thing as what these ages do. Now I would like the game to last longer during the medieval times and sailing period. The age of sails is too short and often unexisting since everything is settled by the time you get nice ships, and you reach modern age before you can use these ships.

realpolitic · October 9, 2004, 16:27

To reflect world demographics, there might be an age ending about 1930-1960 in real first world technology that corrosponds to a decrease in rate of population increase.

lajzar · October 9, 2004, 19:47

Those demographics were caused by the logical consequences on certain techs. I believe civ4 will include an advanced script language that can be used to model this. I don't however, expect that to be modded into teh shipped epic game.

Max Sinister · October 11, 2004, 08:53

The decrease of the rate of population increase was caused by the invention of the contraception pill, since it was completely reliable, which was new.

Max Sinister · October 11, 2004, 09:03

The decrease of the rate of population increase was caused by the invention of the contraception pill, since it was completely reliable, which was new.

(Sorry for the double post, the site lagged)

Didymus · October 13, 2004, 16:52

Quote:

Originally posted by LDiCesare
Cradle is good...
I'd like that ages as they exist in civ III would be gotten rid of. They are a nuisance and a proper tech tree can make the same thing as what these ages do. ...

That's a cute theory, but I have never seen a proper tech tree, if by that you mean 'not hugely exploitable by beelining.' Therefore, ages ought to remain.

lajzar · October 13, 2004, 17:40

But beelining is an established strategy even within a single civ3 age. A more complex tech tree that can have more than 2 pre-requisites would go a long way towards removing excessive beelining. And a lot of the beelining made sense anyway. A lot of the ancient required techs aren't relevant to every first tier middle age tech in the civ3 model.

Chuckles · May 20, 2005, 22:56

I have the most fun in the early stages of the game so anything that can enhance that is good for me.

hexagonian · May 25, 2005, 11:52

Lets see...

Human history as defined by the concept of developing civilizations can be roughly 5000-8000 years. The modern age covers 300-400 of those years. So you can guess what I think needs the most focus.

civ suffers because the actual time invested in actual gameplay is slanted toward the Modern ages, due to the number of units on the map, as well as the number of cities most players possess. (and to some degree the pace of technology today necessitates that the game have more techs in the Modern ages because mankind is inventing more)

This leads to the need to manage all of those elements - which takes more time.

But this is not necessarily an accurate reflection of history when you consider the size of empires in the past (Rome encompassed the entire Mediterranian basin as well as vast swatches of Europe and the Middle East. In terms of land mass, there aren't too many modern nations with that size.) Sure, the overall population was smaller, but at the same time, there were also a lot of cities in Roman hands.

Same with the military aspect of the game - many historical recorded battles were numbered in the 10,000-100,000+ range. Not much smaller than today (for the most part)

Even the tech disparity can be addressed. We notice the rate of a changing society because we are at the stage of development that allows the greatest creativity (and it is the time we live in and experience), but the simple fact is that has been a great deal of tech development throughout history - it's just that is is more subtle and nuanced.

I'd like to see more ancient techs or a much higher cost of those techs as a truer reflection of history. I'd favor more techs over higher cost because this would allow for a greater variety of units and building types that would counter long stretches of gametime with little variance in what you would build when you simply adjust cost.

Keep tech more fluid with the elimination of hard and fast ages. Players should be able to pick a particular branch and milk it for all its worth, at the expense of other branches. Doing so should cause hardship though (CTP does reflect this concept much better than civ3)

And Cradle is very good...(as noted earlier in this thread)