Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: March 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Alternative nation dialog
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Alternative nation dialog

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Mark Metson <markm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Alternative nation dialog
From: aliaga <aliaga@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 10:51:06 +0100

Hello,

At 28-02-02 16:57 -0400, you wrote:
That may be a particularly poor example inasmuch as the so called
Americans are presumably a mongrel mix of European nations not a North
American nation a all.

It would be better for the brainstorming to avoid relying too much in "real world" examples. Just think about it the way hardened Alternative History fans do, there's plenty of examples from imaginary worlds out there...


I would prefer that IF there is to be "arbitrary" differences between civs
they have a reason that is within the game, like the Wonders are. What is

I was thinking more or less along the same lines. Let's have some "predefined" paths to hegemony. Let everybody choose what they want to achieve (and pay its penalties as well as get its bonuses). But there's the important difference between the Civ genre and other games, that in civ, you can always "copycat" other tribes. If you survive to them, that is, you are able to say "heh, those mounted archers are better than my elephants. Let's study horses!"

So the bonuses would consist mainly on the price you pay: the nation already having great horseriders and mounted archers would have it easier to refine those units than the nation not knowing horses in the first place. But the nation having neighbors who do use horses should definitely have it easier start using "horse tech" than the poor sods who never ever have seen a horse, much less a horserider.

And all this I think can already be set up in the existing frame of the game.


it that happened to the Americans genes or memes that eventually resulted
in the superior fighter jet? Whatever is was should be in the game and

Let's have better efficiency on those diplomats and spies bred in places where cities of many different cultures are closer together. Call it "mixed-bred" bonus, like veteran status. Place it in the tech tree, too, if you want. The only real care about all these ideas is not to unbalance the game too much.

After all, in this game, the lowlifes with the poor tech can still beat the higher tech-powered guys, and if they win often enough, they should be able to profit from it and even tilt the balance with their enemies. Sort of some "spying ability" for common military units who survive battle against superior foes.


In fact probably these bonuses should be determined/allocated somewhat
closer to the time they take effect. For example it could be the fact that
the first people to develop heavier than air flight belonged to a
particular nation that caused that nation to have an edge in matters
relating to flight.

Just what I had in mind. The edge can be: reduced expenditure in subsequent techs needed.



That certainly seems likelier than that some stoneage
person decided not to do anything notable or unique until after the
development of high tech. Such putting off of greatness seems likelier to
result in forever putting things off.

More likely result: get smashed by the guy with the better tech.


Hmm possibly if the national dream is to have a great leader that could be
a bonus for them: a great leader. Whereas if the national dream is to fly
like an eagle, they could get a bonus toward developing flight?

Ahhh, yes, would be nice to implement moral of the troops to win (or lose) battles or phylosophies enabling the thinkers to think more when under their preferred government. Just think about how bizarre things could become when some firm believer in the underneath forces of the universe, like Isaac Newton, finds himself under such "rationalist" leaders (who maybe do not even believe in heavier-than-air flying) that he's impelled to go work for the magic-believing half-savages of another continent.

Or when the free-thinkers of the world flock to the banner of the first modern Republic instead of working for their despotic monarchs. Kind of already included in the game, but definitely fun to evolve further, I'd think.


Why the Mongols? In hindsight, BECAUSE they did in our version of history
end up dominating the Steppe with horsemen, and did end up developing
cataphracts, we associate them with being good with horsemen. They had
mounted archers before some other people too. Perhaps you are even
thinking of mounted archery in your comment.

Also, there's been other great horsemen in the world, and other great mounted archers. Time and place also count, and commitment to the task of world-domination, luck and perhaps madness, or even a Great leader. All of those should have their place in the game. What if the Mongols and Genghis Khan had found in front of them such great warriors as themselves (say the Northern American steppe tribes)?


However wouldnt it make more sense to suggest that whatever civ does end
up developing the composite bow early and dominating the steppes early
should go on to have a bonus in further developments of the horseriding
paradigm,

Yes, but let's also give them the possibility to awe at their first sight of a jet fighter and be able to deviate from their path (to extintion) and somehow pursue that new tech of "fighting like eagles".

My 0.02E



[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]