|
Author
|
|
Topic: War & progress |  |
|
rremus
Chieftain
Romania
Jan 2000
|
 |
posted October 17, 2000 10:07
     | 
 |
 |  |
Hi,
In real world, during war periods, development of warfare gets a real boost. I think this should happen int he games as well. My sugestion is that war situation should reduce the cost of researching military advances and increase the cost of other advances. Consecutive years of war should accentuate this. Maybe even more acurate: It should reduce the cost of researching those adavances that allow units wich your enemy has and you don't! This is because you encounter them in the battle, and your scientist are able to understand them more easily. You're researching Warrior Code and your units encoutered an enemy Archer. If you defeated it, you'll get a boost of 10-25% on your current research. If you lost the battle, then only a boost of 2-5%. Also, is you were researching something else and, during the conflict, you start researching Warrior Code, you should still benefit from those boosts, based on an explanation like 'The front is demanding those Archers our enemy has. We know a bit about them because we saw them in battle. Hurry up, research them'.
If the conflict ends, this boosts are lost.
Of course, there is the problem that often you're in war for centuries with a civ you only encountered once! I think the AI should seek to sign peace in these situations, otherwise you could benefit from these boosts without actually fighting a war. Maybe if there is a reverse, and non-military advances become more expensive because of war, the AI (and you) will be much more wiling to sign peace... |
Evil Capitalist
King
sized bed and minibar in each room
Jul 2000
|
 |
posted October 17, 2000 13:18
|
|
| |
A fair bit of this is due to 'rush research'. This could be a feature like rush build, and very inefficient (so the limits on research are still in force). This could lead to huge post-war debts, which is also realistic. |
Stuff2
Warlord
Sep 1999
|
|
posted October 17, 2000 15:45
|
|
| |
I like the rush-research idea. It should be implemented. Also, Just knowing that someone else already has done something makes it far easier to accomplich the same thing, therefore i think that research things that you know other civs has already researched should be a little (not much) sheaper. Especially if you have peace treaties.
|
Dom Pedro II
Warlord
Ridgefield Park, NJ, USA
Nov 1999
|
|
posted October 17, 2000 16:25
|
|
| |
Well, I think the best thing to do is to make it so that you appropriate funds for research. Now I realize they have something like this already, but this would allow you to dump money from the treasury into research which is like a rush build. Actually I think also that the game should just collect taxes and then allow you to set aside money for science or luxuries. The money for science could be distributed to the number of science facilities you have built to increase the amount of science per turn. I would like a system like this, so that in war I could just buy up technology for new weaponry.------------------
"...The highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities." - Sun Tzu Dom Pedro II.... aka Hannibal3 Dom Pedro II - 2nd and last Emperor of the Empire of Brazil (1831 - 1889). |
Vrank Prins
Settler
Haarlem, Netherlands
Sep 2000
|
|
posted October 20, 2000 11:47
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Capitalist on 10-17-2000 01:18 PM
A fair bit of this is due to 'rush research'. This could be a feature like rush build, and very inefficient (so the limits on research are still in force). This could lead to huge post-war debts, which is also realistic.
|
I agree !!!.
Only this.
Usually when you're being involved in war you're researching some completely irrelevant to the situation science like refrigeration. It would be cool to freeze your enemies, though silly.
Maybe it would be possible to implement a rush research program which runs simulteanous with your "normal running research" and which enables you to research martial sciences according to the timespan you're in. It should cost !!!!!!!!!!! and it should slow down your other research drastically. Wars often are very costly and even more exhausting for nations.
If the development of you and your opponent are almost even it should be possible to copy ideas, which you just don't happen to have discovered, from one another after having encountered them, and most certainly when you've managed to overcome them in battle. (I also think it should be possible to capture enemy-units). The bigger the difference between the opponents, the harder it should be to do so. It is ridiculous when bronze-age units capture a tank and use it with its normal effect against its opponent. [This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited October 20, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited October 20, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited October 23, 2000).] |
Shadowstrike
King
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Jul 2000
|
|
posted October 20, 2000 17:56
|
|
| |
Well, EC, for realistic "rush research" we would have to able to generate a vast storage of money. In times of war when people needed a lot of research done quickly, the money spent on it was quite a large part of the yearly budget.Additionally, "rush research" should only be allowed in wars, or else good players would easily be able to climbe the tech tree quickly. |
UltraSonix
King
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
|
|
posted October 20, 2000 19:29
|
|
| |
The rush research idea has possibilities, but I think you guys are forgetting something... quote:
In real world, during war periods, development of warfare gets a real boost. I think this should happen int he games as well.
|
If we think about this in Civ terms, it's because the government set 100% science  .------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... |
Evil Capitalist
King
sized bed and minibar in each room
Jul 2000
|
|
posted October 21, 2000 04:53
|
|
| |
Yes, but- The Russians didn't set 100% when they were developing the bomb, they just poured a great deal of scientists and intel into it. In wartime expenditure goes up dramatically, and since we can't hike up taxes we could guess this come from science and luxury. So this would mean science down. Personally I think it'd be a good idea to be able to raise tax levels, and thereby lower growth, but rush research would be a far easier way to deal with it. |
Builder
Prince
Israel
Jul 2000
|
|
posted October 21, 2000 09:20
|
|
| |
what if i declare war on some civ on distant continent???i'll be able to use the benefits without fighting. |
Shogun Gunner
Chieftain
Fairfax, Virginia
Oct 2000
|
|
posted October 21, 2000 12:45
|
|
| |
Back to rremus's concept of not having the Warrior code advance and meeting then defeating an enemy archer unit.In this case the theory holds, if you got swords and shields, but not archery, you probably could figure out how to construct more bows and arrows after seeing it in battle and capturing some of the materials. If the technology of an invading country is too far ahead of the defending country, the advanced tech won't help the defender if captured. I don't think capturing a plane is going to help figure out how to develop and field an Air Force. In WWI, a German plane was forced down on the Allies' side of the trenches. This bi-plane had the ingenous interruptor gear which allowed the machine guns to be fired between the propeller blades (I believe it was a Dutch dude who invented this). This allowed the Allies to build better planes. It was the Allies "normal running research" to quote Vrank Prins which allowed them to be able to use this tech. This would also represent "buying technology needed" as Germany did not possess the tech necessary, but they went out and hired someone (from another country)to get the job done. This is similiar to the point of Vrank Prins above. The "rushed research" or the "captured technology" would only benefit you within the same "era" of the technology level your country is in. Too far ahead and you can't even buy it because it's a tool you can't really use.
[This message has been edited by Shogun Gunner (edited October 21, 2000).] |
Shogun Gunner
Chieftain
Fairfax, Virginia
Oct 2000
|
|
posted October 21, 2000 12:51
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Capitalist on 10-21-2000 04:53 AM
Yes, but- The Russians didn't set 100% when they were developing the bomb, they just poured a great deal of scientists and intel into it. In wartime expenditure goes up dramatically, and since we can't hike up taxes we could guess this come from science and luxury. So this would mean science down. Personally I think it'd be a good idea to be able to raise tax levels, and thereby lower growth, but rush research would be a far easier way to deal with it.
|
Wasn't this a case of a spy unit and some science research (in civ terms)? It was probably the captured Germany technology at the end of WWII and spying on American cities which gave the Russians the full tech.
|
Evil Capitalist
King
sized bed and minibar in each room
Jul 2000
|
|
posted October 21, 2000 18:13
|
|
| |
Shogun- technically yes, but even so all research the soviets could apply were used in the project. |
rremus
Chieftain
Romania
Jan 2000
|
|
posted October 23, 2000 03:14
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Shogun Gunner on 10-21-2000 12:45 PM
If the technology of an invading country is too far ahead of the defending country, the advanced tech won't help the defender if captured. I don't think capturing a plane is going to help figure out how to develop and field an Air Force.
[This message has been edited by Shogun Gunner (edited October 21, 2000).]
|
Exactly! You can understand a military unit if the required advance is 'whitin' your current research tree, meaning that you could figure it out yourself researching only ONE advance. I posted a related tread, "Knowledge you don't understand" about this concept.
|
Vrank Prins
Settler
Haarlem, Netherlands
Sep 2000
|
|
posted October 23, 2000 07:12
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Shogun Gunner on 10-21-2000 12:45 PM
This bi-plane had the ingenous interruptor gear which allowed the machine guns to be fired between the propeller blades (I believe it was a Dutch dude who invented this). [This message has been edited by Shogun Gunner (edited October 21, 2000).]
|
Yes, his name is Antonie Fokker, the English called him f....r which in fact is the direct translation. |
Vrank Prins
Settler
Haarlem, Netherlands
Sep 2000
|
 |
posted October 23, 2000 12:14
|
|
| |
Guy's, I have just read the thread knowledge you don't understand Rremus referred to. READ THAT ONE one of the best idea's I've read on this site  !!!!!!!
[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited October 23, 2000).] |
rremus
Chieftain
Romania
Jan 2000
|
|
posted October 31, 2000 03:46
|
|
| |
Actually , units could be upgraded without reserching new Advances!
I'm think at WWII, take tanks or planes as an example. At the begining of conflict, tanks had 20-30 mm thick armor (the Matilda II was the expcetion, not the rule!) and 35-45 mm guns. In 2-3 years, they evolved to 100-110 mm thick armor and 85-100 mm high velocity guns. Same with planes. They evolved in the space of few years more than evolved in previous 12-20 years!
But they we're still tanks and planes, no new unit types!
In civ, we could have something like this. If a conflict is inevitable (or is already undergoing), you could research not a new advance, but an upgrade to the current units you have! Such reserach could cost less than a normal advance, around 200-300 science 'bulbs'. The result would be a unit with increased attack/defense points! Each unit type could have a maximum upgradability.
Ex. Phalanx starts with 1 attack/2 defense. You spend some reserach in increasing the Phalanx capability and you 'discover' the Phalanx Mk II, with 2 attack/3 defense. Further research leads to the Phalanx Mk III, which has 2 attack/4 defense! And this is the maximum upgradability of the Phalanx. I'm thinking at different upgradabilities for attack/defense in order to preserve the original offensive/defensive nature of the unit. Mobility should be also subject to upgrades.
This could be applied to any unit type, of course.
Same with Armor, but an Armor has a much higher upgradability. Maybe it could be upgraded up to an Armor Mk VII or even an Armor Mk X, with 20 attack/15 defense.
Each upgrade would also increase the production cost of the unit by 10-15% (maybe even the maintenance cost).
These upgrades should be available as any other science advance. Instead of selecting "Literacy", you could select "Phalanx Mk II" or "Cannon Mk III" as a research.
These researches could be done in War time or in Peace time, no matter.
Once you researched an upgraded unit, it's available for production. It should have the same icon as the basic unit. Leonardo's Workshop should upgrade all units to highest possible model, of course.
I think is a simple yet realistic model! |
Shogun Gunner
Chieftain
Fairfax, Virginia
Oct 2000
|
|
posted October 31, 2000 09:36
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Vrank Prins on 10-23-2000 07:12 AM
Yes, his name is Antonie Fokker, the English called him f....r which in fact is the direct translation.
|
Ah! Now this is coming back to me... hence the name of the series of German airplanes Fokker Dr1, etc. They named these in his honor.
Very ironic linguistic conincidence.  |
Shogun Gunner
Chieftain
Fairfax, Virginia
Oct 2000
|
 |
posted October 31, 2000 09:46
|
|
| |
I like your idea rremus. This would simulate the slowdown in all other sectors of a country as the war effort becomes priority one.I like this for a second reason. I had mentioned this on another thread. Pick any unit from any period of history. The strength and capability of that unit was not same across countries. Different countries invested more into their military - Sparta, Germany (WWII), Japan (WWII), Hitties to name just a few. A Greek phalanx was the best in the world during it's time and not's forget the Roman legions. There should be a way to differentiate between similiar units from different places. They were not all created equal. The best of all, rremus' idea gives you, the game player, the choice. You don't want to compromise your economy, your arts, your investment into agriculture then don't! It's a trade-off between guns and butter. This is a cornerstone of Civilization. It's all about strategy... a different thread also! |
Vrank Prins
Settler
Haarlem, Netherlands
Sep 2000
|
|
posted October 31, 2000 12:27
|
|
| |
The crux is, that when you're saying I want also a better tank (one which is technologically more sophisticated or stronger (whatever)), you're almost saying I want two/three units in subsequent order in strenght which derive from one CIV-advancement. I can't see how that should be done. It could mean that more advancemenents have to be focussed on the building of whatever army stuff. That's a hazard to the game.
I don't think there is a need for this kind of more detailed development of things we already have got in the game, just to have the opportunity to outgun the enemy with the same, but just a bit more advanced equipment.
The being of advanced flight in CIV-I&II to me is strange enough. The Germans already bombed London at the end of WW-I with there Gotha-bombers. Maybe this could be changed to just Flight, jet-propulsion (that should be a new tech) and finally stealth, those have been the three major developments in flight. But NOT, to make the point, flight 1&2&3 and jet-propulsion 1&2&3 or PANZER 1&2&3.
This also means your getting to much into detail in one period of the game. But which period should it be. The (Anglo)Saxons, late 10th century, developed the longbow, which was superior to all its predecessors. The Mongols, mid 13th century, developed an even better twocomposite bow. I mean, how far can we go.
I think we shoudn't endulge ourselves into too much detail of these things. | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
