quote:

2.Mecenaries - troops recruited purely by paying for them - cost 2 gold for support, from central funds - troops gained by bribery become mercenaries - can build mercenaries after the development of currency - if unable to pay they become bandits (i.e. barbarians) - will become barbarians if not stacked with non-mercenaries during and period of anarchy

3.Conscripts - compulsarily recruited - cost 1 gold to support from central funds - cause 1 extra unhappiness when not stationed within a friendly city - may be built after the development of Conscription.

4.Professionals - recruited for pay from your own civ - cost 3 gold to support from central funds - may only be built by cities with barracks - may be built after the development of nationalism

quote:

The fourth entry is Water Supply and Distribution. This could be added to Civ. The amount of fresh water produced per square could be tracked and could act as a limit on the population of a city.

Say each citizen needs two units, squares might supply 0 to 3 units typically. Deserts and seas might produce 0. Plains might produce 1, grasslands 2, etc. A river would add 2. A 1 square landlock sea might be considered a fresh water lake and produce 5. Irrigating a square would take 1 water away from the city.

You might be restricted to water from squares adjacent to the city, unless the city has an aqueduct. This might replace the current limit from not having an aqueduct.

This would allow such things as creating a dam on a river square to improve the water supply, and city improvements such as water works and desalination plants.

I don't think water is dependant of fewer factors than food production. If the food production system is good enough, then a similar system would be good enough for water. If you added in every last detail then of course it would be too complicated, but you don't have to.

It would add complication, but not a great deal. Currently cities grow until they reach a limit and then you get a message saying an aqueduct is needed. That would still happen, the only difference being that the limit would vary. But that variation would be a simple factor based on the terrain. Cities in dry terrain would hit the limit before ones with good access to water - not a difficult comcept. The aqueduct would increase the number of squares the city draws water from from 9 to 21. So they would be room for lots of growth before it again became a limit. Again you could be given a message. The maximum population the water supply supports could be shown on the city screen, and maybe on a city report. There could be an option to get a more detailed display of where the water is coming from.

You wouldn't need to assign people to work a square to get the water from it, though you shouldn't get the water if an enemy occupied the square or another city were working it.

The main decisions would be whether to allow the water supply to limit city growth or whether to build the improvements needed to increase the supply. I would consider that a strategic decision.

It's a judgement call, whether the bit of extra complexity is worth the extra options it makes available, and whether the extra limits on civ growth allowing you to make extra options for growth elsewhere enhance the game. I think it is an option that should be considered, and given a fair chance (which means not demanding excessive detail in the model of the water supply).