PDA

View Full Version : Structures



g5daddy
09-15-2005, 01:16 PM
One feature that would add great strategic depth to the game without over-complicating things would be to have the ability to construct factories (that convert resources in units, or even that convert specific resources into other resources), airports, banks (to improve the local economy), etc.

Mickey
09-15-2005, 01:37 PM
One feature that would add great strategic depth to the game without over-complicating things would be to have the ability to construct factories (that convert resources in units, or even that convert specific resources into other resources), airports, banks (to improve the local economy), etc.

Ooh, interesting thoughts. Maybe if you purchased a factory, you'd be able to convert resources more efficiently, and therefore get a higher exchange rate.

Would these items go in your home base, cities, or both? If they're in a city and the city gets taken over by someone else, do they keep the new buildings?

Brendo
09-15-2005, 01:46 PM
Would these items go in your home base, cities, or both? If they're in a city and the city gets taken over by someone else, do they keep the new buildings?

They should probably be in a city - well a few cities atleast. Thus rewarding city owners like the resource cities.

rasqual
09-15-2005, 03:33 PM
Ooh, interesting thoughts. Maybe if you purchased a factory, you'd be able to convert resources more efficiently, and therefore get a higher exchange rate.Not only that, but other players could pay you a cut for doing so. ;-)

Yeah, that's a very cool idea. Among the ways for genuine business enterprise to come into the game, I think that's the best I've heard yet!

Like any infrastructure in a world, I suppose they should be vulnerable to damage during war, the extent of which, I'd suppose, would be a function of some base probability increased as a function of how intense the battles were. Perhaps such resources could be defended -- but that would just be a natural prospect once armies can battle in open territory.

Dude. Some mechanism for communicating between armies. You know, like white flags, "what are your intentions?" as they come over the horizon, and so forth. Something in the UI, though. Something when you click on the armies.

Mickey, the BBOX thing doesn't submit anything but location, but you can cookie GE, right? Can't the return KML be customized to users? Dude, if you take on that task, anything's possible. Anything. Private conversations between armies (you wouldn't see messages in armies' CDATA unless their leader had directed a message therein to you, personally, for example.

Dude. This could be really interesting.

Mickey
09-15-2005, 05:07 PM
Mickey, the BBOX thing doesn't submit anything but location, but you can cookie GE, right? Can't the return KML be customized to users? Dude, if you take on that task, anything's possible. Anything. Private conversations between armies (you wouldn't see messages in armies' CDATA unless their leader had directed a message therein to you, personally, for example.

I've been thinking along those same lines. You'll have to download a custom KML file, kind of like you do for the oil wells and jewels, rather than everyone using the same one.

It'll take a good bit of code, but like you said - anything's possible.

Corporal
09-15-2005, 08:07 PM
If they're in a city and the city gets taken over by someone else, do they keep the new buildings?

I'd say that the factories/whatever should just be unusable to the new occupier, but it will still be usable by the person who constructed it if it gets re-taken over. Same should go for nuke shields, I think.

I'd say that you should follow Civilization III's examples for a lot of this stuff. If you don't have the game, I could clue you in on some of the stuff that Civ3 did right.

Mickey
09-15-2005, 08:47 PM
I'd say that you should follow Civilization III's examples for a lot of this stuff. If you don't have the game, I could clue you in on some of the stuff that Civ3 did right.

I had Civ1 (on 5.25" floppies!), Civ2 and CivNet. Never had Civ3, though. Please share your thoughts.

Corporal
09-15-2005, 09:14 PM
A few ideas that are pretty much universal in the Civilization universe:

-Maybe a few structures could be used to increase a city's defensive capabilities, and there would be more than one, but with the cheapest and least effective being a requisite for the more expensive ones that accumulate.
-Likewise, there should be a barracks that produces "Veteran" armies [a status that could also be achieved through combat]. Veteran units may also become Elite units with experience. This would entail enabling you to deploy troops from cities, and also upgrading "regular" armies to "veteran" or "elite", for a small fee. Of course, the home base would always produce "regular" armies.
-Corruption could be a factor in cities. Larger cities would have more corruption, and also the farther away from your home base a city is the more corruption it will have. This would make your home base similar to your capital, and for maybe fifty geos you could move your home base.
-Governments are fun. :) Communism could have communal corruption [distance doesn't effect corruption, but total population does] and cheaper structures, Fascism would make your armies stronger on the offensive but weak on the defensive and slightly higher exchange rates, Democracy would have distance corruption but no population corruption and its armies would be the inverse of Fascism's, then there'd be others like Monarchy, Republic, Feudalism, all that good stuff. We should all start out with Despotism though, which doesn't have any strangths or weaknesses. It'd cost a few geos and take about 6 hours to change government to discourage hit-and-runs and those kinds of tactics.

That's all I can think of right now.

Mickey
09-16-2005, 02:00 AM
Good stuff!


Maybe a few structures could be used to increase a city's defensive capabilities, and there would be more than one, but with the cheapest and least effective being a requisite for the more expensive ones that accumulate.
I like it.


Likewise, there should be a barracks that produces "Veteran" armies (a status that could also be achieved through combat). Veteran units may also become Elite units with experience. This would entail enabling you to deploy troops from cities, and also upgrading "regular" armies to "veteran" or "elite", for a small fee. Of course, the home base would always produce "regular" armies.
Again, I agree.


Corruption could be a factor in cities. Larger cities would have more corruption, and also the farther away from your home base a city is the more corruption it will have.
I like the idea, but we're getting more complicated...


This would make your home base similar to your capital, and for maybe fifty geos you could move your home base.
That will likely happen soon.


-Governments are fun. :) Communism could have communal corruption (distance doesn't effect corruption, but total population does) and cheaper structures, Fascism would make your armies stronger on the offensive but weak on the defensive and slightly higher exchange rates, Democracy would have distance corruption but no population corruption and its armies would be the inverse of Fascism's, then there'd be others like Monarchy, Republic, Feudalism, all that good stuff. We should all start out with Despotism though, which doesn't have any strangths or weaknesses. It'd cost a few geos and take about 6 hours to change government to discourage hit-and-runs and those kinds of tactics.
Very interesting. I'll have to think about this one. It'd be quite complex to set-up, so it won't happen anytime soon, but it's a neat one to think about.

Thanks!

michael fontenot
09-16-2005, 02:15 AM
I think adding some of the options from Civilizations is a great idea. Adds a little more stratagy to the game and gives more options on getting ahead i.e. factories, barracks etc. Also research labs for advancing technology i.e. tanks, planes etc. I'm sure it would be quite difficult as far as the technology advancing but it's just an idea. I think for buildings to be effective they must be built in the home base and destroyed when all armies in the base have been killed, makes the owner have a lot more at stake and must protect the home base with a lot more troops. Also there should be some way to destroy nuke shields, it kind of sucks when you purchase one just to give up that city and hand over a free nuke shield to your enemy.

rasqual
09-16-2005, 03:25 AM
I like the idea, but we're getting more complicated..
If possible, try to generalize things so that a lot of things can just be instances of broader classes with varying properties and methods that make 'em unusual. I mean, I really think a bank, a prospector, a farmer, a warrior and a fire hydrant could probably be the same kind of "object" in the game. How they interface with other objects would be a function of how they're connected with "relationship" objects which also have varying properties and methods.