User Tools

Site Tools


Ideas for changes to Civilization

Modifications may be made to FreeCiv, an open-source clone of Civ2.

AI changes

Valuing diplomatic events

Gold is the universal currency of Freeciv, so my first thought is that the value of diplomatic actions should be tied to a gold-value equivalent. However, the value of gold is itself variable. Being bankrupt should increase the relative value of gold while being rich should decrease it. The values of diplomatic actions will instead be worth a number of points where one point == 1 gold in the average case, but the value of gold offerings will be adjusted to the needs of the civilization. To implement this, we could have have a float factor for how much gold is desired by a particular leader.

  • Calculate base gold value of a diplomatic proposal
  • (Desire for gold has already been calculated per turn)
  • Adjust by desire for gold

Adjustments to the value of gold

  • Wealth: (500 - gold) / 2500.0
    • Produces 20% at 0 gold.
    • Produces 0% at 500 gold.
    • Produes -20% at 1000 gold.
  • War: 0.02 per war involved in.
  • Emergency: 0.02 per square adjacent to a friendly city which is occupied by an enemy unit.
  • AI Greed: AI players may have an additional “Greed” attribute to adjust their desire for gold by up to +/-10%.

How can the emergency factor for cities be calculated in a multiplayer simultaneous game where both players move at the same time? The emergency factor for a city should be recalculated every time a unit is destroyed or ends its turn near a city. It is faster to search the adjacent squares to a unit for a city than it is to search the city list.

The cost of going to war

  • Any war costs a lot. Base value 500 gold.
  • Value of the relationship with the target party
    • Lost trade routes. 10 gold * number of trade units lost
    • Lost support against other enemies. 100 gold per mutual enemy.
    • Attacker's relations with the target. 0-300% spectrum.
    • Cost of breaking previous agreements.
    • Value of grievances against the other party
  • Attacker AI's aggression. 50-200% spectrum.
  • Relative attacker/target civilization size values. Multiply by ratio.
    • If no embassy and on same continent, guess by counting visible cities and multiplying by two.
    • If on other continent, assume equal size.
  • Known enemy technology level.
    • Take especially into account attack vs. defense values.
    • If no embassy, guess by visible units. Keep an int of the highest product (attack*defense) seen.
  • Ability to bring force to bear.
    • Is the attacker prepared for war? Cost +50 for every city that has fewer than 3 units present. Cost -25 for every city which has city walls and is “near” the enemy. Nearness may be defined by:
      • Being within 10 squares of that city nearest the nearest enemy city or unit;
      • Being within 10 squares of any city within 10 squares of an enemy city or unit.
    • Does the attacker have enough production to conquer a city?
    • Does the attacker have enough mobility to reach the enemy?
      • 1% per turn to next town, above 10 turns.
      • Double mobility cost if sea passage is necessary.
    • Double cost if the enemy has walled cities.
    • Add 5% for each visible enemy fortress that is less distant than the target city.

The value of technology

  • The default rate is 1 gold per science unit.
  • The technology is 50% more valuable if the AI is researching it.
  • The technology is 100% more valuable if it allows production of a new military unit.
  • The technology is 100% more valuable if it deprecates barracks (is Gunpowder or Mobile Warfare).

The value of making peace

For a ceasefire, the AI could recalculate the value of going to war, add the value of grievances, and see if war is desirable or not.

For making peace, the AI would need to consider whether it trusts the enemy to stay peaceful, whether it has room to expand if it can no longer move through the enemy's territory, and whether it can take more territory by going to war.

Diplomatic memory


If you sign an alliance, it should be a greater grievance to break it the next turn than to break it 50 turns in the future.

If there is a more complex arrangement where player A pays you to declare war on player B without making an official alliance, and you declare a ceasefire the next turn, player A should be very angry.

Agreements are removed from an AI's memory when they are broken or when they become obsolete. If the agreement is broken, it causes an international incident. If the agreement becomes obsolete, there is no effect on the AI.

Types of agreements

Agreements that can be broken may include:

Standard peace agreement

Broken when:

  • The second party declares war on the first party.

Obsolete when:

  • The first party declares war on the second party.

Making peace with a third party

Broken when:

  • The second party declares war on the third party.

Obsolete when:

  • The third party declares war on the second party

Going to war against a third party.

Broken when:

  • The second and third parties enact a cease fire.

Obsolete when:

  • The first party makes peace with the third party.

Surrendering a city.

Broken when:

  • The second party reconquers the city in any way, including a revolt.

Obsolete when:

  • A third party conquers the city.


Record structure

| turn ID | party | agreement definition | original diplomatic value |

  • Turn ID: the turn that the agreement was enacted.
  • Original value: the value of this agreement as of the first turn.
  • Party: the party bound by this agreement.
  • Definition: The type of the agreement.

Diplomatic value

Diplomatic value is just a number that can be used to weigh the values of different types of agreements against each other and determine how angry the AI should be if an agreement is broken.

The current diplomatic value of an agreement can be calculated from its original value and its age when you take an action that breaks an agreement.

Other notes

AI leaders may have a “memory” attribute that affects how much weight they place on old diplomatic arrangements. As the agreements age, they may be purged.

AI leaders may have an “easygoing” attribute that encourages the purging of memory records with sufficiently low value, allowing competitors to break small agreements with no consequence.

City memory


AIs should remember that they once owned a city. The AI should remember all cities that it has ever owned, with a value relative to the number of turns the AI owned the city. The AI should then make demands of any other player who now controls the city or adjust its strategy to target this city.

If a city is destroyed, the AI should remember that it owned a city there and make claims to nearby cities. City memory could therefore be based on the grid location rather than a city name or definition.

AIs should rename captured cities if they used to own a city with as different name in the same area, and the old name is not currently being used by another city.

City memory encourages the AI to request/accept a full or partial exchange of cities captured in a war as a condition of ending it, as the value of cities owned is more than the value of cities just captured. It encourages the AI to accept setting things back to the way they were since returned cities are weighted as more valuable than recently captured enemy cities of the same size.

The idea of city memory does not fit into the agreement structure described in the earlier section, so a second data structure is proposed.

It should be possible that capturing a city previously owned by an ally would return the city to the ally. This can be handled by a diplomatic agreement.

Proposed AI leadership axes

AI attitudes

Attitudes scale from a low point to a high point, like from 0% to 100%.

Aggressive (opp: Passive)

Believes in appearance of strength and power

  • Less willing to accede to demands
  • Less likely to accept binding peace treaties
  • More likely to make demands
  • More likely to start a war when demands not met
  • Demands more in diplomatic trades

Elitist (opp: Egalitarian)

Believes in superiority of culture and upper class

  • Less willing to accede to demands
  • Less likely to build libraries, granaries
  • Less likely to use Republic, Democracy governments
  • Less likely to expand while cities are weak and undeveloped
  • More likely to start a war with weaker players
  • More likely to request technology
  • More likely to build temple, cathedral than colosseum
  • More likely to build Wonders

Industrious (opp: Content)

Believes in productivity.

  • Lower luxury rate
  • Higher tax rate
  • More likely to build Marketplaces, Factories
  • More likely to build Caravans
  • More likely to build roads, irrigation, and mines

Militarist (opp: Pacifist)

Believes in superiority of arms

  • Less likely to build diplomats
  • More quick to build barracks
  • More likely to start a war
  • More likely to value military technologies highly
  • More likely to build expensive units

Friendly (opp: Xenophobic)

Believes in peace and friendship between nations

  • Less likely to prepare for war
  • Less likely to break a treaty
  • More likely to build caravans
  • More likely to initiate trades and peace treaties
  • More likely to give tech, money to threatened allies

Honorable (opp: Untrustworthy)

Believes in keeping word

  • Less likely to break a treaty
  • Less likely to make unfair demands
  • More likely to give help to allies

How this would work

  • Aggressive Elitist: attacks inferior cultures
  • Aggressive Egalitarian: wants to spread your wealth to them
  • Aggressive Militarist: WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR
  • Aggressive Pacifist: attacks with diplomats and spies
  • Aggressive Friendly: You want a treaty? Here, have a treaty. C'mon!
  • Aggressive Xenophobic: Give us some tech and then we'll talk
  • Honorable Aggressive Militarist: Moves units onto your land, waits for you to fire the first shot

New Insurrection Logic

City Cultural Memory

A second kind of city memory can be tied to the value needed to diplomatically overturn a city. The city can have a table of all of the players and their influence upon the city. We can call this cultural influence.

Culture points are accumulated:

  • 1 point per population per turn while controlled by this player.
  • 10 * (new size) points for population growth. Foreign players can collect this by sending settlers into the city and ordering them to build.
  • 1 point per shield value of improvements built while controlled by this player.
  • 1 point per turn per trade route with another city controlled by this player.
  • 1 point per gold spent by the player's diplomats to influence the city.
  • 1 point per player-owned unit present per turn.
  • 1 point per embassy presence per turn.
  • 1 point per turn per religious institution, courthouse, and police station while under control of this player. This may not be collected under certain forms of government.

Cultural influence affects the cost of starting a rebellion in a city.

New insurrection method

Concepts of a new insurrection method

The value of conquering a city by insurrection would be based on:

  • Basic city value (population + improvements)
  • Owner's culture in city
  • Raised to lower limit of gold per population unit, if below this limit.

Reduced by values related to:

  • Attacker culture in city
  • Current unhappiness in city

Instead of an insurgency costing a set amount, diplomats would now spend blindly, and a diplomat could choose to launch the insurrection at will.

Insurrection cost could be guessed by investigating a city.

The result of an insurrection may not be known until the start of the target's next turn.

Proposed new insurrection methods

Combat-based insurrection method:

The population produces hostile units which attack the loyal units present in the city. Some units may go neutral and are left out of the fight. Since the battle takes place within a city, city walls have no defensive effect.

  • Happy population units will automatically spawn defenders.
  • Regular population units have a chance of chance of spawning an attacking unit relative to:
    • (attacker_culture + financing) / max(1,(attacker_culture + defender_culture))
  • Unhappy population units have a higher chance of spawning attackers.
  • Revolting population units will always spawn attackers.
  • The chance of a present military unit turning neutral or not is the same as the chance of a regular population unit producing an attacker.
  • The destruction of every spawned unit, offense or defense, will cost 5 units of food and 25 units of culture.

Happiness-based insurrection method

Instead of spawning units, attempting to start an insurrection would cause unhappiness relative to the amount of money that was spent. A certain level of unhappiness would then naturally lead to revolt.

Merged insurrection method

Insurrection results may be variable:

  • Complete victory. As it is now. The city and all its units are given to the attacking player.
  • Partial victory. The same as now, except units outside the city may remain loyal to their original home country and simply switch their home city to one that can afford to supply them.
  • Combat and partial victory. Units appropriate to the target's technology level are spawned relative to the attacker's culture level, and they combat the units present in the city.
  • Combat and loss. Units are spawned but they are insufficient. The attacker's cultural gains are diminished relative to the value of the lost units, but defending units are damaged.
  • Rebellion. The city goes into rebellion state for a turn but nothing else happens.
  • Complete failure. Nothing happens and the attacker loses a significant share of culutural value.

Diplomacy changes

New diplomatic options

Technology trading

Give any technology

This allows for trading technologies when there is no embassy in place. Upon acceptance, the other party will select a technology from its list. Getting a bad deal, such as horseback-riding for gunpowder, should affect diplomatic relations.

A treaty with this clause cannot be accepted if a country has no new technologies to give.

Demonstrate any technology

A less expensive option for the pre-embassy stage. This gives the player knowledge that the enemy has a technology and a 10% boost toward developing it.

Give ALL technologies

Another option for the pre-embassy stage. Allies may also request this as part of an alliance.

War and peace

Extend ceasefire

Add eight turns to a ceasefire. Implies that the requester is not ready for peace or war.

Ally against ...

Replaces “enter into an alliance”. The alliance is recorded as being against one or more other nations. Those declaring war on behalf of the alliance will record the war as being on behalf of the originating country.

Peace must be made with the originating country to end the war without consequences.

Ally against ALL enemies

The equivalent of the game's current alliance logic where allies are expected to declare war against all of their enemies, which causes a permanent world war.

Suspend / Resume trade with ...

If agreed, all trade routes with the target player's cities will have no effect. New trade routes created after the treaty are not suspended, but establishing a new trade route will be seen by the AI as breaking the treaty.

A state of war will suspend the enemy's trade with your cities, unless your government is a Democracy or Anarchy.

Return liberated cities

An additional alliance clause that the player will automatically return a captured city to the ally if the ally has a claim and the player does not.

New agreements

Never use atomic weapons

A pledge binding the player never to use nuclear weapons.

Cut pollution

Reduces shields AND trade by 1 for every pollution in the city. Value is related to the cost in shields and trade.

General changes

"OR ELSE" clause

Add to any treaty a threat to reduce relations, either canceling an alliance or declaring war. This allows diplomacy to include the stick approach. Other countries will not appreciate you doing this. Republics and Democracies cannot use “OR ELSE” clauses.

"Both" button

Edit the treaty so the selected clauses will apply to both players instead of one player.

Separate preparation from sending

Currently the AI sees every small change to a treaty. I propose that changes be hidden from the opposing player until you press “Accept”. The party proposing the treaty will then go into a state of waiting for a response. The response can either be an explicit acceptance or denial, or sending back an edited treaty.

This allows the AI to get grumpy about constantly changing treaties in a way that will not trigger on every slight gold adjustment, and it allows the AI to offer rounded amounts of gold without the player being able to simply raise or lower the gold to match the exact amount the AI really wants.

States of a treaty:

  • (Negotiation) – One party is rewriting the treaty.
  • (accept in principle) – Waiting for parties to specify specifics of general terms. This applies only to “give any technology”. If a party is unable to meet its agreements, the treaty goes back to negotiation.
  • (accept final) – The treaty goes into effect.



Units may have the ability to launch a light attack which may continue until they receive damage equal to a quarter of their max hit points. This allows attackers to deal a small amount of damage without risking their unit. The main purpose is to protect expensive ship, air, and artillery units from falling to phalanxes. Some units may raid by default.

Static city wall bonus

To benefit attackers, reduce the strength of hard points, and generally allow equal-tech countries to defeat each other without needing artillery to defeat phalanxes, we can make this change:

Defensive positions increase defense by static points, not a percentage

  • Hills increase defense by one point, mountains by two.
  • Fortifying gives a unit one additional defense point.
  • Fortresses increase defense by one.
  • City walls increase defense by two static points.

Catapults are now 3/1 units that ignore defense bonuses.

Detailed governments


Instead of the five well deliniated governments, governments can be defined by economic and political factors allowing for more varied arrangements. These factors could be strictly defined, or on axes representing trends from one extreme to another.

A revolution may aim for one arrangement and end up with another. Multiple revolutions may be required to switch to your desired government from an oppositely oriented one.

Governmental forms

Economic Freedom


Theory: No government interference in economy.

  • Can trend towards becoming Feudalist or Capitalist.
  • 2 trade per road square. [maximized]
  • -20% maximum tax rate. [minimized]
  • No luxuries allowed. [minimized]
  • Lowers defense against infiltration. [minimized]
  • Corruption [maximized]


Theory: Government allows the economy to be run by the wealthy.

  • Requires Capitalism.
  • Can trend towards becoming Mercantilist, Feudalist, or Socialist
  • 2 trade per road square
  • Luxury spending is more likely to create Happy people than make unhappy people content
  • -10% maximum tax rate.

Mixed Market

Theory: Government ensures a market economy exists.

  • Requires Capitalism and Communism
  • Can trend towards becoming Capitalist or Socialist
  • 2 trade per road square
  • Less unhappiness


Theory: Government favors large traders, suppresses their competitors.

  • Requires Trade.
  • Can trend towards becoming Feudalist.
  • Capitol gets full 2 trade per road square; other cities may be reduced
  • Extra corruption.


Theory: Government favors small traders, suppresses large traders.

  • Requires Labor Union.
  • Increases cost of building improvements.


Theory: Government owns everything, nobles get special favours.

  • Requires Feudalism
  • 1 trade per road square
  • - 10% maximum tax rate.


Theory: Government strictly forbids large traders and collectivizes property on the local level.

  • Requires Communism.
  • Increases cost of building improvements.


Theory: Everything is owned by the tribe and is used by whoever shouts the loudest or kills the last owner. This may be the default / weakest economic form.

  • Very high corruption outside the capitol.


Theory: Government owns everything and doles out by algorithm

  • 1 trade per road square [minimized]
  • Highly focused, allows for highest tax rates
  • Cannot exist under Anarchy

Governmental Systems


Theory: No government worth mentioning.

  • Government cannot collect taxes or build improvements


Theory: Warlord rules all with an iron fist.

  • Harder to hold on to external cities


Theory: Warlord with powers derived from God. Arms, money, and religion all are used to support the government.

  • Requires strong religious backing

Constitutional Monarchy

Theory: Ruler is only a figurehead, while a parliament runs affairs.

  • Acts as a Republic, but can be knocked down to a Monarchy without any period of chaos.
  • Requires strong religious backing


Theory: Rule by elite.


Theory: Rule by popular will (the mob)

  • Highly susceptible to subversion.

Religious Systems:


Theory: early earth/nature religions.

  • Most easily swayed to other religions
  • Starting position


Theory: people worship a coterie of gods.

  • Worshippers of different gods cause division, eases undermining of society


Theory: people worship one god.

  • Most solid society


Theory: belief in no religion.

  • People dislike other religious believers


Theory: no belief in religion.

  • People don't care about other religions
  • No effect of temple, cathedral
  • Religious intrusion can undermine the society.

Political Systems:


Theory: belief in strong natural freedoms

  • More dissent
  • More trade
  • Cannot impose martial law
  • Cannot exist in Despotism


Theory: just wanting what's best for the country

  • “Baseline”?


Theory: Values tradition

  • Lowers science output
  • Increases resistance to subversion


Theory: People urged to join, support military

  • Lowers cost of building combat units.
  • Often the result of a revolution.

Fascist / Totalitarian

Theory: People urged to follow one path without dissent

  • Lowers population growth
  • Increases industrial output
  • Cannot exist in Republic or Constitutional Monarchy
  • Cannot exist in Agnostic, Animist, or Polytheist dominance

Combat AI modifications

City defense

For each city, computer determines:

  • Likely vectors of attack (including air)
    • Relative threat of each vector
    • Defensible positions within each vector
    • Distance to known enemy position along vector
    • Distance to fog of war along vector
  • Number of times attacked in last X years
  • Total Defense power
    • avg(def * hit points) * count(units)
  • Strength of enemy assualt parties + 1 enemy assault unit
  • Is palace present?
  • How hard would it be to reconquer the city if it is lost?

The AI then, when under threat:

  • IF the number of free defensive units within transport range exists
    • Bolster defense from other towns
  • ELSE IF enemy presence is overwhelming (attack > 3*defense + defender)
    • IF city walls would help
      • Buy city walls
    • ELSE IF nearby town is in transport range
    • AND nearby town has enough production to support this town's units
    • AND this is not the Capitol
      • Sell city walls/cathedral
      • evacuate to nearest town and set home city
      • Build counterattack unit or diplomat in that town
      • Sell cathedral and evacuate
  • ELSE IF defense can handle the threat
    • Build counterattack unit
  • ELSE
    • Build defensive unit

Troublesome Scenarios/Paradoxes:

A phalanx is on a hill, preventing some Chariots from advancing to near the city. Some other chariots are attacking the city from the other side. The city only has one phalanx unit; it may be able to defend against one group of Chariots, but not both.

How can the AI determine that it is best to keep that Phalanx where it is to keep the attackers split instead of pulling the hill Phalanx back toward the city?

Unit management

Idea: A unit's class ratings are automatically assigned by the AI when the list of units and their capabilities is loaded, and are based upon the unit's attributes.


  • AI will properly use invented specialty units in a scenario without the programmer needing to specify how each unit should be used.
    • Future AIs can intentionally misuse units if they're programmed to be stupid.
  • AI will figure out to lead an attack with armour and clean up the survivors up with fighters, and not the other way around
  • AI will attack cities with strongest units first

Each unit will have Environment flags specifying whether the unit can act in an environment (land, sea, and anything that gets hacked onto the game in the future such as a space environment for satellites). This way, the AI will not build land units to try to defend its ferry boats.

AI's Unit Classifications


Corresponds to AttackStrong.

Used to

  • attack enemy cities and hard points
  • counter-attack enemy forces attacking own hard points

Calculated from:

  • Attack power
  • Firepower
  • ?is destroyed after one turn
  • ?ends turn after attack
  • ?ignores city walls/other bonuses


Corresponds to AttackFast.

Used to

  • explore new land
  • reconnaissance
  • attack enemy units on open field
  • attack undefended cities
  • attack hard points after Assault units have attacked

Calculated from:

  • Attack power
  • Movement speed


Corresponds to DefendOK, DefendGood

Used to:

  • defend cities
  • defend hard points (forts, hills, bonuses)
  • permanent reconnaissance (push back fog of war)
  • defend future cities
  • accompany Assault units
  • accompany noncombatant units

Calculated from:

  • Defense power
  • Defensive bonuses


Corresponds to FerryBoat

Used to

  • carry units

Calculated from:

  • unit carry weight
  • defensive power
  • movement speed

Suitability algorithms

  • A = a + f + destroyed?10:0 + ends?2:0 + ignores?3:0 * HP
  • D = 2d - m + bonuses?num*2:0 * HP
  • S = a * (m-1) * HP
  • F = u * (d + m)

This would make Fighters useless for defense, even though one ought to be built if opponent has Bombers.

AI attack plans

AI will first move towards the designated city. If counterattacks weaken or threaten to weaken this advance, more Superiority and Defensive units are built and/or brought forward.

If resistance is met, Defensive units lead the march.

Target is surrounded by multiple units from multiple sides on the same turn. AI does not stack units in one place unless it plans to attack and succeed in the same turn the stacking occurs. If hardpoints prevent surrounding, they are assaulted first, even if they are other cities, unless there is no chance to conquer both. Defensive units immediately surround city, while units with >=2 movement surround the next radius and assault units move onto defensive squares.

If the surrounding team healthily survives a turn and no/few enemy units have died counterattacking, wait a turn to starve out enemy production.

Guess at enemy's defense power, given known enemy defensive unit strength and number of unblockaded production squares if city has been under siege. If attack power is sufficient, attack. If initial attacks fail but the same enemy unit was targeted twice, attack with superiority units. If this fails but the enemy is down to units with next to no HP, attack with defensive units.

Unit changes

Base unit type on experience

Units may transform into different units based on their experience.

You could build an Advanced Barracks on top of a Barracks to get the more experienced unit, but it is an expensive building.

Warriors can be:

 1. Fighters 
 1. Braves 
 1. Warriors 

Bronze Age spearmen can be:

 1. Spearmen 
 1. Hoplite 
 1. Phalanx 

Bronze Age archers can be:

 1. Hunters 
 1. Bowmen 
 1. Archers 

and so on.

Hacked unit list

Freeciv has some differences from Civ2. Most notably, the Fundamentalism government and the Elephant unit no longer exist.

There are some other changes I've been thinking of making. Some are fairly simple and intended to restore some semblance of gameplay and prevent my mechanical routs of the computer, while others are more experimental and intended to move the game in another direction. Since I have the Freeciv source, I might just see if I can Make It So.

Unit Modifications:

  • Howitzer no longer ignores walls
  • Phalanx to (2/2) from (1/2)
  • Chariot to (3/2) from (3/1), cost to 40 from 30
  • All naval unit movement increased by 1
  • Destroyers can have a single Helicopter land on them (but not other aircraft)
  • Submarines can only load Cruise Missiles and Nukes at a city (so you can't fly them in ;)

Improvement Modifications:

  • City Walls increase defense by 2 points (instead of 3 times)
  • Coastal Defense increases defense by 4 points (instead of 2 times)
  • SAM Battery increases defense by 6 points (instead of 2 times)


  • Existence in city increases defense bonus by 1 (instead of 50%)
    • Make that two with (new tech) Urban Warfare
  • Fortifying in city increases defense bonus by 50% (instead of 0)
  • Increase cost of 0wnz3r1ng cities by 10 times, or spend 50% cost on failure (this option might already exist)

New Units:

  • Jetfighter (6/4/10, 60 shield) (gained with Rocketry)
  • Tank (6/5/3) (obsoleted by new Panzer)
  • Panzer (8/5/3) (obsoleted by what is now Armour)
  • Special Forces (8/5/1 with 1hp/2fp/80shield, paradrop)
  • Conquistador (3/3/1, 50 shield, treats all squares as road)
  • AC-130 (8/2/8, 2fp, 60 shield, bomber)
  • A-10 (8/3/10, 3fp)


  • Mech Infantry gained from something other than Labour Union (makes no sense)
  • Labour Union needs to do something positive like turn one unhappy person happy.

Another unit modification I've been considering

  • Boost
    • Musketeers by 1/1 to 4/4
    • Dragoons to 5/3
    • everything after that by 2/2, and
  • Add new units:
    • Longbow (4/3)
    • Mounted Archer (5/2)

Yet another modification I've been considering is to have levels of improvements.

Barracks: units produced gain “levels” and become other units by the number of barracks available at the city:

  • Mob (1/1) → Warriors (2/2) → (???)
  • Hoplite (2/1) → Phalanx (3/2) → Legion (4/2) → Centurion (6/3)
  • Archer (3/2) → Yeomen (4/3) → Crossbowmen (5/3) → Longbowmen (5/3, cheaper)
  • Horsemen (2/1) → Knights (4/2) → Mounted Archers (5/2) → Dragoons (5/3)
  • Tank (6/5) → Panzer (8/5) → Armour (10/5) → M1 (12/7)

Another idea: Make better units more expensive. Currently, 1 tank costs the same and 2 riflemen. Make it cost 3 or 4; will people still build them? Yes, because they need the firepower to go through hardpoints, but offense would become much harder.


{“TOPICINFO”:{“author”:“DeltaTango”,”date”:“1333511045”,”format”:“1.1”,”reprev”:“1.2”,”version”:“1.2”},”TOPICPARENT”:{“name”:“WebHome”},”GameAboutFormTemplate”:{“GameGenre”:“Simulation”,”Inspirations”:false,”GamePerspective”:“2-d Top View”,”ProjectLegality”:“Unspecified”,”ProjectDifficulty”:“Unspecified”,”TargetPlatform”:“Desktop”,”TargetERSB”:“E”,”YearOfIdea”:false,”DesignVersion”:false,”DesignCompletion”:“Needs Work”,”CodeVersion”:false,”CodeCompletion”:“No code”}}

civilizationmodifications.txt · Last modified: 2013/11/29 17:16 (external edit)