Revolting Cities + Newborn Nations

What would you like to see in Freeciv? Do you have a good idea what should be improved or how?
Eusebio Ptolomeu
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:51 am

Revolting Cities + Newborn Nations

Postby Eusebio Ptolomeu » Fri Aug 31, 2018 11:33 am

-I've talked a little about my idea of revolting cities once. My idea would be to make cities which are in disorder for more than a certain number of turns actually revolt against the player, and gain independence. Basically, this would mean this new city would be a new nation/player/AI added to the game, just like what happens in civil war (but limited to a single city here). Your capital (the city containing your palace) should be immune to this, but any other city can fight for independence. Once a city gains independence, all units which call it their homecity will belong to this new nation. When it comes to gold and other factors that are nation-wide and not specific for a single city, just take a proportional part of the national treasure (if you have 200 in gold and five cities, once one city revolts, it would take 40 pieces of your gold, etc.). Also, the new players already starts with all the technologies you have researched up to that point, a new pallace is created in the city, and it starts the game already at war with you.
-My other idea would be to let huts evolve to new civilizations. Basically, any tile with a hut would have a small percentage of generating a new nation (if possible, the nature of the tile could be taken into account: plains and forests should have a hiigher chance of developing, because they naturally gives more food, while it should be harder in deserts). We could create a thershold to let the simulation decide when it starts running these dices: huts will only be able to develop into nations after a certain number of turns, so the original players have the chance to explore some of them. Given that a new techology is one of the possible outcomes when you interact with huts, when a hut becomes a civilization, it could start with one (and only one) technology already researched. Of course, one of the first technologies. About diplomacy, it would start with a "never-met" or "peaceful" instance with all players. The idea here is basically to let huts evolve into civilizations (new players) if they are let alone enough

User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 840
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: Revolting Cities + Newborn Nations

Postby Corbeau » Fri Aug 31, 2018 12:53 pm

Interesting idea. However, every even a little bit experienced player will avoid cities being in revolt for more than 1 turn, and most of the time will stop the revolt even before it starts. So it would be an interesting feature, but would happen in less than 1% cases.

Eusebio Ptolomeu
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:51 am

Re: Revolting Cities + Newborn Nations

Postby Eusebio Ptolomeu » Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:01 pm

Perharps we could add some challenge in taking care of cities? Ok, I admit that I'm thinking more about realism than gameplay here, but I think it would create more interesting, umpredictable matches. The idea here is once you create a large empire, with lots of cities and land, you pretty much beats the game, since no other nation can stand against yours; and this idea would make the very concept of a large empire works against itself, making it harder to mantain, thus adding a new sort of challenge for the player. Of course both of the things I suggested should come as an option you can turn off.

User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 840
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: Revolting Cities + Newborn Nations

Postby Corbeau » Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:09 pm

Keep in mind that a single-player game is drastically different from multiplayer, and a regular multiplayer is, again, drastically different from Longturn.

Eusebio Ptolomeu
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:51 am

Re: Revolting Cities + Newborn Nations

Postby Eusebio Ptolomeu » Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:04 pm

I know. I was thinking more about single-player experience here. And, also, my approach to this game might not be the same as most people: coming from Dwarf Fortress, I really like the motto "losing is fun", so this might explain why I like to add challenges like this. I admit that in Freeciv I have more fun watching the world evolves, unfortunately (for me) in the end a nation always has to win. I know the game can't run forever and it will have to end sometime, which is fine; my biggest problem here is the fact that a nation can literaly conquer the world, and nations that began in the dawn of time remains for thousands of years until the present, when in reality empires come and go. As I said, I believe my point here is a little more realism, because in the end I treat this game more like a simulation game (like sim city) than a game "you beat".