|
Post by afosynthesis on Sept 27, 2015 10:51:13 GMT
I've been a bit concerned about the Society and Industrial stages, that they might suffer from a lot of historical inaccuracy much like Spore. It might sound easy to make it historically accurate, but it's not really as easy as it sounds.
In Spore, we have tribes that form cities, and then conquer other cities and expand their civilization. This is quite obviously not how it worked out in real life. How about other games? In the Civilization series, a few people found a village, then the people of that village found more villages and conquer other villages, eventually becoming cities and they develop throughout time. This is also inaccurate. In real life, civilizations sprung up in many different ways. They were inherited, conquered by outside forces, proclaimed by separatists, and united through diplomacy, war, and so on. Civilizations also didn't last forever (like the color red in spore lasting from the tribal ages to the space age), so that also adds a problem.
|
|
|
Post by StealthStyleL on Sept 27, 2015 13:42:41 GMT
I'm pretty confident Thrive's Society and Industrial stages will not be like the above. They will pertain more to real life and include a number of ways to expand your civilisation, like the ones you have listed above. Other civilisations will be able to come in and conquer you, you can do vice versa, you could unite several civilisations, create alliances and so on.
Also, the problem of the rise and fall of civilisations is actually a very recently discussed topic on Slack and is still ongoing (and is likely to be for a long time.) Just so you know we are considering that.
|
|
The_Wayward_Admiral
Spacefaring
The_Real_Slim_Shady
Atrox drew this awesome image of the Keldori!
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by The_Wayward_Admiral on Sept 27, 2015 13:54:18 GMT
I have a similar problem with games such as civ (after conquering half the planet all challenge is gone), however it's important not to go to far with realism. As the devs have said many times before I say it here, Thrive must strive to be both accurate and a fun playing experience. I truly believe that having challenges (i.e. economic downturns, REAL civil unrest, etc) that could lead to the fall of your civilization could be fun, but if truly realistic they would eventually become such great challenges that they're insurmountable. I realize that what I'm trying to say might not be clear, so condensed: I agree that there should be a higher chance of failure for the player's civilization, but it shouldn't be like the civ IV mod "Rhyse and Fall" of civilization where you couldn't avoid the frustrating and inevitable failure of your civilization due to forces well beyond your control. Balance between realism and fun! Sorry if this comes off as abrasive, that's not the intent.
|
|
|
Post by StealthStyleL on Sept 27, 2015 14:33:14 GMT
I agree with you. I think the player should always have a chance of success. This chance can be slimmer if the player selects a harder difficulty.
It didn't really sound abrasive at all.
|
|
The_Wayward_Admiral
Spacefaring
The_Real_Slim_Shady
Atrox drew this awesome image of the Keldori!
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by The_Wayward_Admiral on Sept 27, 2015 18:16:28 GMT
In reference to the generative nature of society, there could be a rudimentary "secessionist" system, where malcontents are tallied, and eventually they will either leave to make a new nation or declare a small part of the player's empire to be a new one (either completely novel or joining an existing empire).
|
|
|
Post by StealthStyleL on Sept 27, 2015 18:22:35 GMT
Are you talking about groups within the nation deciding to up and leave? Sounds like a good idea to me.
|
|
The_Wayward_Admiral
Spacefaring
The_Real_Slim_Shady
Atrox drew this awesome image of the Keldori!
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by The_Wayward_Admiral on Sept 27, 2015 18:25:11 GMT
Yeah, I think it would be both realistic and a neat challenge. It sounds like the current plan is that the more authoritarian you are(as if being an eternal god-emperor wasn't enough so already) the more control you have over what happens to your nation but the more unhappy your citizens are. So basically this mechanic would force you to balance the ability to control you nation (and prevent disaster) with the happiness of your citizens, which is its own disaster. Does that sound balanced? I think so...
|
|
|
Post by afosynthesis on Sept 27, 2015 18:27:54 GMT
IMO the hard part will be who you will actually play as in the society/industrial stages because, like I said, no civilization lasts forever and it wouldn't be historically accurate to play a tribal nation (with the same name) that expands over the course of thousands of years.
|
|
The_Wayward_Admiral
Spacefaring
The_Real_Slim_Shady
Atrox drew this awesome image of the Keldori!
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by The_Wayward_Admiral on Sept 27, 2015 18:33:19 GMT
Definitely, we could maybe think of changes to government structures as changes in the country (few would argue that pre and post Bolshevik Russia were the same countries). Or perhaps if your country flounders and dies, you could choose another to lead to greatness (or failure). The way I always envisioned tribal stage for Thrive was that you command a tribe of ancestral beings, and once it transitions to society you are randomly assigned a small country. Now I'm no dev and the plans that I've read are far from final, so take this with whatever grain of salt you wish.
|
|
|
Post by Oliveriver on Sept 27, 2015 18:54:00 GMT
The temporary nature of civilisations has been considered. See: https://www.reddit.com/r/thrive/comments/2g1xt2/on_the_rise_and_fall_of_nations/
|
|
|
Post by StealthStyleL on Sept 27, 2015 18:55:18 GMT
Say you have a large empire, right. What if, for some reason, your empire is shattered into many tiny smaller pieces? Which one do you play as? Is it random? Is it the one with your capital? Do you get to choose?
By the way, I'm not going against this idea. Far from it, I want it to be implemented.
Edit: I remember that discussion now. Ninja'd. I realised I said virtually the same thing on that thread.
|
|
The_Wayward_Admiral
Spacefaring
The_Real_Slim_Shady
Atrox drew this awesome image of the Keldori!
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by The_Wayward_Admiral on Sept 27, 2015 19:01:33 GMT
IMO one should be assigned the fragment that is closest in ideology to the progenitor nation.
|
|
|
Post by gamerark15 on Sept 28, 2015 14:31:12 GMT
Will the head of the nation be given a name, like civ and will this head(hope not) be immortal like the leaders in Civ
|
|
|
Post by StealthStyleL on Sept 28, 2015 15:54:53 GMT
The head of your nation will have a title based on what kind of government system you have, but I'm not sure if it'll have a name. If it did it would probably be randomly generated. And no, it won't be immortal.
|
|
|
Post by gamerark15 on Sept 28, 2015 19:49:17 GMT
Thats the one thing I never got about the civ games, they have the same name and face over THOUSANDS of years and dont look a day past their age
|
|