I wrote this before playing demo. And then added on to it after playing the demo.
I'm not a coder (I can do very minor editing and understand what is going on, I suppose, or debugging. That should save someone time.), but maybe I am a thinker.
My initial desire is for
social engineering and, after playing the demo,
improved pacing. Graphically for 3d leaders (I assume Buncle is interested in this) and I think such things could be done with low manpower. The current AC mod (The Unity Project) has a powerup style social engineering, and developing one particular social engineering path.
I respect his efforts, though in my opinion, if nothing else there should be more considerations for alternating one's model than in the original. But I do not know how many people here would agree with me, or at large. I should like to hear opinions on social engineering. If it were up to me political would represent a larger part of the game, assuming the role of affinities, and using the guest system.
One should discuss how orthodox a more developed mod should be. Inorder to make a good mod, I think there is necessity to discuss AC and really understand AC. I don't think the Civ4 mod was as interesting a game mechanically.
Before anything else though, really, I'd like to ask why a worker takes ten turns to build, and an improvement the same. Just why? If anything you should start with a worker (or a colony pod).
Suggestion: The research consists of buildings or unit upgrades. Production takes so bloody long, removes the cultures/virtue system and put bonuses in the research instead.
observation and comparisonsAC is a faster game than the rest of the series. I personally don't think the length of the other Civ games improves their strategy, options, considerations. It just makes it more long-term. In AC, You don't spend 60 turns on a wonder (if you know what you are doing... or if I just sucked at Civ, I don't know, I gave it up). The Civ4 mod emphasized a bunch of small wonders. I think perhaps that this is not correct.
BE has a health mechanic, as in other Civilization games. Inorder to really grasp it, it might be nice if there is strategy discussion on it from the other Civilization games. Actually, should look at strategy commentaries on the game, if not Civilization more generally. But have to keep in mind low manpower.
Philosophical and mechanical considerations regarding the AC FactionsThough I am a political Legalist, if not Christian (more philosophically than literally), and not a literal Marxist, a philosophy which considers a very broad historical mechanic that I rather doubt can be applied administratively, a paragraph from this Mao documents methodology reflects a certain methodology in my thinking.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_17.htmIt states "The world outlook of materialist dialectics holds that in order to understand the development of a thing we should study it internally and in its relations with other things; in other words, the development of things should be seen as their internal and necessary self-movement, while each thing in its movement is interrelated with and interacts on the things around it."
The affinities idea is goofy to me, as to me it just looks like technologism versus ludditism. In AC, Gaians come come close to being a BE Harmony affinity (Green)), but really their philosophy only really works becaue of Planet. So in that sense I would like it thought about just philosophically.
To me an idea is considered internally, in and of itself. Yang focus on growth and industry are ultimately simply better; they have more utility. The Legalism of Yang, both in reality and in the game, unfolds in itself, laying out fortresses, and ultimately wins because of it's internal logic.
I cannot actually talk about the validity of the Gaian philosophy in terms of it's internal coherency because it is a not a self-contained idea; the Gaian philosophy interfaces with planet. I am unable to actually consider it as a real, whole, internally coherent idea, because it does not function as such. It's played using mindworms; i.e. using an external factor.
The same can be said of Santiago. Because she is industrially crippled, she is only going to win if she is near you. Otherwise she will lose pace. Ultimately the other faction lose because they are latching onto externals, like morale.
University researches better, but of course he can't make what he researches as fast, so eventually Yang is going to catch up. Energy is more internal/essential, so Morgan can keep up with University. Energy has more utility than research, and can be applied to building in addition to research. Ultimately, of course, Energy is not as internal/essential as growth and industry, and does not have as much utility as as them.
if one was to reconsider the philosophy of the factions, I would do it giving them more internally coherent ideologies and mechanics, which unfold out of themselves. They should, of course, still play different; perhaps even more. But maybe Santiago shouldn't be so crippled all the time, maybe some bonuses should be able to be turned on/off, or have multiples to trade between.
