PDA

View Full Version : Contagious diseases



ruuti0
01-12-2018, 09:11 PM
I think we could have more different (contagious) diseases in 1800.

And they could have different serious ranges (like 1-5), 1 easiest, 5 deadliest. Also some could be more local (like 1 island) and some more global (like all islands).

There could be ONE REALLY BAD ONE illness / contagious disease like Black Death. Well I know black death was in 1300s, but something similar maybe, just different disease and name for it, that would affect all players and players would have to really fight it to survive. This disease could be very rare.


I know there was one similar thread, but it was more about illnesses and poor hygiene. I think we should one 1 thread only for contagious diseases.


What kind of different contagious diseases you would want to have in 1800?

And how you would want them to affect game and gameplay?

How you would want to "fight" them? Having just hospitals or maybe something more complex like getting cures from university reseaches?

Same could apply to different disasters also

stylisticsagi
01-13-2018, 12:47 PM
I think having ot deal with disasters have always been to easy in anno games.
I found it still best in 1404 yet your population there was not your top income so it wouldn't matter if 2/3 of your population died for a limited amount of time.
2070 had the best balance of trade income and tax income but disasters where reduced big time.
But in general it was often more costly to build a hospital/firestation then to just suffer the disasters. I think this is wrong.

I think your suggestion of having more ranges in disasters is awsome.
I really liked the way in 1404 when your town had an illness the traders refused to trade with you.
I think it would even be more awsome to have all your passive trade routes also not make port on your city to prevent spreading. Altough it would be even cooler that when ships do make port they would get infected themself for an amount of time and spread the disease on other islands and other players. Perhaps a new harbour building wich can stop ships from entering your harbour when they are infected would be awsome!

But in general i think counter buildings (fire station, hospital, police station, carpenter,...) Should have a much wider range so when a simple disaster starts at the edge of your city they will always react on it. Yet when bigger disasters happen one station would not be enough to protect your city from it.
I'm thinking of fires and ilnesses just happening like they always do without a immidiate warning (so you don't get message spammed) happen frequently. Yet bigger accident can happen also.
A bit like when you are sabotaged. a big explosion happening somewhere, a big sudden outbreak of a desease (perhaps hospitals need a small amount of time to make a cure) etc wich can overwhelm your city for a brief time.
I think disasters should be things who get your attention. Also non city disasters like 2070 where awsome the tsunamies and tornados.

p.s. If they would add a carpenter building and house deteriation it would be a very nice feature that whenever a house is destroyed within carpenters range it would be rebuild by the carpenter nstead of you doing it manually. p.s.2. the carpenter range from 1404 was waaaay to small.

Nox_29
01-13-2018, 12:56 PM
If they do add in disasters like tornadoes again I really want them to be toggable like in 1404. They weren't in 2070 and I really disliked that. The damage they make was often enough to practically destroy a player.

AgmasGold
01-13-2018, 11:07 PM
Yep, definitely need to be able to toggle disasters off completely, for when a more casual play through is wanted.

stylisticsagi
01-14-2018, 03:29 PM
Such catastrophy disasters would indeed be toggable but city based disasters like fire illness and other really need to be in the game.

AgmasGold
01-14-2018, 05:02 PM
Well the whole point with them being togglable is that the player can turn them on or off (including fire and illness, hopefully). If one person wants fire disasters in the game, then they can just leave that setting switched on.

stylisticsagi
01-14-2018, 06:01 PM
in 2070 this was possible and even some option to set how often the disasters would occur. but then the city disasters in 2070 where a joke.

ruuti0
01-21-2018, 08:22 PM
Anybody else (than just me and stylisticsagi?) who want different ranges to disasters?

I personally find that it would be really cool to have like 1-5 ranges.

More dangerous one = more it would affect whole gameplay and bigger part of map, less dangerous = more local (like only for island for example) and less deadly.

It would be cool if game would notify that disease is spreading to one island and you have X amount of time to try protect your island(s). You probably could protect your island(s) till some point, but not necessarily counter them 100%.

That range thing would be really good for different natural disasters also.

AgmasGold
01-21-2018, 09:07 PM
I mean, you had tsunami's (a bit weak and not destructive enough to be honest) and tornado's (very destructive and annoying) in 2070. Having some form of epidemic, maybe as a scenario, would be pretty cool, although I am not sure if I would enjoy it in a normal game.

stylisticsagi
01-22-2018, 03:24 PM
I think hapiness can have a large impact on this. More unhappy peasents are at higher risk of causing (more dangerous) fires and epidemics then happy ones.
It is off course mainly manipulated with tax levels but thes could create a reason why you should not let citizens always pays as much tax as possible. If you let them then pay the lowest tax as possible they will be far less risky to have disasters. Off course for this to work tax has to be a really valuable income not like in 1404.

And apart from that happier vs unhappier people could also have a bigger impact on grafical city atmosphere. I remember in 1701 if you let your people pay the least amount of tax they would hang the laundry in between buildings (bit weird as if higher taxed people had no laundry...) and they also started to furm bands of musicians who walked the streets in parades and making music. That alone was for me a reason not to tax people more XD. Perhaps with higher taxes and unhappier people you would see more beggars and perhaps some military patrols in your streets to give you the more tyrant feeling. even more so if they would interact with citizens. weve'seen citizens fight since i guess 1701 why not let military patrols also fight some citizens and stuff? (p.s. all of this stuff i just mentioned would be a pure grafical thing).

ruuti0
02-10-2018, 03:40 PM
I think hapiness can have a large impact on this. More unhappy peasents are at higher risk of causing (more dangerous) fires and epidemics then happy ones.
It is off course mainly manipulated with tax levels but thes could create a reason why you should not let citizens always pays as much tax as possible. If you let them then pay the lowest tax as possible they will be far less risky to have disasters. Off course for this to work tax has to be a really valuable income not like in 1404.

And apart from that happier vs unhappier people could also have a bigger impact on grafical city atmosphere. I remember in 1701 if you let your people pay the least amount of tax they would hang the laundry in between buildings (bit weird as if higher taxed people had no laundry...) and they also started to furm bands of musicians who walked the streets in parades and making music. That alone was for me a reason not to tax people more XD. Perhaps with higher taxes and unhappier people you would see more beggars and perhaps some military patrols in your streets to give you the more tyrant feeling. even more so if they would interact with citizens. weve'seen citizens fight since i guess 1701 why not let military patrols also fight some citizens and stuff? (p.s. all of this stuff i just mentioned would be a pure grafical thing).

Maybe (happiness factor), but there have to be also some risks for accidents that doesn't get affected at all by all for example by happiness, really bad accidents like more dangerous contagious diseases could come with certain risk, no matter what you do.

Happiness could be part of reducing smaller diseases.

stylisticsagi
02-15-2018, 12:30 PM
Completly aggreed and the level of these should also be adjustable in the game settings.
But it would be a nice change to have happines have a big factor on this since happines is straight inline with how much you are taxing your people.
So taxing your people less would reduce the change when you can not yet afford the anti disaster buildings or you simply don't want to deal with them(like the plaege could cost you alot in 1404 because traders won't come to your port with plague can cost you much more then losing some tax income). Or wanting the max out of tax income yet you also lace more efforts in protecting your city with sufficient anti disaster buildings.

ruuti0
02-15-2018, 06:05 PM
Completly aggreed and the level of these should also be adjustable in the game settings.
But it would be a nice change to have happines have a big factor on this since happines is straight inline with how much you are taxing your people.
So taxing your people less would reduce the change when you can not yet afford the anti disaster buildings or you simply don't want to deal with them(like the plaege could cost you alot in 1404 because traders won't come to your port with plague can cost you much more then losing some tax income). Or wanting the max out of tax income yet you also lace more efforts in protecting your city with sufficient anti disaster buildings.

There could be also option to buy out help (like some sort of vaccine or medication that could help your citizen who got disease) from NPC etc. You would just to sail to their headquarter, buy it and go back. Just one other possible option.

stylisticsagi
02-16-2018, 09:10 AM
Altough i like mechanics to promote this i'd say let's stick this to sidequests.
I think if you place anti disaster buildings standard in your city you should overcome most disasters automaticly unless there are things happening to overwhelm you like sabotage or indeed the more dangerous forms of desease as the topic started with.
But if it's just an option i'm for.
Perhaps a whole set of items wich are consumables and you can create them in a school or something simular like the lab in 2070.
like make firefighters put out fires 500% faster for 5 minutes or stuff like that.

ruuti0
02-16-2018, 05:04 PM
Altough i like mechanics to promote this i'd say let's stick this to sidequests.
I think if you place anti disaster buildings standard in your city you should overcome most disasters automaticly unless there are things happening to overwhelm you like sabotage or indeed the more dangerous forms of desease as the topic started with.
But if it's just an option i'm for.
Perhaps a whole set of items wich are consumables and you can create them in a school or something simular like the lab in 2070.
like make firefighters put out fires 500% faster for 5 minutes or stuff like that.

I agree partyly with "if you place anti disaster buildings standard in your city you should overcome most disasters automaticly unless there are things happening to overwhelm you like sabotage or indeed the more dangerous forms of desease as the".

Instead of totally stopping some diseases (I speak only about diseases now), I find it smarter that hospitals (if you have them all the time) could make them less likely to happen, but all diseases still could happen.

WorldC
02-16-2018, 06:10 PM
I have to read more about the whole 1800 disaster feature. But aren't we able to define this by game settings "easy, medium, hard'
I love the way 2205 gives me options to tweak my settings when starting a new world.

I have a world without any sort of Disaster and Invasions, and I have a world with both of them on "heavy/hard/plenty"

I hope we are still able to tune these settings to our needs..

Placing a "no disaster" building could be a addition to that model... sure.

ruuti0
02-16-2018, 11:19 PM
I have to read more about the whole 1800 disaster feature. But aren't we able to define this by game settings "easy, medium, hard'
I love the way 2205 gives me options to tweak my settings when starting a new world.

I have a world without any sort of Disaster and Invasions, and I have a world with both of them on "heavy/hard/plenty"

I hope we are still able to tune these settings to our needs..


Yeah in past we had that option (like different disaster levels: easy/medium/hard and so on), but I don't remember that they would confirmed this option for 1800. But if I have to guess, we will have it like that since it has been like that for so long.

I agree. It has been one of key things that made continunous game so good that you could configure game settings so well.

stylisticsagi
02-17-2018, 10:40 AM
agreed as well but still the disasters must also feel like disasters.
1404 was very good at this your population could handle a small fire and plaegue outbreak but when it started to spread and you didn't act your whole city was quite fast a disaster zone.
in 2070 even on hard disaster settings it was easy enough to just undergo the disaster and rebuild that one house after... Crime also was nothing more then a nuecence.

Sliders yes but make sure if you set them to medium/hard the disasters are also really something to keep in mind.
However having a hospital makes people less sick sounds like a good idea but in reality it just made that one house wich was just outside the hospital range sick and this was terrible annoying.
For this reason i think fire stations and hospitals should have much more range but will not overcome disasters on their own in larger cities.

ruuti0
02-17-2018, 12:23 PM
However having a hospital makes people less sick sounds like a good idea but in reality it just made that one house wich was just outside the hospital range sick and this was terrible annoying.
For this reason i think fire stations and hospitals should have much more range but will not overcome disasters on their own in larger cities.

Yes I like it that they have limited effect area, it give you one skill area to game, build your cities so that everyone get protected when needed. It makes you think accurately and carefully how to place each building (or leave empty slot to right places for disaster buildings and later add them if needed) and I like it.

I wouldn't myself give them bigger effect area (at least for basic early-mid game), because it would narrow one skill area of game in early-mid game. I think what we had in 2070 was pretty optimal. In late game things are different because most of your main cities are pretty much ready so there is room for different things. There could be option to make research in later game that allow you build more expensive versions of hospitals/firestatsions/and so on that would make effect area longer, disaster buildings more effective or better somehow. I don't mean that they would have to make whole 3d models again from empty but maybe make them little bit different looking also.

stylisticsagi
02-17-2018, 03:50 PM
that's also a great idea.
perhaps even some tent version for those people who love to place anti disaster buildings only when needed to but are build quite cheap.
While more expensive versions have bigger range and perhaps also another bonus as well.
Actually i see no reason why they shouldnt make some kind of income based on population.

ruuti0
02-17-2018, 05:10 PM
that's also a great idea.
perhaps even some tent version for those people who love to place anti disaster buildings only when needed to but are build quite cheap.
While more expensive versions have bigger range and perhaps also another bonus as well.
Actually i see no reason why they shouldnt make some kind of income based on population.

Tent could work, but lets hope it doesn't create them too much extra work. I was thinking just pretty much same looking hospitals with small differences so it wouldn't come too arduous to add different "hospitals".

What you mean with income? We already having taxing, did you mean something different?

Or did you mean that "hospitals" would separetely get income from citizen?

stylisticsagi
02-18-2018, 01:18 PM
Yup hospitals can make income from inhabitants apart from tax.
And yeah diffrence between small hospitals and larger ones should be very decent

ruuti0
02-18-2018, 07:07 PM
Yup hospitals can make income from inhabitants apart from tax.


That would change game dynamics.

I Anno player has always controlled financial situation (as far as I can remember), you have to control how much get taxes and how much certain things cost you money.

Now it would change to model where hospitals would get money from citizen instead.

It would change one of key aspects of the game. It would actually make game easier for you because you wouldn't have to care how much hospitals cost for you if citizens would pay to them automatically, you could just add them endlessly without thinking how much they cost, because you don't have to pay them anymore. I don't know if I like that, if you ask me, financial thing could be made rather "harder" and more complex than easier, I had another thread about this also.

I rather keep things so that you have to think how much things cost and "you pay for it", not citizens instead of you (citizens of course pay taxes for you, but wouldn't directly pay for hospitals etc).

I like it much more that you pay from tax money (and other moneys) things that you build.

Fuzzician
03-04-2018, 02:31 AM
While on the topic of disasters, how about super disasters?

These could be part of a scenario, where you are informed that a Tsunami is coming, and have to prepare in order to survive it. Stockpile resources, have fleets on standby to redeliver missing goods, etc....

AgmasGold
03-04-2018, 02:33 AM
Yeah, there have been scenarios in the past with very specific and stringent challenges. It makes them really interesting to play.

Geextha2486
04-14-2018, 01:26 PM
Hey ruuti0,

thanks for sharing your idea, i really like it.
When talking about contagious deseases it would be nice if an island is inhabited by more than one player you have to cooperate with them to defeated the deseases.
I don't know how many effort do you will have if you implement it.
It would be hard if you must make a decision to sacrifice some people to rescue many others, or trying to cure the deseases for example with a quarantine while the worker couldn' t go to work in the meantime.

What do you think about that idea instead of playing with taxes or payment for hospital?

MuscleSpider
06-02-2018, 06:56 PM
I think there should be the occasional crime like murder and robbery and if you had a "police station" they would go out and deal with it and send them to the third party guy with the prison.

stylisticsagi
06-04-2018, 02:07 PM
Yeah i remember in the very first anno there where robbers who robbed your market wagons when you had productions buildings near your city.
It was actually a nice cool idea. However in most anno cases there are no production buildings into your city.
I am goign a bit off-topic with this but whould it actually not be a good idea if some production buildings would get a decent bonus of something if they would have been build into your city.
I am going to make a new topic about this subject it is way to off topic from this one.

ruuti0
06-04-2018, 09:16 PM
While on the topic of disasters, how about super disasters?

These could be part of a scenario, where you are informed that a Tsunami is coming, and have to prepare in order to survive it. Stockpile resources, have fleets on standby to redeliver missing goods, etc....

Superdisasters were one of my idea. They could be super bad for players (human and NPCs), but should happen very rare.



Hey ruuti0,

thanks for sharing your idea, i really like it.
When talking about contagious deseases it would be nice if an island is inhabited by more than one player you have to cooperate with them to defeated the deseases.
I don't know how many effort do you will have if you implement it.
It would be hard if you must make a decision to sacrifice some people to rescue many others, or trying to cure the deseases for example with a quarantine while the worker couldn' t go to work in the meantime.

What do you think about that idea instead of playing with taxes or payment for hospital?

Good to hear that you like it! It could be good idea, IF multiple players can take one island to cooperate, but there haven't been confirmeation for that multiple players can use one island (at least as I know).

What you mean with instead of playing with taxes?