Forum Lobby

Bronze Age Collapse

Although the Bronze age will be a far off expansion, may I ask how you intend to bring about the bronze age collapse? Will it be like an endgame crisis that your city needs to withstand, with droughts, an end to trade, and the invasion of the Sea people? Games need a feeling of progression, so progressing passed the bronze age collapse might be a bit too much for this game.

1 Like

We will study the problem when we reach there.
Still too far away :wink:

Well when you do research it, may i suggest it be the end of the first game. Yes I am suggested you break this into separate game installments. Dark ages are a difficult thing to put into a builder game, as a player you don’t want to see all your work fall apart, but if you don’t collapse, then it is ahistoric. I would love to see a game that goes to the time when that society would have collapsed and challenges the player to survive through it.

My suggestion would be this first game to the bronze age collapse, then you make the next separate game “classical cities” where the player starts building up to the height and fall of Rome. Then a third game could be "medieval cities " that goes from the newly formed Germanic kingdoms as they develop their unique cultures.

The reason I would want several games is so that you can continue to develop the engine with new hardware to allow for bigger cities.

There are lots of people who pay for a skylines DLC that is all about seeing your work to fall apart.
We don’t see a problem with collapsing if eventually you can rebuild, really.
It can even be really funny and make the game less boring and challenging.
The fall of Rome is another fall that could be very interesting to play as a transition to middle ages.

The platform will be improved in each iteration for all the games, that is the plan.
But you are right. At some point a technological break could force us to a new platform.
But this is so far away at this moment that we feel like building castles in the air just talking about it.

1 Like

As far as I’m concerned, I’m incredibly more interested in the earliest ages, up to the beginning of the classical. They are not covered at all in the majority of cases, and offer really interesting survival gameplay. This is where AC is unique, has an edge on all other games, and is most attractive. You have all my support; I’ll be most happy if you achieve the short and mid-term plans.

Even if you use the DLC to make your world fall appart guess what? There is the save and reload button. It’s amazing to watch the world burn only to not have to live with the consequences! :smiley:

I would love to see the Chinese dynasties brought to life in a Bronze Age expansion! Asian contributions and culture are woefully under-represented in video games and western history classes. After the Neolithic Age, the ancient cities I’d be most interested in playing are of the Egyptian and Chinese empires.

@jim_kahle People don’t like to see they work fall apart because in most cities building games there is no/small chance you can recover. In most game, the collapse is thought as a game over. However, if the mechanic is thought as a step in game (with ways to recover and overcome it) it could be more challenging. Some historians think that we would not have reach is far if civilisations have not rise and fall during all our history.
Maybe collapses will bring new tech since people need to adapt in order to survive (After the bronze age come the iron age :wink:)

An other exemple, when a city was taken by the enemy, it could be razed (game over) but most of the time it was “only” looted and change owner. The new owner could bring new tech/traditon/craft etc. I hope it will be the case in AC.

There is another way to look at it. Did anyone play a game of Age of Empires where your entire city was being over run by the enemy, all your soldiers where dead, and you the player hastily put a single villager on board a transport boat and shipped him off to the other side of the map. As long as that villager survived and you found a quiet corner you could rebuilt your city, rebuild your army and sometimes come back and win the game (with a lot of luck and skill). Going by the idea of this game (starting out as hunter gatherers and going through the ages to build a city) the “end” does not need to be the end. Even if the city is destroyed, as long as you can get a couple people out you can go out and start again.

1 Like

I posted this on the Victory Conditions thread;

It is possible to highlight the endgame with a societal decline. In the last turns/time hours before the finish line there could be trade stagnation, natural disasters escalating, and barbarian migrations.
Your city should be stacked with debuffs and expected to endure and outlast the timer.

That would make the endgame transition more apparent and also leave room for improvement post endgame. Instead of having maxed everything out and having only stagnation, a post endgame city will be able to clawback development and technology with the player having an open padded timeframe in which they can end the game themselves.

I think struggling to overcome the Bronze age catastrophe would make for an excellent ‘boss battle’ finale for an epic campaign starting in the neolithic.