This suggestion is what it says on the tin.

When you stake your claim on a piece of land and declare it a country, what kind of landscape are you building off of? Is it in the arctic? How about along the coast? Surely, wherever your country is located, the lay of the land itself could provide benefits and detriments to your empire's growth.

The purpose of this suggestion is to promote an added layer of strategy to country builds, as well as open the door for new strategies to flourish.

When creating your country, you will also be asked if your land is located on any dominant terrain. You can choose not to do this, and be provided with no additional benefits or drawbacks. However, once you have made your choice, it can not be changed, even if you die and restart.

The bonuses and drawbacks would stack with those provided by your chosen government type.

I've provided a few examples. Feedback would be appreciated.

Tundra
-75% Food Production
-25% Population
-40% Bushel Decay
+10 % Oil Production
+30% Defense against Spies
+50% Defense against Troops

Desert
More frequent Droughts
-20% Per Capita Income
+10% Tech Per Turn
+20% Turret Defense
+20% Construction Speed
- 25% Time for Goods to arrive on Market

Plains
-15% Defense
-25% Industrial Production
More frequent Food Booms
+20% Agricultural Tech Effectiveness
-50% Effectiveness of Harmful Spy ops made against you.
No Earthquakes

Coastline
-25% Exploration Rate
-20% Defense against spies
More Frequent PCI Booms
+10% Per Capita Income
-20% Corruption
-6 hours Foreign Aid Cooldown

Mountains
Susceptible to Landslides (Destroys Buildings and kills civs)
+20% Bushel Decay and Corruption
+10% Military Defense
-30% Attack Gains on Standard and Planned strikes against you.
-6 hours Planned Strike brigade cooldown
+10% Research Ally Gains

Wetlands
+10% Private Market Costs
-15% Maximum Technology
+20% Spy Production
-10% Food Consumption
More frequent Oil Booms
+10% Missile Hit Chance

Very cool +1

This is a great idea also.

This is great but you need to add SALT FLATS for obvious reasons

Consider it done!

Salt Flats

-50% Oil Production
+15% Building Costs
3% Market Commissions
-10% all non-GDI Expenses
No Droughts or Tax Rebates
-50% buildings lost to Earthquakes

Cool idea.

Could probably start with a few simple perks and then add more to each one as time goes on.

For the commies that produce super cars instead of military?


But I think this is a cool change. I think the game would benefit from subtle changes like this. I also brought up a sug a while ago about like political parties and such. Would be cool to see terrain, government, and a political party options to shake things up.

Terrain should have some decent bonuses, governments could stay the same or altered slightly, and political parties should offer a small bonus for various things. Loss of half readiness per attack, construction costs less, small boost to (farm or oil or military) production, 1/2 market commisions, boost to research, etc...

What happens when you explore/grab?

That's why it's a "Dominant Terrain", as opposed to just "terrain". It's the terrain you start with, but not necessarily your country's ONLY biome as your country expands.

However, maybe there would be a land-gain bonus against countries that share your dominant terrain. Maybe.

Great question! :D

Land gain when you hit the same terrain is higher and lower gains on other terrains

Last I played utopia it had this. You pick race and personality.

iirc they change it every "reset" because otherwise everyone will just play the same combinations after one set when its obvious. I think the same would happen here, so if we dont have active devs that change this every 2 months we will likely have a rather stale game in terms of strategy after the first reset of this. I like the idea IF these terrains stats change frequently enough that people have to make clever guesses on what is best, rather than just learning it by experience and sticking with it.

It's like when we played tyranny casher or the 0cs challenges on express, no one knew how to play it so we all make up different strategies for how to deal with it. If we played 2-3 sets everyone would just adopt the same strategies and it would be boring because the originallity had been lost.

That's why having "seasons" or something could help with that. Every year changes should be made to change strategies.

That's actually a pretty good idea f

Pretty good idea actually for alliance by the time everything is figured out season changes and everything is up in the air again. Only once a year too so not to overload code writers and such.

Also need to still add the all button to fa screen to make it a little faster to send hahaha

That's actually a pretty good idea f

Pretty good idea actually for alliance by the time everything is figured out season changes and everything is up in the air again. Only once a year too so not to overload code writers and such.

Also need to still add the all button to fa screen to make it a little faster to send hahaha

TTT - I would like this thought explored and agree with Gerdler that it needs some randomness (which can be programmed in) to keep it from just becoming the new Meta.

Keep thinking of good ideas, Brigg!

Thanks man. And thanks for all the feedback, everyone. ^.^