Furthermore, if we're going to have squares, I'd like to have lines of latitude and longitude, either after circumnavigation, or some tech ( spherical trigonometry ?) . I'd like to be able to use those to negotiate treaties, much the way that The Pope divided the world between Spain and Portugal for colonization. Or as a demilitarization line . Allies could draw a line through the enemy country and call it "Yours" and "Mine".
Love this idea.
I'd also like the ability to ask an ally to hit a specific target. Nothing too complicated, just something like "Focus on city X" and have the AI respond "No focus on city Y" based on its own "strategy". Even if the city were selected totally randomly, it would be interesting if an ally told you "Our forces are en route to Berlin" before the stack arrived. If nothing else, you would be able to adjust your strategy accordingly.
Diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy. The more diplomacy options I have, the more variety a game can have.
I also think conquered cities should remain unproductive (or less productive) until the end of war. For example, say I conquer half of Germany? Do I keep it? (Monarchs respect that; Democracies abhor it) Do I return it to the original civ? Does it get split up? All of the above should come into play, based on the other parameters of the game.
Something I miss from Civ 1- capturing a capital should do special damage (i.e. triggering civil war). Or perhaps every remaining city has a % chance of immediately flipping to you, based on happiness, culture, and other factors.
Along the same lines: unhappy cities should revolt into their own civ, complete with leader. I.e. the Confederacy withdrawals from the Union, or the enslaved people from another extinct civ demand their own nation (something like Israel). Even better: diplomacy options to appease potential revolutionaries, and military tactics to suppress them, allowing more variety in the game.
And how about this: the ability to buy/sell units. This seems like an obvious one. IIRC Civ 4 allowed me to "gift" units, but not sell them. This seams like a no-brainer (i.e. USA in WWI and WWII prior to direct involvement).
Something Civ 3 does right is the "Great War" that almost always occurs after nationalism; civs learn about MPP and soon the world divides into competing factions. This is what made Civ 3 a major step forward from Civ 1/2 (IMO).
Now, where the game can improve, is what happens after war. I like the idea of full treaty negotiations. For example, perhaps I will give back the conquered cities after 20 years of occupation. Or perhaps I could demand some % of that cities production or commerce. The concept of "vassal state" introduced in Civ 4 felt...lacking...to me. A good concept, but the execution could be greatly improved.
Final suggestion: the ability to build military bases. They could work like cities, except they would occupy one square only, and be immune to culture. You could buy certain improvements (harbor, airport), but they would have no production or commerce value. You could build them under a specific condition of ROP, or within waring territory. At any moment the host country could change the conditions of this agreement, forcing you to either defend them via war, or abandon them to appease pubic opinion or balance the budget.
tl;dr version: MORE MORE MORE!
And micromanagement is fine, so long as it always remains
optional. The AI should be able to run a "good enough" solution for players who don't like getting into the nitty gritty.
But the city screen, based on tile production- to me, that *is* civ. Don't mess with success.