Civ V - One World Speculation Thread!

Status
Not open for further replies.
IMO (speculatory guesses)

-expanded UN
-Earlier choices for diplomacy / religion expanded (AP?)
-International Trade Routes? (One World?)
-Expanded Trade (Bonus Resources, finally tradeable?)
-Expanded Economics (A return of new and improved corporations?)

It is clear that every expansion pack with civ has added different civs and in [civ4] additional leaders per civ.

I also think like G&K there will be improved AI.

I think I agree with everything you're speculating about here.

It's worth noting that if you currently check out the list of resources you have in your empire, it displays all the bonus resources and quantities (1 fish, 3 cows, 2 wheat etc.). I always wondered what the point was of that, but maybe it was coded in right from the start so that implementing corporations would be easier to do. That way you can have a similar corporations mechanic to what we saw in Civ IV, where having more of a certain bonus resource (and trading for it) has benefits for your empire (and whereever your corporation expands to). Why else show us the quantities of bonus resources?...

And, if One World does indeed turn out to be a second expansion, first of all, let me just say how happy I would be, and secondly, let me plead for an expanded UN in which we finally have resolutions to vote on. Surely that, together with international trade, is the quintessential part of "One World"... :mischief:
 
It feels like the name is referring back to Play the World, so it could be a straight multiplayer rejuvenation. Which would be a disappointment, because:

* It would be nice to have some new main game mechanics or content, and
* Multiplayer was a promised launch feature, and if they actually make us pay to have it work properly rather than making it a free patch then that would be annoying.
 
What's the most expensive and difficult thing to make in CiV? Leader screens. I wouldn't imagine Firaxis wants to devote resources to making 34+ new leader screens.

This is actually not strictly true. Sure, those leader screens are nice and require a lot of work, but a dev team consists of people from all kinds of different disciplines, and making those screens only requires an artist or two, plus a writer for the text and stuff. It doesn't take any resources off of programming or design side of things.

--

I'm personally really, really hoping for extended diplomacy and trading, above all else. If there's one thing I feel is not really accurately represented in the game, it's that in modern times there should be way less incentive for wars of conquest: other nations are more valuable as trading partners than just land to conquer. If there are wars in modern days, they should be about resources (oil etc), not the land and population.

Also I totally agree about a mechanic for colonization, or in general autonomous lands. Maybe something like a city state that's under your flag; who actually manages their own army and workers, unless you demand they hand their units over (which would lower their opinion on you, and risk an independence war); you could maybe just broadly guide them by deciding between food focus / production focus / science focus etc. On the plus side they would generate little or no unhappiness, on the negative side you would get only a fraction (50% or so?) of their science / culture / gold yield.

Same mechanic could then be used for modern times as well: even though the US pretty much occupied Iraq, they never added it as part of their own "empire". Just took the resources. :)
 
Another expansion, that's great! I hope they will tell us something soon!!!

Things i'd like to see in it that are already been said in this thread are

  • Canals
  • Airlifting
  • New Leaders for old CIVs

It'd be nice to see something more of the future... maybe just a total conversion mod in space like the one back in Civ4
 
I so hope that colonization (as opposed to settling cities the normal way) will be there. And some revolution mechanic. I wouldn't mind more espionage options either--sabotaging production, blowing up buildings, assassinating scientists, badmouthing and framing other civs, causing unrest, damaging defensive buildings or discovering their weaknesses star wars style, disrupting the food supply etc.
 
I'm hoping, that they would slow down the Later Eras, right now, once you get Spies (enter Renaissance), the game slows down, and depending on your tech lead, it probably gets boring because you're either guaranteed victory, guaranteed loss, or you have to get into a war with somebody to gain that lead. But other than that there is nothing else.
 
Some tweaks to the very beginning of the game would be nice too, I don't really know what to do but it would be nice to see something different at the beginning of the game.
Maybe a Stone Age :D Or you know, a Dinosaur empire :lol:
 
:D :D :D

"One World"? If the title is supposed hint at what the expansion focuses on, my guess is something to do with colonization or that time period.

Funny, too, 'cause earlier today I was thinking how interesting it would be if they added a feature that was more than the current puppet mechanic, but less than allies. What I am referring to is the number of states that were controlled by the French and British during the 19th century. I suppose one could argue that they were puppets, but in many cases they wanted the state to be self-sufficient as long as they could use the land for strategic purposes, and operate their military.

How it would play out in the game is say you have a crazy runaway like Washington, and next to him is a weaker Civ like Nebbu. You know Nebbu isn't going to hold out and only feed Washington. So you set-up some sort of mandate system where Nebbu gets a bonus of your science and the ability to "gift" units to him at the cost of GPT. Or something.

The whole idea being 1. To imitate real-life scenarios of world powers using weaker states as an extension of their rule against other super powers (See: Middle East during cold war) and 2. Keeps weaker Civs in the game, as far as still being useful. As it is now, after a Civ gets trashed (especially capital lost) they essentially sit out the rest of the game occasionally denounce, but that is about it.
You mean the Civ4 vassal system? It's extremely horrible, IMHO, but there is a good chance it'll be back. Because... well, recycling is good, I guess. :D

Extended UN functionality is very likely to be introduced.
Personally I'd want to see much much better diplo victory. But don't get my hopes too high. I'll settle on little perks like emigration and international trades.
 
^ What the above poster said; also, map trading will never work in CiV with the bonuses for happiness and CS quests you get for discovering Natural Wonders, other Civs, etc. (although apparently they didn't think of that with embassies :lol:)
 
when I think of "One World":
- an exchange rate for resources would be nice. No more haggling. A simple chart would do.
- a colony system, where new cities can operate similarly to puppet ones. Anger them, or fail to upkeep them, and they break away
- airports, canals, mountain tunnels, some kind of later-game scout unit. Faster travel all-around.
- migration and refugees. A stability rating for each city that acts as push-pull factor for populations
- proxy wars, or somehow getting city-states and "colonies" to fight for your or acquire resources for you.
- more barbarians: pirates, anarchists, guerrillas
 
I'm intrigued by the potential for some of the things discussed here, especially the canals. I can see two ways for that to work. Either for extending the benefits of river tiles to other terrains or for allowing passage for ships over land tiles. I think both have the potential to be interesting.
 
I'm intrigued by the potential for some of the things discussed here, especially the canals. I can see two ways for that to work. Either for extending the benefits of river tiles to other terrains or for allowing passage for ships over land tiles. I think both have the potential to be interesting.

I think it should just be a tile improvement you build. It should take exceptionally long time to build and of course no other improvement could be built on that tile.
 
I am hoping for more diversity. Like the mod, they should for instance make the Asian civs common units like the archers or spearmen look Asian and while the European units look European like the settlers are now. They should create more resources like tea, rice, buffaloes and Coffey that is only found on their appropriate continent.

This alone would not be enough for an expansion but if they added one or two unique unit/buildings to each civ that would make the expansion a success. The more different each civ feels the more fun it is to replay the game over and over, changing strategies dependent on what civ you play .

And a better and more international trade and economy system is needed, including real international trade lanes that are calculated not just from city size and distance but also from the different resources around the trading cities. Think east India companies.
 
I am hoping for more diversity. Like the mod, they should for instance make the Asian civs common units like the archers or spearmen look Asian and while the European units look European like the settlers are now. They should create more resources like tea, rice, buffaloes and Coffey that is only found on their appropriate continent.

This alone would not be enough for an expansion but if they added one or two unique unit/buildings to each civ that would make the expansion a success. The more different each civ feels the more fun it is to replay the game over and over, changing strategies dependent on what civ you play .

And a better and more international trade and economy system is needed, including real international trade lanes that are calculated not just from city size and distance but also from the different resources around the trading cities. Think east India companies.

I'd like more diverse graphic appearance of units, but i think the differentiation between civs is already sufficient. There are already enough threads about how certain civs are better than others and more diversity would only serve to compound that problem.

I'd also rather they kept back UU and UB's for new civs, the more diversity the better and i'd much rather have a greater choice of more balanced civs than a smaller selection of wildly specialised civs.
 
Re. the map trading, I think it could work as a sort of 'exploration agreement' - you need to have a connection of the tiles explored in order to have contact (i.e. your revealed tiles must overlap with their revealed tiles), so why not make it so that you pay gold like a research agreement and then get tiles revealed that are ajacent to tiles you already have revealed?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom