Civ V - One World Speculation Thread!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I myself am wondering what happened to that American Civil War scenario that was found in G&K...maybe it'll make a reappearance.
 
Something more useful for the UN, with different criteria for diplo victory besides paying off CSs, would be welcome.
 
From the name i would guess the pack would be globalization/trade/union themed. Enhancements to friendship agreements and treaties, enhanced trading options etc.

Possibilities for canals and the Panama Canal as a wonder with that.

Possibilities for civs could include Brazil as the last of the modern global BRIC countries and a trade focussed medieval Indonesia.
 
One World. Sounds interesting. Most seem to think it will be about diplomacy, trade, and culture which is cool. It makes me think of multiplayer though.
 
: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.
 
The name could refer to the "One World" principle of the Atlantic Charter. A political statement from 1941 where the Allies defined their goals for a post war world:

The Charter stated the ideal goals of the war: no territorial aggrandizement; no territorial changes made against the wishes of the people; restoration of self-government to those deprived of it; free access to raw materials; reduction of trade restrictions; global cooperation to secure better economic and social conditions for all; freedom from fear and want; freedom of the seas; and abandonment of the use of force, as well as disarmament of aggressor nations

It could mean we get an expansion that focuses on the post ww2 era. Including (maybe) new diplomatic options like the UN, trade options and maybe vassal states.
 
Airports and airlifts? Please! It's ridiculous my units are walking across a continent in the 1900's.
 
I'm pretty much done with CiV unless there's another expansion. I've seen all there is to see and I've done all there is to do. Well, not really, but it sure feels that way.

But yeah, I'd buy a new expansion in a New York minute.
 
: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.

I was thinking of something similar, but I see it as a Free Trade Agreement. Whereby two civs that share open borders and have a declaration of friendship and a defensive pact would be able to sign a FTA. It would cause them to pool their luxury resources so that each lux held by either contributed to the happiness and WLtK Days of both signers. The AI would want compensation for signing it unless they had significantly fewer luxuries than the other signer.
 
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.
 
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 have major doubts that Firaxis will add multiple leaders, even though that was in CIV.
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.

I completely agree on all other fronts, though.
 
I have major doubts that Firaxis will add multiple leaders, even though that was in CIV.
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.

I completely agree on all other fronts, though.

It's unlikely, but it would add so much. I want to play as Stalin, damnit! :p
 
The expansion :D! And I have to agree with others - seems like the "Scramble for Africa" would be the most logical.

Also I am almost willing to guarentee either Indonesia or Brazil (or both) get in this expansion due to the sound of the name
 
I would love to see an Inuit civ which could build igloos and has a UA which makes snow and tundra worth settling in.
 
Well I am not sure about anything yet there's not much they could add that has been in the other civ games almost everything is taken I think it will take some thinking to add stuff that has not been implemented from other civ games. They need something oringial something new thats what we need but I can't think of anything. and as for civs in particular maybe something like Poland they have rich history and they been a superpower in eastern europe more than once.
 
I'm hoping for no civs. At this point, if they release civs, they're going to seriously nuke the modding scene.

I am, however, hoping for a feature overload. Corporations, aerial transport, expanded future, politics, civil wars and revolutions, a colony system, and all that good stuff.


Moderator Action: Quote and sentence removed. Calling for a ban on someone is flaming, especially for a spelling mistake? Please try to be more civil and reasonable in future.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom