Civilization 6
- Thread starter Windsor
- Start date
I hate to be a pessimist here, but I very much doubt that the devs are looking much at civ 4 forum. Just take a look at Civ 5, Civ BE, Civ Online and Civ World.
Its almost 10 years since Civ 4 was released, and we civ IV'ers are not the market anymore. I guess the only way forward is a Kickstarter campaign
You know what I would throw my money after?
A Civ4 reprogrammed to take fully advantage of 64bit, changed siege (and later ships) to do a prober range attack (instead of the stupid suicide sieges), and a working (AI understands) max 25 UPT. Lastly the obvious bugs should be fixed (K-Mod'ish). Thats all it takes to make a super game imho.
Of course I wouldn't mind if they picked one or two features from my VIP mod, but honestly I wouldn't mind creating a new mod on top of the above changes
edit : oh, and a better AI experience with more diplomatic options, such as Unions.
Yeah, that sounds pretty good to me. I'd also add a better AI, since the Civ series never has had a truly good AI (except possibly for the Civ4 Better AI mod). Improved diplomacy with an AI that is competent at diplomacy certainly would help towards that.
I hate to be a pessimist here, but I very much doubt that the devs are looking much at civ 4 forum. Just take a look at Civ 5, Civ BE, Civ Online and Civ World.
Its almost 10 years since Civ 4 was released, and we civ IV'ers are not the market anymore. I guess the only way forward is a Kickstarter campaign
You guys are being way too pessimistic! Sure, the developers probably doesn't read the Civ4 forums, but they see a lot of the same flaws with Civ5 that we do.
Civ5 wasn't targeted at a different audience than Civ4. They just got a couple of the core mechanics wrong. Those things can't be patched out and even CivBE has to live with those flaws.
CivWorld/CivOnline has nothing to do with the development of the main franchise.
Unless your main problem with Civ5 is hexes or Steam then Civ6 might be a great game.
ringwraith18
Chieftain
I want to see the entire map populated by "barbarians", with limited diplomatic options with them. Also way, way more trade.
If they keep 1UPT then I will not be interested in Civ6. Most Civ5 problems come from that. I understand they will not go back to SoD but maybe they can come up with something in the middle, like a limit of 12 units per tile or something like that.
1UPT is not bad for a game per se, it just makes the game more tactical and less strategical. Advanced Wars (for Gameboy) and the early Panzer General series are all excellent games with 1UPT.
Making a good AI might be difficult though.
Making a good AI might be difficult though.
blitzkrieg1980
Octobrist
I would be interested in multiple layers of combat. Something like a more generalized map view like we have in Civ4 and also a "zoom-in" smaller map where 1 UPT tactical view could be utilized. It could be optional and allow for simulated fast battles if you're not interested in the tactical view. But I'm not sure how it would work when at peace. Clearly, more thought would be needed than my quick idea, but I would love to see something like that implemented.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Developed by Sid Meier instead of just playing on his name and building on his foundation. I have high hopes.
ringwraith18
Chieftain
Panzer General took place on areas of land the size of a small county, like in Normandy or a tiny section of a front. It was also a limited, tactical excersise.
Compare this to Civ V where the military side always seemed redundant to me. At least in Civ IV there was a rough correlation between your nation's power, and your nation's military - units cost hammers to produce and money to maintain, the larger your empire the larger your army. In Civ V it seemed like this connection didn't really exist.
Yes! So you can avoid the tedium of moving your units across the map one by one. I hate 1 UPT for that reason.
That was the biggest problem for me. Units leaving the road to get by someone else. It made the go to command useless so you had to micro manage every move. That's not why I play games.
Now you could minimize the problem by building roads on every square but because someone thought it looked ugly they made it cost prohibitive. The combination of the two was laughable.
And the worst thing was that every beta tester griped about it but the devs just ignored us on it.
Now you could minimize the problem by building roads on every square but because someone thought it looked ugly they made it cost prohibitive. The combination of the two was laughable.
And the worst thing was that every beta tester griped about it but the devs just ignored us on it.
Civ6 should at least bring back the fun factor for the human player, civ5 doesn't have it.
I've tried hard to like civ5 BNW, but I can't and going back to civ4 wasn't easy.
Penalties should be dramatically reduced, civs should have most their uniquenesses right from the start,
questionable game mechanics/play should be avoided, a decent + active AI which knows how to play the game and
an interface that should work as intended.
It really annoys me to no end when at the start of your next turn the camera + sound zoom in at unit which has been completed in a city, but an older unit (low left corner) needs orders first.
Same thing when you want to go through the message buttons first, good chance you gave a goto order to waiting unit.
Most of the civ5 UUs never see daylight and most UAs are also useless.
When playing Siam or Greece and you have Venice at your continent, say goodbye to the your city-states.
I've tried hard to like civ5 BNW, but I can't and going back to civ4 wasn't easy.
Penalties should be dramatically reduced, civs should have most their uniquenesses right from the start,
questionable game mechanics/play should be avoided, a decent + active AI which knows how to play the game and
an interface that should work as intended.
It really annoys me to no end when at the start of your next turn the camera + sound zoom in at unit which has been completed in a city, but an older unit (low left corner) needs orders first.
Same thing when you want to go through the message buttons first, good chance you gave a goto order to waiting unit.
Most of the civ5 UUs never see daylight and most UAs are also useless.
When playing Siam or Greece and you have Venice at your continent, say goodbye to the your city-states.
Reg Pither
Warlord
Yes, same with me. The gap between expectations of and disappointment in a new game has never been as vast as with Civ V.
Assuming they don't 'fix' the Civ franchise by removing 1UPT (and all its ensuing problems) in Civ 6 - which seems unlikely, to say the least
- I can't see myself ever being at all interested in any version other than Civ IV.
Macksideshow
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 382
The thing with AIs (I am basically guessing from limited programming knowledge) is that it's not impossible to make them good the problem is the processing power they then require. With a strategically open game like Civ where people want 10+ AI opponents I suspect it a trade off against turn time. Something to think about when wishing for a better AI.
That being said, sometimes the Civ IV AI does some really questionable things and needs some pretty outrageous bonuses against a human at high difficulty settings.
That being said, sometimes the Civ IV AI does some really questionable things and needs some pretty outrageous bonuses against a human at high difficulty settings.
On the other hand, human players also gets quite a number of "bonuses". Human players can declare on whoever they want, and bribe AI's to war despite not being at war. AI's are also "plotting" for a while before a declaration, giving an indication to the human player, while a human player don't need to plot. A human player can also trade whatever tech they want, but AI's won't trade certain techs at certain times. It's a trade-off between predictability and difficulty. You want the game to be predictable, but also difficult. Then the AI's need to follow certain predetermined paths, and be subject to scripted behaviour.
The often cited CTP system sounds a lot better than it was. It had serious flaws, mainly that once one had built a stack of 12 of the best available units, one could stomp the map with this unstoppable force, since by definition there could be no stronger army out there.
Instead, the most reasonable system, both for gameplay and realism, is to have a soft limit based on the amount of available supplies. A square (and I really hope they get rid of this hex nonsense) would have a certain supply limit depending on its terrain, which, when exceeded, would cause the units on this square to lose hp. Supply limits would be increased (or lowered) by specific factors, such as proximity to ones homeland, tile improvements, government forms and certain units (i.e. supply wagons). Scorched earth policy would become a viable defensive strategy, among other things.
The Civ4 PAE mod already has an elementary form of a supply system implemented, so it can't be all that hard to do.
Instead, the most reasonable system, both for gameplay and realism, is to have a soft limit based on the amount of available supplies. A square (and I really hope they get rid of this hex nonsense) would have a certain supply limit depending on its terrain, which, when exceeded, would cause the units on this square to lose hp. Supply limits would be increased (or lowered) by specific factors, such as proximity to ones homeland, tile improvements, government forms and certain units (i.e. supply wagons). Scorched earth policy would become a viable defensive strategy, among other things.
The Civ4 PAE mod already has an elementary form of a supply system implemented, so it can't be all that hard to do.
Lennier
Emperor
Some of the problems with a 12 best unit stack can be overcome with a Civ-IV like combat system (where strength is proportional to hit points) rather than the previous Civ combat systems (where strength is fixed and not directly related to hit points), so several less advanced 12 units stacks could whittle down the monster stack and defeat it.
But I agree a "soft" limit would be better.
I don't think that going hexes was a fundamental flaw of Civ V (mostly comes down to a preference), but the 1 UPT was the fundamental flaw. 1 UPT belongs in a tactical simulation, not a strategic simulation where you can theoretically have infinite numbers of units.
But I agree a "soft" limit would be better.
I don't think that going hexes was a fundamental flaw of Civ V (mostly comes down to a preference), but the 1 UPT was the fundamental flaw. 1 UPT belongs in a tactical simulation, not a strategic simulation where you can theoretically have infinite numbers of units.
Similar threads
