If you could bring anything back from a past Civ game what would it be

Back to the topic, I found a new thing I'd love back

Ability to ask how Leaders feel about each other,b ecause at this stage we have NO way of finding out the attituted of others, except an occasional DoF and Denouncements, I don't think that's enough.

I want nuclear missiles to have a limited amount of fuel. Why? You can launch it at any point in the world you want, but the moment it runs out of fuel halfway to target and slams into a neutral's territory instead...

Can we say accidental nuclear war?

@PhilBowles

Quote:
ICS is quite natural.

Whether it's natural or not is beside the point - this is a game and it's an unpopular game mechanic, sufficiently so that Civ IV designers attempted to actively penalise it, and its apparent reappearance in pre-patch Civ V caused sufficient complaints that happiness effects and city placement limits were changed to prevent it. It's also extremely limiting strategically to be forced to spam settlers at every opportunity, and simply boring to manage a hundred cities in precisely the same way you'd manage three and duplicate the same structures in each in order to curtail their unhappiness and health while maximising their commerce output. It would be natural for chess to have thousands more pawns than it does per king, but it wouldn't be a better game for having thousands of pawns that need moving individually.

The option to build smaller empires and remain viable is important gamewise in a system where the AI is programmed to spam cities, because it gives the player a way of winning other than just copying the AI's strategy and doing it better/faster. A smaller Civ V empire can overcome a much larger rival empire.

Click to expand...

There is an easy way to limit the effect of large empires :
- make population growth independent of food surplus and city size but mostly dependent on local health system and sufficient food (and wars)
(- make population growth global)
- make food a tradeable and transportable ressource
- allow citizens to manufacture goods in exchange of food
- allow bigger cities
- make settlers cost 1 population of the producing city (as in Civ1-Civ3)

Except for the population growth, the mechanics is already known from Colonisation and Civ4Col.

Expansion then means to split your limited population between a number of cities forcing you to build and support more expensive infrastructure which makes your population less effective. (see Russia, the biggest country in the world, but only with small population compared with china (1:10) and small GDP per pop compared with Singapore for example (44:100))

(Compare the gameplay with the very early gameplay in Civ5 where everybody is limited by the same small amount of start-happiness and has to decide if going for 1 big city or 3-4 very small cities to grab ressources early. In the Col-like game the population would be limited.)

Public works from Call to Power instead of physical worker units

Hit points per unit, as in civ3.

primordial stew said:

Hit points per unit, as in civ3.

Click to expand...

:| what do you mean Hit points per unit? Every unit has 10 hit points in vanilla and 100 in God and Kings...? Do you mean per promotions? So 110 on level 2, 120, on level 3 etc?

TheKingOfBigOz said:

:| what do you mean Hit points per unit? Every unit has 10 hit points in vanilla and 100 in God and Kings...? Do you mean per promotions? So 110 on level 2, 120, on level 3 etc?

Click to expand...

Each unit can have it's own (base) number of hit points. As an example we could have a division (4 points), a corps (8 points), and an army (12 points). Each could have the same combat strength, but can take a variable amount of damage.

In Gedemon's Stalingrad scenario it's very easy to see an application. The scenario uses 50 hit points, which is desired for the ground units, but it makes the air units far too powerful. Also those AA, arty, and naval units should have many fewer hit points.

Civ2 air units

primordial stew said:

Each unit can have it's own (base) number of hit points. As an example we could have a division (4 points), a corps (8 points), and an army (12 points). Each could have the same combat strength, but can take a variable amount of damage.

In Gedemon's Stalingrad scenario it's very easy to see an application. The scenario uses 50 hit points, which is desired for the ground units, but it makes the air units far too powerful. Also those AA, arty, and naval units should have many fewer hit points.

Click to expand...

... are you talking about Civ 3? You said Civ 3? I never played Civ 2 but the poster above me refers to "Civ 2" so now I'm confused.

I like how granular the Spaceship was in Civ 2. I also like how you could send an incomplete ship to Alpha Centauri in hopes of beating a rival's ship.

I wouldn't be opposed to requiring more parts for a "complete" ship, with the parts being cheaper than they are now.

I also wouldn't be opposed to sending an incomplete ship to AC.

I liked how they did it in Civ 4, and wish they bring it back at some point in Civ 5.

Oh, one other thing.

I wouldn't be opposed to the reintroduction of the resource satellites from SMAC.