Civilization 6: Ideas

And GP tile improvements don't connect luxury resources.

Exactly, Browd.

I really wanted to know the logic/reason behind the concept of constructing GP Improvements outside the cities. In the previous version, the Academy for instance was constructed inside the city, and no one saw any problem with that. On the contrary.

Why would they change that?

Luisao82 said:

I really wanted to know the logic/reason behind the concept of constructing GP Improvements outside the cities. In the previous version, the Academy for instance was constructed inside the city, and no one saw any problem with that. On the contrary.

Why would they change that?

Click to expand...

Speculating, but it adds for more variety in the terrain landscape. It also allows them to be disrupted by pillaging.

Luisao82 said:

Exactly, Browd.

I really wanted to know the logic/reason behind the concept of constructing GP Improvements outside the cities. In the previous version, the Academy for instance was constructed inside the city, and no one saw any problem with that. On the contrary.

Why would they change that?

Click to expand...

Visual appeal. I enjoyed this aspect as a way to turn a useless desert settlement half surrounded by useless tiles into an Area 51 science center or artist colony.

Apart from visual appeal, there's the issue of strategic decision-making. Not much of a decision to make if the tile improvement yield is in the city center, since that doesn't require you to decide where to place the tile improvement. As is, each tile improvement loses you some other benefit from that tile (i.e., extra yield from a farm, mine, pasture, etc. that you can no longer build) and raises the risk of pillaging (barbs or an enemy). Not the deepest of decisions to make, but it does require thought and consideration of trade-offs.

Rusty Edge said:

How would ethnicity best be represented in the series? I liked Civ III's racial approach, and often wish that IV's religions could have been added to that.

How do you introduce the element of ethnicity without controversy?

What about language groups?

Click to expand...

I think the best way to represent language groups would be to tie it to cultural influence and maybe military occupation, in a situation where in subtle ways you could spread the prevalence of your language. Having your language spoken by many countries and across your empire could boost trade, culture, and enhance production, whereas if your civ had dozens of languages inside of it, production could go down. As for your question about how ethnicity could be represented, I've always like Civ IV's approach where one tile could have many different cultures on it, but in a Civ VI incarnation, ethnicity would be partially separate from just raw culture output. Did that answer your question?

phaethon16 said:

I think the best way to represent language groups would be to tie it to cultural influence and maybe military occupation, in a situation where in subtle ways you could spread the prevalence of your language. Having your language spoken by many countries and across your empire could boost trade, culture, and enhance production, whereas if your civ had dozens of languages inside of it, production could go down. As for your question about how ethnicity could be represented, I've always like Civ IV's approach where one tile could have many different cultures on it, but in a Civ VI incarnation, ethnicity would be partially separate from just raw culture output. Did that answer your question?

Click to expand...

Maybe.

Are you saying that ethnicity should be based upon original civilization, as opposed to-

Race, Religion, and/or Language?

I always had a problem with Alpha Centauri, call it my inability to believe in faster than light travel. I would prefer a progressive colonization of the solar system instead. If that is too grand a scale, the victory condition is a terraformed colony on Mars completely independent of Earth resources.

My second, third , and fourth wishes are elements of the series absent in V.

• Zoom ability, from up close to space. Made reviewing an expansive empire easier
• Bring back the Label/De-Label toggle. Sometimes I just want to look at the world without all the clutter
• Move all units on a selected tile button. For settler/military unit or Great General/Admiral escorts, for a couple less mouse clicks.

yes expanding to the solar system first makes more sense. they are already talking about launching the mars manned missions from a moon base rather than earth. that would extend the game potentially. competing nations wont attack each others moonbases or missions, but once colony cities are established on mars THEN you can maybe build the extra solar mission to alpha centauri

Different leaders for the same Civ with unique bonuses, maybe have a "Unique Leader Bonus aka ULB". For example in England: Elizabeth I, Churchill or Thatcher? Or Japan: Oda Nobunaga, Tokugawa Ieyusu or Hirotada, Toyatomi Hideyoshi, or Minamoto no Yoritomo?

andreafin said:

another idea for unplanned settlements. these dont involve settlers. the byzantines built a long road through no mans land to connect their capital to distant cities. i find it useful so i build a couple of forts and station units along to detect and defeat barbs. in real life eventually towns would build up to service the forts and the caravan and other traffic along the road...not sure exactly how it would work but i am thinking if the forts are built and then a unit fortified there for a number of years it should become a city. it should happen slowly for ordinary forts and maybe quicker for citadels, but they cant be in any civs territory at any time. so if someone settles a city there and it expands its area before the fort becomes a city the process is halted. or you can leave the fort unattended for a turn now and then to reset the counter if you dont want to found a city there at all.

Click to expand...

Well, if you consider that the biggest cities and the capitals might have 20-30 citizens in the game, but in real life that would be in the millions. For the sake of simplicity, they represent large numbers of people in units (they do this for the military too). So basically the hole in the wall towns and villages may be there, but they're invisible and irrelevant for our purposes. We only care about the cities with 100,000's of people or more and that have a significant influence on international affairs.

I don't care for the idea of cities springing up all on their own. The silly, god-like power of the player to direct the development of her civilization is the foundation of the game. There's almost nothing organic in this game. I'd even like more power to, for example, direct the expansion of my city borders, besides just spending gold to grab hexes instantaneously.

EDIT: Two follow-up thoughts. First, self-spawning cities could certainly be a "random event" if that option were in the game. Second, while I wouldn't want cities in my nation to magically appear all by themselves, new City States appearing as history moves along could be kind of cool.

Trackmaster said:

Well, if you consider that the biggest cities and the capitals might have 20-30 citizens in the game, but in real life that would be in the millions. For the sake of simplicity, they represent large numbers of people in units (they do this for the military too). So basically the hole in the wall towns and villages may be there, but they're invisible and irrelevant for our purposes. We only care about the cities with 100,000's of people or more and that have a significant influence on international affairs.

Click to expand...

I agree. Chartres, for example, would be a Trading Post 2-3 hexes from Paris, and Trenton, New Jersey, might be a Manufactory a couple of hexes from New York City.

EgonSpengler said:

I don't care for the idea of cities springing up all on their own. The silly, god-like power of the player to direct the development of her civilization is the foundation of the game. There's almost nothing organic in this game. I'd even like more power to, for example, direct the expansion of my city borders, besides just spending gold to grab hexes instantaneously.

EDIT: Two follow-up thoughts. First, self-spawning cities could certainly be a "random event" if that option were in the game. Second, while I wouldn't want cities in my nation to magically appear all by themselves, new City States appearing as history moves along could be kind of cool.

Click to expand...

i think making this an option OR adding it to a class of random events with an option to disable them all might work. people who prefer to completely plan settlement (aside from war) can just turn off the formation of cities around fortified trade posts.

its a little less than random, in that the conditions i outline would be predictable; and you can prevent it by moving the unit so the fort is undefended for a turn, or by founding a city which puts the fort in your territory or some other civ does so. the ai might even try to defeat the unit to prevent a city building up. it would likely raze the fort if successful.

civ should be more like starcraft where each civ should be nearly unrecognizable from each other ya they have 40 choices but i can build basically the same unitts and buildings in all of them

Rusty Edge said:

Maybe.

Are you saying that ethnicity should be based upon original civilization, as opposed to-

Race, Religion, and/or Language?

Click to expand...

I think that ethnicity should be initially based upon civilization, but it would become slightly more complex later on in the game. I see no true place for race in the game, not because it could potentially be controversial but because I don't see any game-play elements that it would tie into. As for language, I think that spreading your language could be a by-product of spreading your culture, and that if you can get a different ethnic group to learn your language, it would over time make them more agreeable to your rule and more susceptible to your cultural influence. Lastly, the only tie in to religion that ethnicity should have is that once you convert a majority of one ethnicity to a religion, that religion would be able spread more easily among others of that ethnicity.

As a broad overview, ethnicity would originally be tied to civilization, with each starting civ and CS getting their own ethnicity. As the game progresses though, random third ethnic groups that don't correspond to a cs or civ would spring up and become a part of your empire if you expanded into their land. Also, if your empire doesn't produce culture, you could end up with breakaway ethnic groups because your empire lacks a central cultural identity. I think ethnicity could be a new way that cultural influence is shown, as well as be a mechanic that deals more with empire building and civil order. It seems strange to me that it hasn't been included before, considering how many empires and nations have been bolstered or brought down by ethnic factors (Austria, Russia, America, etc.)

In the old days, ending I guess in the twentieth century, most often after capturing a city (unless they burned it down to the ground first) victorious armed forces usually dealt with any ethnic problems by the use of brute force and/or resettlement. There was no World Congress to prevent that.

I'd also like to see more attractiveness added to the concept of Colonization. Natural Resources appearing on some continents/larges island on the map in significant quantities, being sparse or non existent on other lands (affected by geographical location of a given land mass) thus giving a player an additional reason to try and colonize. I know this is already included in the game, I'd like it pushed to further extremes so that colonization would become essential (especially for a cultural victory and if a commercial victory is plausible then as well).

All nations/tribes divided into: 1. Barbarians-producing generic barbarian units, incapable of producing settlers but capable of building encampments which after capture could be turned into cities(towns) 2. Minor Tribes- semi barbaric (nomadic) nations, with a separate-primitive tech tree, who after achieving a specific population size/number of villages, and acquiring all necessary techs would become civilizations and be capable of building all generic wonders, buildings and units like other cultured civs. These Minor Tribes would also have: A single unique unit available for production(along with a few generic ones), can found new villages/settlements, have 1 great-historically accurate leader. Minor tribes could also acquire new settlements/cities by capturing barbarian settlements and by capturing cultured civilization's cities (perhaps also by successfully exploring goody huts-native villages-if included in the game). 3. (Cultured) Civilizations.

I would like to select an array as a rallying point for units.

i remember having the ability to set a destination for units to auto head to when built. so they were in the right area after buidling without the need to manually move them all. that could be handy so long as you didnt forget about that city and what it was building

i havent really had any ideas about wonders other than canals or tunnels, and i was thinking about one the other day like the lines of Torres Vedras that were constructed by wellington to defend lisbon. they would be different to the great wall in that graphically there would be napoleonic fort structures at intervals that could be occupied. that makes me think maybe it could be another thing great engineers could be used to construct.

if its not a wonder, the player will get a set length line, and must pick the two anchor points for the ends. so they would be napoleonic style forts (or maybe just use citadel graphic without the land claiming). the line would run between the two citadel ends following terrain, putting smaller structures on hilltops. it would cause damage automatically and also slow down enemy units from musketmen downward (or perhaps riflemen) trying to pass them through the line with a zone of control of one hex either side of the line. OR the structures and citadels could use the city attack mechanism. that might be easier to implement. the line causes enemies to need full movement to move one hex in the zone of control. the line consists at maximum of citadel with 2 fortified towers between it and the other citadel. there should be a max length of 7 hexes.

you can also fortify units along the line in the structures and citadels (actually i think you should HAVE to or the line is counted as abandoned, and is pillagable and cannot attack enemy units passing through or even slow them). the units can add their own fire only if they are ranged. if a melee unit is used and it unfortifies (to say finish off enemy), the structure it was in loses the city attack until it refortifies in the structure hex.