Civ V - One World Speculation Thread!

Status
Not open for further replies.
They pulled the leak already, makes you wonder when the announcement will be.

As I've said before, based on previous announcements and release dates, as well as the lack of activity since the release of Gods & Kings, the announcement of a new expansion is most likely on the 14th or 21st of February for a June release. Who knows though, now that the name is potentially out there, it might be announced a bit earlier, though I doubt that they would.
 
Wow, second expansion! :goodjob:





Hmm... I think what we'll see in One World Expansion:

* New Civilizations:

1) Zulu
2) Portugal
3) Sioux
4) Indonesia
5) Khmer
6) Brazil
7) Israel
8) Poland
9) Vietnam
+10) Inca (just like Spain was in G&K from Double Civilization and Scenario Pack: Spain and Inca)

Though, Sumer & Hitties from Wonders of the Ancient World Scenerio DLC have a high chance of being included and Inuit could be a "surpice" Civ replacing bottom three civ's from my list.

* New Social Policies like Environmentalism (late game).

* City Health system

* Enhanced Exploration system with Map Trading

* Rebellion/Government Overthrown element

* Random Events (pretty much same system than in Civ4)

* Improved Economy system which includes foreign trade routes, rivers and economic victory condition.

* New Strategic Resources: (late game) Saltpeter and Rubber.

* A few new units, buildings and wonders. (Additional UC for each existing Civ would be awesome).

* New Scenarios

I agree that most of the civs you listed are indeed probable. However, there is always a wild card or two and I doubt both Vietnam and Khmer get in. There is a decent chance there won't be the Sioux either and another Native American Civ (Cherokee/Comanche, to fit with the Civil War Scenario).
 
I would like to see proper, unstunted multiplayer, thanks.

I don't think the importance of this can be stated enough. However, having to buy an expansion to receive functionality of something released in the base game doesn't appear to be a wise move, or 2K's style. It will come in a patch accompanying the expansions release if it comes at all with the expansion (which i doubt).
 
Tobacco, fine! But then reintroduce health as well and all cities get -1 health if the realm has tobacco ;)

If tobacco as a luxury resource was to get negative effects, why don't resources like whales, ivory and to a lesser extent furs and other animal resources give unhappiness in the modern era and beyond?
Because negative effects from resources you acquire by settling a city near them and improve them sounds like a very bad idea for gameplay.
As a smoker I admit I'm a bit biased here but you still get my point.
 
I can't see them including tobacco. Notwithstanding its undisputed significance in history, there's too much potential baggage/criticism for a commercial game. Candidly, I suspect they'd rather be excoriated for introducing slave trading or prostitution (neither of which, by the way, would they touch with a 10-foot pole) than tackle the anti-smoking zealots.
 
The discussion so far is proof that there are still lots of features that can be added for this expansion; hopefully they'll put a good amount of work into it. The release of this expansion should also mark the imminent release of the .dlls for modding, and pitboss, hopefully. (The .dlls should also allow modders to add tobacco if the E rating doesn't allow it).

Because negative effects from resources you acquire by settling a city near them and improve them sounds like a very bad idea for gameplay.

If anything, it should become "obsolete" (not negative), and at the same time that other Luxes appear on the map to make up for the obsolete ones.

---

War weariness could be implemented given the "One World" concept. I could definitely see it becoming a bigger factor in the late game, while still giving some players a reason to use the late-game units. But they have to be careful so it's fun and not frustrating. As an example of implementation:

if you declare war, you start with an empty "war weariness" bar.
- Over turns, the bar fills itself.
- Losing units fills the bar, and damage to units slightly fills it as well.
- Destroying enemy units helps empty the bar.
- Damage to cities helps empty the bar, but when the city gets the health back, that effect is reversed, so the city must take more damage than it's healing for it to be of use.
- Conquering a city empties a lot of the bar.
- Making peace removes the bar from play.
- Offering peace with no conditions empties the bar.

If the bar is overfilled, temporary unhappiness is added; more overfill means more unhappiness. As the overfill is removed (or peace is made), the temporary unhappiness goes away too.

The reason for all this detail is because I don't want to give the wrong idea of what kind of war weariness I'd like to see in the game. War weariness sounds like a logical step fitting with the name of the XP (as well as being a feature in earlier games), so hopefully they'll find a good way to implement it.
 
If this is a more diplomacy and trade oriented expansion, I'd like to see the following:

International Trade Routes: A simpler version of the Civ IV version. It would be a simple trade agreement. It would work from Capital to Capital. There would be a layer on the map showing trade routes and a civ sould disrupt them by pillaging a road or certain Naval units like the Privateer could blockade them. The benefit of a trade route would be a percent bonus to money produced by the Capital.

Free Trade Agreement: Allows both signers to pool their luxury resources to contribute to the happiness pools and WLtK Days of both. It would probably require open borders, International Trade Route, and DoF.

Wonder Resources: CivIV had Broadway and Hollywood which produced luxury resources. I would bring those back and add to those: Silicon Valley, producing Electronics, and Universal Healthcare System, producing the luxury of Medicine.

Embargos: Two civs would agree not to have International Trade or any other kind of trade with a third. This way you could help defeat an enemy without direct conflict.

Regarding civs: If we look at G&K, half the civs tied into the scenarios, while the other half had something to do with the Religion mechanic. The trade mechanics are mostly a modern affair, but we could trace their origins back a few centuries. So we may end up seeing some colonial power like Portugal and some enabling power like the Ashanti, and some resistive power like the Zulu or Comanche. Plus whatever ties into the scenarios. If they do the American Civil War scenario which we have files for already, the Comanche or Sioux could be an option.
 
If tobacco as a luxury resource was to get negative effects, why don't resources like whales, ivory and to a lesser extent furs and other animal resources give unhappiness in the modern era and beyond?
Because negative effects from resources you acquire by settling a city near them and improve them sounds like a very bad idea for gameplay.
As a smoker I admit I'm a bit biased here but you still get my point.

Dont worry, I sure get your point. I simply want "health" back and thought it d be a nice little joke to say it that way.

By the way, at the moment I do not like the city-growing system. Right now all big late game cities are those which are founded early (ok, given enof food is present). Its because cities basically grow with a constant rate and this is really contradictory to the real world. Liked the system in civ4 in that regard much better.
 
About the Tobacco fiasco, isn't Tobacco a luxury resource in Civ 3? If so, what's the game's rating?

Pretty sure Tobacco was in a Civ 4 Scenario too
 
Pretty sure Tobacco was in a Civ 4 Scenario too

Also one of the main resources in the Civ IV Colonization game
I don't think it's an issue to include them as a luxury resource in Civ V
So they should do it, along with Coffee, Tea and Cocoa
From bonus resources Rice and Maize is a must have
 
I wish they nerf some and boost some beliefs, I think some are way to strong and others are weak and I wish they put something new in civ series that wasn't before.
 
As I mentioned above (obviously without any impact), there has to be considered more than only the "real-world-importance" of luxury resources.
All new luxuies that were intoduced with G&K (salt, cooper, truffel and crabs) need different techs to be developed. In contrast, coffee, tea, tabacco and cacao merely need plantations to be developed. If all of them are integrated into the game, the calendar-technologie-branch will be way to overweighted and the "oral tradition"-believe will be heavily OP. Both is BAD for game balance!

Additionally, there has to be a fine balance between available numbers of (different) luxuries and map size. Too many of them and happiness will be as good as a non-issue and lose it's growth-limiting relevance. (And I don't think it would be possible to reduce happiness-building effects even more for compensation. They wouldn't be worth building any more.)

Yes, the mentioned luxuries were and still are important in the real world. To implement (all of) them into CiV would be a bad idea nevertheless!
 
Hmmm .. ONE WORLD

how about we finally get a decent (official) Earth Map with Proper starting locations? Yeah. ONE WORLD.
 
Dunno, I think the number of Wonders in the game is about right as it is. If they do add more, I'd like to see some kind of exclusion method like they do with luxuries (btw this is why I'd like to see tea, coffee and cocao - wouldn't need to change the distribution of improvement methods, could just see a higher turnover game to game of the plantation ones. Let's get a tea ceremony pantheon!).
 
Dunno, I think the number of Wonders in the game is about right as it is. If they do add more, I'd like to see some kind of exclusion method like they do with luxuries (btw this is why I'd like to see tea, coffee and cocao - wouldn't need to change the distribution of improvement methods, could just see a higher turnover game to game of the plantation ones. Let's get a tea ceremony pantheon!).

That'd be the simple solution. Yes, it would be unfortunate in some games to not have incense or spices, but that's life.

The other solution to not make calendar so required would be to add a new improvement other than plantation (which even in the pedia it says it's just a big farm). So the resources that are well known plantations (coffee, tobacco) would be plantations, and maybe some of the other ones like Silk or Spices could be switched to something else.


For me, I'd like to see the ages lengthened, or at least force you to make your way through more of an age before advancing. Often at times my top tech will be 2 ages ahead of one of the other ones. Even if it was something as simple as:
make each new age's techs tons more expensive than it is now. But, to make up for it, for each tech in the previous age you complete, you get like a 5% discount on the next age. So you can jump ahead, but it's more and more expensive if you haven't completed the previous age yet.
 
"One World"....sounds like it's going down the 'ol global warming "kumbaya" deadend again. Perhaps this time Al Gore can strike a deal with rich oil....oh...wait...
 
I believe a vassal system like Civ 4's would do the game good. And it is not at all "extremely horrible" as you claim. You can demand resources and gold from vassals, which will of course make them annoyed. You can gift them techs and cities to make them a more competent ally. You can tell them to attack a certain city when you are at war. If a vassal becomes too strong, he can seek to declare independence. There are many sensible mechanics connected to the vassal system which have historical resemblence and which add another layer of desicions. And it lets you "beat" another Civ without having to conquer every single city. All in all a very nice improvement. One should of course ask why a vassal system wasn't in Civ 5 to begin with, but that's a different story.
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine. I had more than enough debates about whether vassal system is good or bad 5 years ago, so I'll use my right not to go there again. :) The only thing is worth mentioning, is that many players constantly complain that Civ5 is too military oriented and favors warmongers. Vassal system Civ4 style will force them to nuke their steam account.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom