Your Top Requested Change

[dexters]

A lot of bits have been spilled discussing the advertised feature of the expansion, but the current state of Civ 5 leaves some room for additions and improvements.

Aside from general things like 'better AI' what would you like to see in the expansion?

Update 2/29/12: Based on the voting trends, I have began a series of articles discussing some of the most discussed topics.
First up is the implementation of Puppet States.

• (CIV IDEAS) #1: The Puppet States

[Glassmage]

Info Addict info but maybe not too much because then spies have nothing to do. I want the nations relation tree back so I know who to denounce!!!

[blasto]

A big "Other" on this poll..

Multiprocessor support should be the biggest thing, followed by better starting options, increased Civ count (over 22).

[Haig]

Other

I'm happy for the info released so far, but I bet there's at least small additional features and details not yet told about.

My number one hope is for AI Civs to get more colonies to other continents and islands, and to launch naval invasions. So if I have my own little continent with two pikemen units for defense forces, I want to be surprised to see the Spanish Armada unloading it's marines to my shores.

[apocalypse105]

Redesign Research Agreement Effects

Its just broken its now a system spam techs faster then the AI not enjoyable at all

[AriochIV]

"Other."

[Gucumatz]

Buff Nukes? More like we need a way to defend against Nukes (Able to shoot down the bomber, SDI, something!)

Not make them stronger! Already whoever gets nukes first almost guarentees them a game.

[Rupe]

Other. I want to see major changes to the diplo system. everyone denouncing everyone seems to take the meaning out of denouncing. Why even have it? Make it mean something and have it used sparingly.

[AriochIV]

Originally Posted by Rupe

Other. I want to see major changes to the diplo system. everyone denouncing everyone seems to take the meaning out of denouncing. Why even have it? Make it mean something and have it used sparingly.

I'd say that about the whole diplomatic system; trying to maintain a friendly relationship is nearly meaningless (except for the trading of luxury resources). The AI civilizations will attack you whenever they feel like it, regardless of how Friendly they supposedly are, and then when the war is over pretend like nothing happened. And then do it again... and again... and again.

Features like this will remain broken unless they can code an AI that knows how to use them.

[CivilizedPlayer]

I think we need some way to defend against nukes. What I would like to see is some way to intercept them (I'm not an engineer, so I have no clue what that would be), so that half my pop isn't annihilated in a single nuke. Especially when I have a tall empire going, this is crippling. I think nukes should be that powerful, but I think that I should have a way to stop them too. That way, when half my city dies, I'm partially to blame.

[apocalypse105]

Originally Posted by CivilizedPlayer

I think we need some way to defend against nukes. What I would like to see is some way to intercept them (I'm not an engineer, so I have no clue what that would be), so that half my pop isn't annihilated in a single nuke. Especially when I have a tall empire going, this is crippling. I think nukes should be that powerful, but I think that I should have a way to stop them too. That way, when half my city dies, I'm partially to blame.

I would love to see a option before you start a game no nukes just like in other games you have a option of disabling super weopons(nukes,ion cannons and so on)

[bcaiko]

Originally Posted by CivilizedPlayer

I think we need some way to defend against nukes. What I would like to see is some way to intercept them (I'm not an engineer, so I have no clue what that would be), so that half my pop isn't annihilated in a single nuke. Especially when I have a tall empire going, this is crippling. I think nukes should be that powerful, but I think that I should have a way to stop them too. That way, when half my city dies, I'm partially to blame.

This. There are many disadvantages right now that Tall Empires have to Wide Empires, and this is a major one. I'm fine with Nukes being king of the modern era, but by the Future Era, there should be a strong defense. Also, it would give players a reason to spend that uranium on a Giant Death Robot for once.

[apocalypse105]

Originally Posted by bcaiko

This. There are many disadvantages right now that Tall Empires have to Wide Empires, and this is a major one. I'm fine with Nukes being king of the modern era, but by the Future Era, there should be a strong defense. Also, it would give players a reason to spend that uranium on a Giant Death Robot for once.

The most obious reason to stop a nuke rocket is with a other nuke in real so don't know how they would do it in game

[Johan de Witt]

I would like an option to disable simultaneous turns in multiplayer. That would actually make me play multiplayer.

[Civsassin]

I, for one, want expanded game features, which is exactly what G&K provides. CiV is a bit simplistic, which is the reason that the game isn't as hard as other games like CiIV. Exanded features will make the make more challenging and replayable.

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by CivilizedPlayer

I think we need some way to defend against nukes. What I would like to see is some way to intercept them (I'm not an engineer, so I have no clue what that would be), so that half my pop isn't annihilated in a single nuke. Especially when I have a tall empire going, this is crippling. I think nukes should be that powerful, but I think that I should have a way to stop them too. That way, when half my city dies, I'm partially to blame.

There should be a peaceful/diplomatic way of defending yourself against nukes. If you build a peaceful tall empire it would be great to make densive pacts with others or get the world to ban nukes. Think about NATO and the cold war, only a few members posessed nukes themselves, but being in the alliance made it too costly to nuke you....

[apocalypse105]

Originally Posted by Johan de Witt

I would like an option to disable simultaneous turns in multiplayer. That would actually make me play multiplayer.

Yes Now everybody spams range units and move them as quick as possible

[nokmirt]

This is one change I was thinking about, which should be considered in G&K. With the current rules when you do not have a resource a unit needs you lose combat efficiency. What I think they should do is change this. Lets say your territory has no horses, so you buy some to build a horse unit or two. After the horse deal runs out in 30 turns. This is what I think should happen. If that horse unit is at full strength and it enters combat it fights at full strength. But when it takes losses and you do not have the required resource, then it cannot replenish until you do have that resource. Without the resource the unit simply cannot be equipped. So its combat effectiveness will suffer as losses to the unit add up.

[TheKingOfBigOz]

I actually would love if they included InfoAddict, I never downloaded (because mods block achievements) it, but I think it's a lot similiar to the way Bug worked (Info was Civ 5's Bug/Bull/Bat mod)

I think "Fix Animations" should've been omitted as we all know it's coming in a patch (sooner or at G&K release)

[Maktaka]

Originally Posted by blasto

A big "Other" on this poll..

Multiprocessor support should be the biggest thing, followed by better starting options, increased Civ count (over 22).

The game already has multicore support. It will use up to four cores while loading and up to three while processing AI turns. It's had that since release.