CivFanaticMan
Warlord
Ok we all know by now that the Fraxis sold a buch of people an unfinished game, and something no one really asked for. What I wanted was a game that improved upon its predecesor (not civ rev; Civ4) But I see that Fraxis decided to take steps back and rework something that was already working. In my opinion the new features in civ5 would have been a step in the right direction if the game designers had kept some of the good features of civ4. So here is a short list of what I think Fraxis could have done better:
1. Social Policies- SP's are a step in the right direction, but... taking away Civics in the process was big mistake. I think if SP's had been combined with Civics it would have added depth and kept the longterm decision making process alive, while not sacrificing flexibility. For instance in previos civ games culture was not very important and too easy to build up. Cultures only use was for a cultural victory and fighting border wars. Turning culture into a currency so you could buy certain cultural bonus and work your way down certain culture trees (Social Policies) that you couldn't change, while keeping Civics in the game for short term decision making. A balance between the two could have kept the player engaged in thinking about the longterm game, while still being able to focus and be flexible about the current situation.
2. 1UPT- 1UPT was something people were excited about pre release. No more stacks of doom, making for a more strategic way to have war while making war more exciting by taking battles "outside of cities". I loved the idea of no more SOD's. It should have made a more interesting game where combat wasn't decided by luck and how many units you had in a stack, but by tactical thought. Sadly this causes a major problem: 1UPT creates major traffic jams. Sure this problem is supposed to be fix by giving infantry units 2 movement points so they can pass by any unit already in the tile, but what if that unit blocking is on a hill or in a forest? What if you get your unit stuck? or you can't pass by a choke point? 2UPT would be much more efficient, keeping tactical gameplay alive while reducing traffic.
3. City-states- City-states are an excellent idea in my opinion, but how that idea was executed was rather poor. City-states feel more like a liability than an asset. I have no ideas on how to improve on them as of now.
4. Happiness- Happiness in civ5 has been completely changed. Now instead of each city having a certain level of happiness, you have empire wide happiness. If one city is unhappy then your whole empire suffers. This has become a problem that many people complain about. If you conquer a enemy city, the city doesn't revolt, but you suffer a happiness penalty throughout your empire. My idea to fix this is keeping the empire wide happiness but balance it out with local happiness, so that a city in your empire can still revolt and have unhappiness. A city that is unhappy receives a production and growth penalty, while a revolting city produces nothing and can't grow. Global happiness would be less affected by 1 unhappy city, but a lot of unhappy cities could start affecting it, giving a major loss of science. I would also like to see the return of sliders in some way or another.
Feel free to discuss.
1. Social Policies- SP's are a step in the right direction, but... taking away Civics in the process was big mistake. I think if SP's had been combined with Civics it would have added depth and kept the longterm decision making process alive, while not sacrificing flexibility. For instance in previos civ games culture was not very important and too easy to build up. Cultures only use was for a cultural victory and fighting border wars. Turning culture into a currency so you could buy certain cultural bonus and work your way down certain culture trees (Social Policies) that you couldn't change, while keeping Civics in the game for short term decision making. A balance between the two could have kept the player engaged in thinking about the longterm game, while still being able to focus and be flexible about the current situation.
2. 1UPT- 1UPT was something people were excited about pre release. No more stacks of doom, making for a more strategic way to have war while making war more exciting by taking battles "outside of cities". I loved the idea of no more SOD's. It should have made a more interesting game where combat wasn't decided by luck and how many units you had in a stack, but by tactical thought. Sadly this causes a major problem: 1UPT creates major traffic jams. Sure this problem is supposed to be fix by giving infantry units 2 movement points so they can pass by any unit already in the tile, but what if that unit blocking is on a hill or in a forest? What if you get your unit stuck? or you can't pass by a choke point? 2UPT would be much more efficient, keeping tactical gameplay alive while reducing traffic.
3. City-states- City-states are an excellent idea in my opinion, but how that idea was executed was rather poor. City-states feel more like a liability than an asset. I have no ideas on how to improve on them as of now.
4. Happiness- Happiness in civ5 has been completely changed. Now instead of each city having a certain level of happiness, you have empire wide happiness. If one city is unhappy then your whole empire suffers. This has become a problem that many people complain about. If you conquer a enemy city, the city doesn't revolt, but you suffer a happiness penalty throughout your empire. My idea to fix this is keeping the empire wide happiness but balance it out with local happiness, so that a city in your empire can still revolt and have unhappiness. A city that is unhappy receives a production and growth penalty, while a revolting city produces nothing and can't grow. Global happiness would be less affected by 1 unhappy city, but a lot of unhappy cities could start affecting it, giving a major loss of science. I would also like to see the return of sliders in some way or another.
Feel free to discuss.
