Suggestions and Requests

[smileywalk]

Barbarians invading China are suicidal. I fortify my cho-ko-nu at the border preferably on hills and horse archers attack them almost always. If their goal is to pillage and capture cities, they should go past my border troops and wreak havoc. That would make defending a long border challenging. The way it is now is unrealistic and too easy.

 

[Gen1_]

But it's how barb IA works.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

I’m not sure how feasible the transformation from land unit to sea unit but I have always thought Civ4 should allow inland cities to build ships (maybe a unit named “Galleon (parts)” or something) and then you bring it via road to a port city or fort and it turns into a ship

Yo Mehmet.

 

[IrishDragon]

Create a unit similar to the persecutor, except it can remove a foreign core area tile from other civs

- It should take a number of turns, during which it generates hostile enemy units
- It should have a (probably lowish) chance of being successful
- You suffer a permanent diplo hit with that civ for attempted genocide, including any rebirths
- You suffer a diplo hit with their allies/friends, and any civ running multilateralism/democracy if in the modern era. Maybe even the possibility of war declarations
- You gain the possible stability benefits of removing some/all of a foreign core from your territory, and reducing the probability of losing cities to a rebirth

 

[smileywalk]

When another civ is about to cancel a trade deal, you can renegotiate the deal. Apparently not the same when YOU want to renegotiate. I made a deal to trade gold and rice for gems to save a little gold. Later I wanted the rice back for myself and was willing to pay more gold for gems. I thought I could cancel the deal and make a new one. Surprise! Gems disappeared from the trade menu once I canceled the deal. There should be a way for the player to renegotiate deals if he/she wants to.

 

[Cypriot]

Create a unit similar to the persecutor, except it can remove a foreign core area tile from other civs

- It should take a number of turns, during which it generates hostile enemy units
- It should have a (probably lowish) chance of being successful
- You suffer a permanent diplo hit with that civ for attempted genocide, including any rebirths
- You suffer a diplo hit with their allies/friends, and any civ running multilateralism/democracy if in the modern era. Maybe even the possibility of war declarations
- You gain the possible stability benefits of removing some/all of a foreign core from your territory, and reducing the probability of losing cities to a rebirth

I think it would be pretty much useless. Foreign cores do not give any additional stability penalty (except for overextension), but poor diplomatic relations do, and a lot. So I doubt additional stability for no foreign cores will end up beneficial. Rebirths do not happen if you are on solid (or probably even stable) anyway, so there is no real benefit to use this unit.

 

[Leoreth]

Barbarians invading China are suicidal. I fortify my cho-ko-nu at the border preferably on hills and horse archers attack them almost always. If their goal is to pillage and capture cities, they should go past my border troops and wreak havoc. That would make defending a long border challenging. The way it is now is unrealistic and too easy.

Not to say you are wrong to give this feedback, but right now it seems that you come to post in this thread for every small unexpected thing that happens in your ongoing game. Maybe it makes more sense to finish your game, and perhaps play more than one civilization, and then give more comprehensive feedback after that.

 

[hnrysml]

I’m not sure how feasible the transformation from land unit to sea unit but I have always thought Civ4 should allow inland cities to build ships (maybe a unit named “Galleon (parts)” or something) and then you bring it via road to a port city or fort and it turns into a ship

Why? Certainly the raw materials for ships can come from inland but historically and even today ships are almost exclusively built in port cities or those on a few large rivers (which would be the exceptions to the rule).

 

[Logoncal]

Why? Certainly the raw materials for ships can come from inland but historically and even today ships are almost exclusively built in port cities or those on a few large rivers (which would be the exceptions to the rule).

The only famous example of building a ship and taking to the sea if i recall was Garibaldi doing it on Laguna, during the Farrapos War.
But thats it. A very strange suggestion.

 

[Dracosolon]

Yeah, there is naval activity in-land but that's probably not worth representing. At most there could be something simple, like letting cities by a river build Harbors (to add to tiles in their second ring and allow Wharfs), but that's another bonus to rivers and those are already pretty powerful.

 

[Logoncal]

Yeah, there is naval activity in-land but that's probably not worth representing. At most there could be something simple, like letting cities by a river build Harbors (to add to tiles in their second ring and allow Wharfs), but that's another bonus to rivers and those are already pretty powerful.

Best way to make Dujiangyan completely trivial.

 

[Dracosolon]

I meant food on sea tiles, obviously.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

Barbarians invading China are suicidal. I fortify my cho-ko-nu at the border preferably on hills and horse archers attack them almost always. If their goal is to pillage and capture cities, they should go past my border troops and wreak havoc. That would make defending a long border challenging. The way it is now is unrealistic and too easy.

The Mowhawks would like to speak with you.

 

[Hickman888]

I’m not sure how feasible the transformation from land unit to sea unit but I have always thought Civ4 should allow inland cities to build ships (maybe a unit named “Galleon (parts)” or something) and then you bring it via road to a port city or fort and it turns into a ship

One fantastic implementation in Civilization 6 (Humankind as well) is the Harbor district. It allows an inland city to build a spawn location for naval units on the ocean.

We could feasibly do something similar in DoC, by introducing a Harbor improvement to be placed on coastal tiles, allowing nearby cities working the tile to train naval units for the Harbor.

 

[Leoreth]

One fantastic implementation in Civilization 6 (Humankind as well)

This is not the way to endear a suggestion to me.

 

[Logoncal]

This is not the way to endear a suggestion to me.

Top 10 ways to murder a suggestion with a shotgun blast to the face: Suggest its a Civ 6/Humankind mechanic.

Hey, can Happiness be global now and each luxury gives +4 happiness? (joke suggestion)

 

[Dracosolon]

I thought the top way to do that was just to post here.

 

[1SDANi]

Why not use this as an opportunity to buff forts? Let coastal forts next to a city make that city count as coastal. Doesn't use that weird Civ 6 system where cities build improvements and there's the opportunity cost of building a fort on a tile that could have literally anything else on it, but in exchange, you're making a city able to have a harbor, wharf, lighthouse etc, that otherwise wouldn't be able to have it. Coastal would still be vastly preferable, but I imagine players may find scenarios where it outperforms a cottage, windmill, or watermill.

 

[IrishDragon]

I think it would be pretty much useless. Foreign cores do not give any additional stability penalty (except for overextension), but poor diplomatic relations do, and a lot. So I doubt additional stability for no foreign cores will end up beneficial. Rebirths do not happen if you are on solid (or probably even stable) anyway, so there is no real benefit to use this unit.

I for one would use it, because I don't play the game the exact same way as you

Why not use this as an opportunity to buff forts? Let coastal forts next to a city make that city count as coastal. Doesn't use that weird Civ 6 system where cities build improvements and there's the opportunity cost of building a fort on a tile that could have literally anything else on it, but in exchange, you're making a city able to have a harbor, wharf, lighthouse etc, that otherwise wouldn't be able to have it. Coastal would still be vastly preferable, but I imagine players may find scenarios where it outperforms a cottage, windmill, or watermill.

Or make a canal improvement. Could only be one tile deep so could only connect with cities within one tile of the coast. Must connect to a city and a sea tile. Can only hold one ship at a time, gives some commerce bonuses.

 

[Hickman888]

This is not the way to endear a suggestion to me.

I’ll admit that while I haven’t played Civ 6 in years, I still do enjoy the occasional game of Humankind. I consider it a much better sequel to Civ 4 than Civ 5/6 ever were!