What do you really want to see in the new expansion?
- Thread starter Ajaccio
- Start date
Zion_Withrow
Standing Before a Giant
Happy Birthday Ajaccio.
The main thing I would add to the game is Israel as a Civ. I have wanted them as a civ since Civilization 1.
The main thing I would add to the game is Israel as a Civ. I have wanted them as a civ since Civilization 1.
kingchris20
Wisdom Seeker
If this is the last piece of work they are going to do on Civ V, an update to the SDK to make it easier/possible to add custom 3D animated Leader Scenes, custom music, etc.
blackcatatonic
Queen of Meme
Happy Birthday for yesterday, Ajaccio!
All I really want for BNWmas is:
- an AI that expands less aggressively in the early game, and that is capable of playing peacefully without resorting to war the moment it feels threatened.
- speaking of war, it would be nice to see the AI in the late game team up against powerful opponents rather than crushing all the weak ones.
All I really want for BNWmas is:
- an AI that expands less aggressively in the early game, and that is capable of playing peacefully without resorting to war the moment it feels threatened.
- speaking of war, it would be nice to see the AI in the late game team up against powerful opponents rather than crushing all the weak ones.
78stonewobble
Chieftain
I like a lot of stuff that I've seen/heard about the new exp.
But there's allways room for improvement.
Agree with vassals/colonies.
Easier time in diplomacy to make a meaningfull long term alliance with one or more players (easier not cheap). Maybe atleast make teams more meaningfull?
The option to decide on where to make my borders. So I can cede country to a neighbour or fight a just war to annex what is rightfully MINE!.
But there's allways room for improvement.
Agree with vassals/colonies.
Easier time in diplomacy to make a meaningfull long term alliance with one or more players (easier not cheap). Maybe atleast make teams more meaningfull?
The option to decide on where to make my borders. So I can cede country to a neighbour or fight a just war to annex what is rightfully MINE!.
blackcatatonic
Queen of Meme
^ The post above reminds me:
- if we're not going to be allowed to tell our cities which hex to expand to next, can the 'mayor' at least make less derpy choices? I think an option to tell cities whether to prioritise luxuries, food tiles, production tiles or strategic resources would be helpful.
- if we're not going to be allowed to tell our cities which hex to expand to next, can the 'mayor' at least make less derpy choices? I think an option to tell cities whether to prioritise luxuries, food tiles, production tiles or strategic resources would be helpful.
George is Angry
Chieftain
Little things for me, but:
1) Have leaders screens that are Era relevant. I want George W. to be in a buttflap if I meet him in the Ancient Era and Montezuma to be in a suit in the Modern Era.
2) Not be denounced by the AI for defending myself if someone declares war on me. Does this happen to you guys? Happens to me almost every game. :/
3) This is supposed to change with BNW, but less insane AI with short term memories. Oh, and smarter combat AI. I want city-states I'm supporting to prioritize killing siege units or units capable of capping their city over workers fleeing offshore.
1) Have leaders screens that are Era relevant. I want George W. to be in a buttflap if I meet him in the Ancient Era and Montezuma to be in a suit in the Modern Era.
2) Not be denounced by the AI for defending myself if someone declares war on me. Does this happen to you guys? Happens to me almost every game. :/
3) This is supposed to change with BNW, but less insane AI with short term memories. Oh, and smarter combat AI. I want city-states I'm supporting to prioritize killing siege units or units capable of capping their city over workers fleeing offshore.
78stonewobble
Chieftain
Maybe let the AI team up a bit more if they're falling behind as well. I'm sorta neutral in a current test game and everyone else is picking on each other. There's like 2 friend declarations out of 22 civs constantly denouncing eachother for god knows what reason.
It would be nice to see the smaller civs gang up (or do it better atleast) to try to protect themselves from being overrun from the powerhouses. Rather than trying to gang up with the powerhouse (since that one have more options to make deals) and then end up being the next in line.
It would be nice to see the smaller civs gang up (or do it better atleast) to try to protect themselves from being overrun from the powerhouses. Rather than trying to gang up with the powerhouse (since that one have more options to make deals) and then end up being the next in line.
Snownova
Warlord
- Better wartime diplomacy, Casus Belli, diplomatic bonuses if AI agrees with your reasons for war and if you terminate the war after achieving your stated objective.
- Slavery, maybe when you capture a city or barb camp it spawns a slave work gang unit that can be settles in a city and can work a tile, but will only yield 1 type of resource from that tile (similar to Crawlers in SMAC)
- Culture Wars! I used to really love having culture wars at my borders with other players. Pumping out as much culture as possible in order to keep or expand my tiles.
- Neutral Zones and territory claims. I'd really, really like some way to ensure that AI's don't settle cities right next to my borders or even on the island/peninsula/continent that I'm on, without having to go to war over it. (the "don't settle cities near me" diplo option rarely seems to work
- Slavery, maybe when you capture a city or barb camp it spawns a slave work gang unit that can be settles in a city and can work a tile, but will only yield 1 type of resource from that tile (similar to Crawlers in SMAC)
- Culture Wars! I used to really love having culture wars at my borders with other players. Pumping out as much culture as possible in order to keep or expand my tiles.
- Neutral Zones and territory claims. I'd really, really like some way to ensure that AI's don't settle cities right next to my borders or even on the island/peninsula/continent that I'm on, without having to go to war over it. (the "don't settle cities near me" diplo option rarely seems to work
bcaiko
Emperor
why ?!?!
Actually, I'd very much like to be able to show allies in multiplayer and AI allies in war where I'd like them to go. I would love Velex's idea to be implemented, or some kind of waypointing system. It would be nice if I could coordinate AI Monty to try and convince him to help me take down this or that city; whether he listens or not might be up to some debate...haha.
I'd also really, truly like pathing to be implemented. I want to be able to tell my units the EXACT PATH I want them to take, and have them not randomly deviate or stop unless something is blocking that path and they can't keep on it ON THAT TURN (and not, some-random-unit-stepped-into-the-hex-I'm-moving-toward-but-won't-be-there-in-six-turns-when-I-can-actually-get-there-so-stopping-for-new-orders
).Yeah, to that end, the AI should at least acknowledge when you're (or another Civ is) close to victory. If every AI Civ but Ethiopia has lost its capital, Ethiopia should understand you're gunning for them.
I know people didn't like when the AI's opinion of you was partially based on them trying to win, but the AI should TRY TO WIN. I'd like the option to turn this kind of acknowlegement on in games.
Aaron90495
King
The problem may be lessened with BNW, but I don't want you to be dead if you fall behind in science. If you're two or three eras behind, that's one thing, but science is too much of a be-all-end-all in this game. As well, I'd love for the melee line (i.e. non-fast units) to be useful as something other than meatshields.
An Israel civ would be great, but I don't think they'd put it in a full-blown for political reasons. If anything, Firaxis would put them as stand-alone DLC so that those offended by it (don't ask me why, I'm just acknowledging those people exist) can simply not buy it.
An Israel civ would be great, but I don't think they'd put it in a full-blown for political reasons. If anything, Firaxis would put them as stand-alone DLC so that those offended by it (don't ask me why, I'm just acknowledging those people exist) can simply not buy it.
Zion_Withrow
Standing Before a Giant
An Israel civ would be great, but I don't think they'd put it in a full-blown for political reasons. If anything, Firaxis would put them as stand-alone DLC so that those offended by it (don't ask me why, I'm just acknowledging those people exist) can simply not buy it.[/QUOTE]
I agree, I really wish they would at least do a DLC. And I find it a bunch of crap that they would include multiple Muslim nations, but not Israel.
I agree, I really wish they would at least do a DLC. And I find it a bunch of crap that they would include multiple Muslim nations, but not Israel.
baptismbyfire
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2013
- Messages
- 126
I don't see why they can't make a Hebrews or Judea, something that refers to the historical civilization rather than the current Israel if people find it so offensive. I don't agree with the venom, of course, since we seem to be fine with the Huns and Mongols who did some pretty horrific things, not to single them out. It's supposed to be a game reflecting civs that had an impact in real life, whether or not you agree with their "right to exist."
I'd also like them to make add some tools to help make animated 3D models for modders. It's inherently more complex than the rest of what modders do (XML manipulation and scripting), but they sure could expose the requirements to at least accommodate those willing to put in the time required.
PreLynMax
Your Lord and Master
Revolution and Rising States:
The ability for city states to go full civ, or for barbarians to turn into city states and the ability for your nation to split in half when it gets too big/unhappy/different religion/ideology/ect.
War Weariness:
Severely punish warmongers with revolution to discourage runaway civs (they way Rome was split in half, then broken in many city states because they grew too big).
The ability for city states to go full civ, or for barbarians to turn into city states and the ability for your nation to split in half when it gets too big/unhappy/different religion/ideology/ect.
War Weariness:
Severely punish warmongers with revolution to discourage runaway civs (they way Rome was split in half, then broken in many city states because they grew too big).
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
Improved Coup/cs ideology
Cs should randomly choose an ideology
If a cs has a different ideology, then you get
-a penalty to influence gained
-an increase in influence lost
-inability to rig elections
Then a coup would switch the cs ideology to yours (giving you a big influence boost, and a small influence loss to all of the original ideology)
Cs should randomly choose an ideology
If a cs has a different ideology, then you get
-a penalty to influence gained
-an increase in influence lost
-inability to rig elections
Then a coup would switch the cs ideology to yours (giving you a big influence boost, and a small influence loss to all of the original ideology)
What are you referring to in regards to Rome? Just curious...
And I agree in the splitting of empires. In fact in the first game, when a civ that wiped out another by occupation lost its capital to a third civ, the game poped up a supposed civil war text and split said civ in half. Effectively the citizens of the occupied civ rebelled in the chaos and captured/liberated their cities
Also loosing the capital was an effective way to turn the countdown for a science victory off, I know there is no count down but they should implement something like that again.
Similar threads
