What should Civilization VII bring back from previous installments?

[jsciv69]

What should Civilization VII bring back from previous installments?

I will start by suggesting the return of those charming advisers from Civ II. They brought humor and entertainment. Would love what today's AI could make that look like.
I would also like to bring back certain functions from Civ III. Such as being able to settle a city anywhere not occupied by a rival Civ, City State, or Barbarian Camp. Also bring back the realistic sea activity from Civ III. Especially Amphibious ships that can transport units from Continent to Continent. And the realistic combat from Civ III
Bring back the immigration we had in Civ IV
Graphics. The realism enjoyed from Civ V was especially enjoyable. From the impressive realistic looking leader animations to the realistic look of cities.
What I liked in Civ VI was negotiating with Barbarians. Which I would like to expand. And include Trade. Perhaps setting up alliances. And even playing as Barbarians.
These are just a few things I would like to see return in a possible Civilization VII. What are yours?

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

2D graphics.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

Sean Bean

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Stackings and One-turn resolves.
and not the same unlimited stacks of doom.

 

[Angry_Sand]

My understanding of past iterations, 4 and prior, is that rebellions could lead to the formation of entirely new civilizations that compete against players. 6 has the flip system, and sometimes they become neutral or city states, but a true secession system that leads to additional civilizations competing for victory seems more interesting. Irl, the US is a fairly prime example of this, they split from the British empire, and not 300 year later, are incredibly more powerful than the UK, not just a city state.

 

[vorlon_mi]

My understanding of past iterations, 4 and prior, is that rebellions could lead to the formation of entirely new civilizations that compete against players. 6 has the flip system, and sometimes they become neutral or city states, but a true secession system that leads to additional civilizations competing for victory seems more interesting. Irl, the US is a fairly prime example of this, they split from the British empire, and not 300 year later, are incredibly more powerful than the UK, not just a city state.

Civ4 had that feature. Cities that the player settled on another continent were more susceptible to being "liberated" or turned into a new Civ. I don't remember seeing that happen in my games of Civ3 (still playing it!)

In Civ3 and Civ4, cities could be "flipped" culturally to join with a strong neighbor. Not go through a "free city" phase, just a one-turn changeover. Tactics were available to try to promote that, or defend against it. City states were not present in those games. If Civ7 allowed culture flipping, then it should be much harder to flip city states.

I would welcome the return of either/both of those two game mechanics in Civ7.

One of the earlier games in the franchise -- can't remember which one, maybe Civ2? -- had a feature where if a civ was eliminated but enough open/unclaimed land still existed, a brand new civ could be born. @Patine , was this a thing in Civ2?

 

[Patine]

Civ4 had that feature. Cities that the player settled on another continent were more susceptible to being "liberated" or turned into a new Civ. I don't remember seeing that happen in my games of Civ3 (still playing it!)

In Civ3 and Civ4, cities could be "flipped" culturally to join with a strong neighbor. Not go through a "free city" phase, just a one-turn changeover. Tactics were available to try to promote that, or defend against it. City states were not present in those games. If Civ7 allowed culture flipping, then it should be much harder to flip city states.

I would welcome the return of either/both of those two game mechanics in Civ7.

One of the earlier games in the franchise -- can't remember which one, maybe Civ2? -- had a feature where if a civ was eliminated but enough open/unclaimed land still existed, a brand new civ could be born. @Patine , was this a thing in Civ2?

Not in Civ2, no (though Diplomat and Spy units could try to instigate revolts, that may or may not flip na individual city, but that was an active use of a unit function, not a passive thing. I believe the ability first appeared in a Sid Meier-type game in SMACX, with one specific Civ, the Free Drones (Drone was the name for an, "unhappy working citizen icon," in SMAC), under Foreman Domai, who seems to represent a more idealistic and earlier view of Revolutionary Vanguard Marxist-Communism, can flip a city within a certain range of their border that goes into a Drone Revolt. Given SMAC predated Civ3, I'm pretty sure it was the first public usage by the Sid Meier outfits to use that mechanic. That mechanic can be given to a custom scenario or mod civ, too, in the SMAC editors.

 

[Civinator]

One of the earlier games in the franchise -- can't remember which one, maybe Civ2? -- had a feature where if a civ was eliminated but enough open/unclaimed land still existed, a brand new civ could be born.

It is a feature of Civ 3, that can be disabled in the starting settings of a game (edit) and it was a feature in Civ 2, too.

Spoiler :

 

[mattlach]

1.) Allow early (pre-ocean going) naval units to enter ocean tiles, with a high risk (~80%) of being lost at sea if they cant find another coastal tile in time, and end their turn on the open ocean, just like in Civ1. It's a fun way to discover nearby land early in the game, with a little bit of risk if you accidentally end your turn on an ocean tile.

2.) Get rid of unit embarkment, bring back transport ships. Make it more difficult to cross the ocean.

3.) I always found the "adding to your custom palace" from the early games to be fun.

4.) Make the graphics less cartoonish. The earlier titles were more serious looking. I know part of this is that as computers became capable of better graphics they had to choose if the early low fidelity graphics were more cartoonish or more realistic. We've seen cartoonish in Civ 6, it would be nice to take a turn back towards the more realistic.

5.) Allow for renaming of cities.

6.) Stop making the game always online always connected. The overwhelming majority of Civ games are played single player, and should be completely offline when doing so. Also, commit to absolutely zero user data collection, and no forced developer/publisher launcher.

There are probably more, but that is all I can think of right now.

 

[Naokaukodem]

1.) Allow early (pre-ocean going) naval units to enter ocean tiles, with a high risk (~80%) of being lost at sea if they cant find another coastal tile in time, and end their turn on the open ocean, just like in Civ1. It's a fun way to discover nearby land early in the game, with a little bit of risk if you accidentally end your turn on an ocean tile.

Bad idea to incentive players to try a passage for at the end a loss of production early. Beside some point, everybody would understand that it doesn't worth the cost. So it's a useless feature.

2.) Get rid of unit embarkment, bring back transport ships. Make it more difficult to cross the ocean.

Worst idea ever. I think that even if the game would go back to SODs, I would still prefer auto-embark. That said, sending a settler with no escort across the seas is still a bad idea, especially if barbarians are on. But I would never return back to the logistic mini-game nightmare such as building enough transports for your current and future units.

4.) Make the graphics less cartoonish. The earlier titles were more serious looking. I know part of this is that as computers became capable of better graphics they had to choose if the early low fidelity graphics were more cartoonish or more realistic. We've seen cartoonish in Civ 6, it would be nice to take a turn back towards the more realistic.

Graphics, especially leaderheads, have always been cartoonish. A more serious design would make them totally out of place. As to units, I don't bother looking at them, I just look at their icon, which need of clarity overpasses the need of any style. Cities, are cartoonish also, if you consider how grossly they are represented. As to features, they are cartoonish in a sense that they are limited to one single tile, and often out of proportion compared to units/cities.

 

[vorlon_mi]

Lost at sea -- Part of the reason that players in Civ1/Civ2/Civ3/Civ4 would spend the resources to build a boat and send it out on a (potentially) one-way trip was the incentive for meeting other civs. Tech trading was allowed and encouraged in Civ3 and Civ4; I didn't play Civ1 and don't have a clear memory of whether it was possible in Civ2. Absent those incentives for exploration, @Naokaukodem has a good point. The player would be risking early production for little gain. I could still see a risk/reward decision regarding sending an embarked settler and embarked archer across deep water to plant a city on an island near a key resource.

I was (and still am) a fan of tech trading from the earlier games in the franchise. It certainly helped me catch up in the early game. Those games had fewer luxury resources for happiness (what are now called amenities), so offering a tech to an AI might convince them to sell you their spare lux for 20/30 turns in the mid- and late-game. I would favor bringing back tech trading.

 

[AffineConstant]

It is a feature of Civ 3, that can be disabled in the starting settings of a game (edit) and it was a feature in Civ 2, too.

Spoiler :

View attachment 665972

Shoot, I totally forgot Civ 3 already did this.

But yes this a great idea to bring back. And on top of it you could have either a "free" city (one that had rebelled to be independent) or a city state become that new "big" Civ. This would give the new starting Civ an immediate city and resources, and make even more sense from a "look it's like real history!" perspective.

 

[Playsoneasy]

Bring back sliders. I know they are a bit of a love/hate thing in this forum but I always thought sliders were a good way of adjusting your government's priorities quickly.

More in-depth city screens, with a "view city" option like in Civ 2. It was a nice touch that helped with immersion.

As others have suggested bring back a more serious and less cartoony feel to the game. More realistic leaderheads would be welcomed, IMHO.

 

[dagriggstar]

I actually forgot about restarting eliminated players, that's actually a great idea. Would mean they can take more risks with allowing early conquests as eliminated players just respawn. I'd even be good with respawning myself
Civ IV city flipping and migration
I'm also pro-stacking one-turn combat

Tech trading I'm against, it sounds fine in theory but I remember recently watching someone play civ III, constantly trying to optimise being a middle man tech trader every turn, I'm just thinking this is way too time consuming but I know the AI is doing it too so as a human you have to do it too or be at a disadvantage. Prefer a passive system (meet another civ with tech, get research points towards that tech)

One of my favourite mod memories was a personal mod I made for 5 where longboats could carry specifically 2 berserkers. So you could appear on the coast in longboats and have a massive amount of moves on the turn you land your berserks to raid and run away. So in general transport ships are a no from me, but as a special ability for a or two civ sure. I also had some fun modding some Japanese "super carriers" (basically aircraft carriers with extra aircraft carry slots) too. The berserks almost operated like mini-airplanes.

Stuff not mentioned yet (I think)
My favourite government design is civ V policies and ideologies
Civ 2 I think had the best unit support/supply system. Mostly it costed 1 production per turn (but depended on government) per unit. So more military meant less production. I'd like to see that tweaked but back in some way.
Leaders with a preferred government/civic/policy choice. Worked well in IV in giving you another way to play diplomacy. Personally I would make it so instead of having a "leader ability", you pick a leader and their preferred government choice (or civic or policy) gets a +100% boost. Then you do something like "Gain x% science/culture from other civilizations with similar governments to you". That way players are incentivised to adopt the special government/policy/civic AND spread it to others. Like adding an extra layer to civ IVs idea

That's off the top of my head, without looking up what the features were in each iteration.

 

[Patine]

Bring back sliders. I know they are a bit of a love/hate thing in this forum but I always thought sliders were a good way of adjusting your government's priorities quickly.

Civ IV city flipping and migration

I'm not sure what these concepts mean, as I haven't played 4 and 5 (only 1-3 and 6), and their descriptions aren't as obviously intuiitve, completely.

I'm also pro-stacking one-turn combat

Tech trading I'm against, it sounds fine in theory but I remember recently watching someone play civ III, constantly trying to optimise being a middle man tech trader every turn, I'm just thinking this is way too time consuming but I know the AI is doing it too so as a human you have to do it too or be at a disadvantage. Prefer a passive system (meet another civ with tech, get research points towards that tech)

One of my favourite mod memories was a personal mod I made for 5 where longboats could carry specifically 2 berserkers. So you could appear on the coast in longboats and have a massive amount of moves on the turn you land your berserks to raid and run away. So in general transport ships are a no from me, but as a special ability for a or two civ sure. I also had some fun modding some Japanese "super carriers" (basically aircraft carriers with extra aircraft carry slots) too. The berserks almost operated like mini-airplanes.

I like unit stacks, and tech trading, and transport ships, and would very much like them all to come back, personally.

 

[queenpea]

I miss map trading.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

I'm not sure what these concepts mean, as I haven't played 4 and 5 (only 1-3 and 6), and their descriptions aren't as obviously intuiitve, completely.


I like unit stacks, and tech trading, and transport ships, and would very much like them all to come back, personally.

1. But it has to be limited stackings, not limitless stack of doom.
Also 'one turn resolves' rocks. actually it is more historical accurate when one turn takes at least one year.
2. Transport ship mechanisms has to be also reworked. before dedicated troop transports came to exists (or even as late as Russo-Japanese War). soldiers being loaded into watercrafts are also active combatants on board a watercraft. they don't just sit around when ship to ship fighting takes place. but they don't fight at full strenghts as some abilities on land are marginalized or even not available at sea, (cavalry keep their horses / vehicles inside the ship's hold and not on deck, each cavalrymen must fight dismounted like generic infantryman, combat strenght reduced, all combat resolves in this situation is resolved as infantry VS infantry)

 

[dagriggstar]

I'm not sure what these concepts mean, as I haven't played 4 and 5 (only 1-3 and 6), and their descriptions aren't as obviously intuiitve, completely.

Sliders are present in 2 and 3. It's referring to the commerce/trade slider. Like, your city gained commerce, then the slider would turn that commerce into science/gold/luxuries (in 4 also culture). For instance in 2 if you ran monarchy you could max your trade slide out at 70%, so usually you ran 70% science, then like 20% gold (tax i think) and 10% luxuries

In civ 4 each city had nationality percentages. So when you initially found a city, that city would be 100% your nationality. There were at least two ways of foreign nationalities increasing in domestic cities.
1) Trade routes. If you had a lot of trade routes between you and another player, that players nationality would rise in your city (and vice versa).
2) Culture. In civ 4 cities would expand to claim more tiles around it with culture. Lets say we have two foreign cities A and B. City A claims a particular tile first. City B later culturally expands and if city A didn't exist, would have claimed that same particular tile. Under civ 5/6 rules, the tile is almost always stays with city A. Under civ 4 rules, if city B's cultural output (culture generated by the city on the tile) on that tile exceeds the cultural output of city A, the tile will change to belong to city A. You can hover over the tile to see the % nationalities of the two cities. If the tile is a city center, so for instance city B exerts so much culture that the city tile of city A becomes majority city B nationality, the city will change faction to the same as city B.

 

[Hellenism Salesman]

5.) Allow for renaming of cities.

This is an existing feature in Civ VI.

Edit: Though, to be fair, it still fits the criteria of the thread.

It's certainly a feature I would like to return for Civ VII as well, though I think many of us have taken it for granted and it's just become a staple (as Patine has said).

And it seems like many other posters have narrowed the scope to features from games before Civ VI, so I guess my comment is still valid.

 

[Patine]

This is an existing feature in Civ VI.

I believe it is in all Civ iterations, if I'm not mistaken.