Well, Civ 7 has finally been announced. I'm sure everyone has their personal wishlist, wanted to include mine:
1. Revamped Unit Recruitment: You shouldn't have to use your production queue to build units. It has never made sense to me to have to choose between building a library and recruiting some early era melee unit. Why are those mutually exclusive? Personally, I think a cool idea would be to have unit recruitment something that happens a periodic number of turns that you can toggle on and off. The number of turns can vary depending on some resource like loyalty or something else. Every set number you get a basic melee unit, and then you can send the unit to a military encampment for "training", at which point they become a specialized unit.
2. Group Alliances: A common theme I've seen on other threads in other places is wanting to make diplomacy more interesting and wanting to make minor factions more dynamic. I've seen talks of civil wars and splitting factions and I think all of that is super cool (especially if governor's could "lead" revolutions and you had diplomacy options about fomenting/supporting revolutions in opposing countries). I think one of things Civ is lacking is the idea of group alliances. When you think about the world stage today, the major alliances aren't between two countries, it's between groups. NATO, the UN, African Union, EU, CSTO, etc. Each of these could have requirements for membership (3 cities on X continent, possess some resource, certain level of technological advancement etc...) and have some benefit/policy/make group decisions. maybe every member of the alliance can gain suzerain benefits or something. Vote on new members or to recognize new nations. improvements to trade and can vote to refuse trade to a certain nation. You can create new groups to rival other opposing groups, and be involved in multiple groups to make it layered and complex. The biggest thing is every alliance should have a cost to joining and a clear and constant benefit. That will force players to engage (otherwise this miss the cost) but be intentional about which alliances they participate in (otherwise you just join as many as you can and don't care about the consequences, cause there aren't any). Lots of cool options.
3. Shared Military: This goes along with the same theme as group alliances, but is so interesting I wanted to share separately. I feel like every group alliance should have a shared military that they can "deploy" if a member state gets into a war that not everyone in your alliance can join. Instead of declaring an all out group war, you can deploy the troops from this shared military to help your ally. This military is independent from any countries military, so you can still have your own personal army. It is operated by the computer (or by whatever nation started the alliance or something idk), it is upkept by member dues or something else, and lasts for a set number of turns. The composition of this army can be determined a number of different ways. It could be as simple as having some preset options based on size of the alliance and then you vote on which one, or you get some benefit for "donating" units for shared military service. Meant as an emergency situation to give alliances some teeth even when you're allied with peacable civs.
4. Bring back naval transports!!!!! I know this is probably the unpopular opinion, but invading somewhere across the water got so boring so quickly after that happened. You don't have to get rid of embarkment feature, just further restrict movement or something idk. Transports were interesting because it created strategic weakpoints that you had to deal with. Naval warfare has gone downhill because there is rarely a reason to have anything outside of naval bombard and submarine units.
5. More than just cities = less Cities: this kinda goes back to minor factions. but it would be cool if you had more options than just creating a city. I was playing a game where where there was a resource all the way across the map I needed that was unclaimed. I didn't want to send a settler all the way there. I really just needed a mine. What if we could build colonies, that were different from cities? what if we could establish regions that has one "city" but multiple townships that extend the border? and you could have governor effect the whole region. This is one thing I think Humankind did well, but could also be done a lot better, especially with Civ's district system. Build a region capital and then have a city center as a buildable district that culture bombs adjacent tiles. Each city center increases the number of possible districts, and feeds yields back into the region capital.
6. Distributed Defenses: This ties into the previous idea in a way. Late game combat can gettttttttt pretty boring. Because once you take a city center the whole city becomes yours, even if you don't really have good control of the territory. Too many times have a taken an encampment district without even getting it in my field of view. It's just too easy to focus on city centers. But what if you couldn't? What if every district was a tile you had to take? and I don't even mean necessarily that it had HP and you have to bombard it, I just mean that you actually have to possess territory with your troops before you claim that territory. That way, city centers are less rewarding because you haven't flipped all of the tiles to your territory, you don't have your in-territory combat bonuses yet, you haven't add the yields etc... I think it would also be cool if there were still some type of resistance mechanic where once you take a city, a number of resistance troops pop up (maybe equal to the number of districts but max of 5?) that you have to deal with. Something to force you to be more intentional about how you invade your neighbor. Focus combat less on city centers by distributing the defense and strategic importance out to other tiles. Encampments were a huge step in the right direction, but we can go farther.
7. Better/new utility units: Military Engineers should be able to build forts in enemy territory and should have more than just two charges. Otherwise they aren't m i l i t a r y engineers, they are just really bad builders. They aren't providing any utility to combat. Also, there should be some type of black flag/black ops type unit that can infiltrate stealthily and mess horsehocky up diplomatically. Like a combination of the spy/spec ops unit. someone who can sabotage carriers or do a false flag operation or steal a bomber or sabotage an aerodome district. The type of unit that makes me keep some of my units off of the front line in case someone is gonna show up at my back door to interfere with my bombers.
Honorable Mentions:
-Bring back customizable palace designs and city view from Civ3. Heck, don't just bring it back, make it better. Give us a 3d rendering. Let me fly around my capital with an aerial view. Let me sit on my throne and look at my empire.
-Let canals and bridges be two tiles long/wide. I know coding the tile restrictions can get difficult, but just say canals have to be on a flat tile adjacent to water and bridges have to be on a water tile adjacent to land. If someone wants to make a dumb canal that can't ever connect, that's on them.
-repeatable projects for us late-gamers who don't have anything else to produce. I know there are mods for this, but still
-group army movement.
-better AI, specifically for the type of units they make and where they move them during combat.
-Civil wars/revolutions. I know I mentioned this earlier but it was in reference to another idea. So I wanted to make sure this was on here
-would love to see them continue to develop the corporations/industries idea. That was a super neat concept.
-customizable end eras. similar to how you can choose your start era, you can also choose the last era that you are able to keep researching
1. Revamped Unit Recruitment: You shouldn't have to use your production queue to build units. It has never made sense to me to have to choose between building a library and recruiting some early era melee unit. Why are those mutually exclusive? Personally, I think a cool idea would be to have unit recruitment something that happens a periodic number of turns that you can toggle on and off. The number of turns can vary depending on some resource like loyalty or something else. Every set number you get a basic melee unit, and then you can send the unit to a military encampment for "training", at which point they become a specialized unit.
2. Group Alliances: A common theme I've seen on other threads in other places is wanting to make diplomacy more interesting and wanting to make minor factions more dynamic. I've seen talks of civil wars and splitting factions and I think all of that is super cool (especially if governor's could "lead" revolutions and you had diplomacy options about fomenting/supporting revolutions in opposing countries). I think one of things Civ is lacking is the idea of group alliances. When you think about the world stage today, the major alliances aren't between two countries, it's between groups. NATO, the UN, African Union, EU, CSTO, etc. Each of these could have requirements for membership (3 cities on X continent, possess some resource, certain level of technological advancement etc...) and have some benefit/policy/make group decisions. maybe every member of the alliance can gain suzerain benefits or something. Vote on new members or to recognize new nations. improvements to trade and can vote to refuse trade to a certain nation. You can create new groups to rival other opposing groups, and be involved in multiple groups to make it layered and complex. The biggest thing is every alliance should have a cost to joining and a clear and constant benefit. That will force players to engage (otherwise this miss the cost) but be intentional about which alliances they participate in (otherwise you just join as many as you can and don't care about the consequences, cause there aren't any). Lots of cool options.
3. Shared Military: This goes along with the same theme as group alliances, but is so interesting I wanted to share separately. I feel like every group alliance should have a shared military that they can "deploy" if a member state gets into a war that not everyone in your alliance can join. Instead of declaring an all out group war, you can deploy the troops from this shared military to help your ally. This military is independent from any countries military, so you can still have your own personal army. It is operated by the computer (or by whatever nation started the alliance or something idk), it is upkept by member dues or something else, and lasts for a set number of turns. The composition of this army can be determined a number of different ways. It could be as simple as having some preset options based on size of the alliance and then you vote on which one, or you get some benefit for "donating" units for shared military service. Meant as an emergency situation to give alliances some teeth even when you're allied with peacable civs.
4. Bring back naval transports!!!!! I know this is probably the unpopular opinion, but invading somewhere across the water got so boring so quickly after that happened. You don't have to get rid of embarkment feature, just further restrict movement or something idk. Transports were interesting because it created strategic weakpoints that you had to deal with. Naval warfare has gone downhill because there is rarely a reason to have anything outside of naval bombard and submarine units.
5. More than just cities = less Cities: this kinda goes back to minor factions. but it would be cool if you had more options than just creating a city. I was playing a game where where there was a resource all the way across the map I needed that was unclaimed. I didn't want to send a settler all the way there. I really just needed a mine. What if we could build colonies, that were different from cities? what if we could establish regions that has one "city" but multiple townships that extend the border? and you could have governor effect the whole region. This is one thing I think Humankind did well, but could also be done a lot better, especially with Civ's district system. Build a region capital and then have a city center as a buildable district that culture bombs adjacent tiles. Each city center increases the number of possible districts, and feeds yields back into the region capital.
6. Distributed Defenses: This ties into the previous idea in a way. Late game combat can gettttttttt pretty boring. Because once you take a city center the whole city becomes yours, even if you don't really have good control of the territory. Too many times have a taken an encampment district without even getting it in my field of view. It's just too easy to focus on city centers. But what if you couldn't? What if every district was a tile you had to take? and I don't even mean necessarily that it had HP and you have to bombard it, I just mean that you actually have to possess territory with your troops before you claim that territory. That way, city centers are less rewarding because you haven't flipped all of the tiles to your territory, you don't have your in-territory combat bonuses yet, you haven't add the yields etc... I think it would also be cool if there were still some type of resistance mechanic where once you take a city, a number of resistance troops pop up (maybe equal to the number of districts but max of 5?) that you have to deal with. Something to force you to be more intentional about how you invade your neighbor. Focus combat less on city centers by distributing the defense and strategic importance out to other tiles. Encampments were a huge step in the right direction, but we can go farther.
7. Better/new utility units: Military Engineers should be able to build forts in enemy territory and should have more than just two charges. Otherwise they aren't m i l i t a r y engineers, they are just really bad builders. They aren't providing any utility to combat. Also, there should be some type of black flag/black ops type unit that can infiltrate stealthily and mess horsehocky up diplomatically. Like a combination of the spy/spec ops unit. someone who can sabotage carriers or do a false flag operation or steal a bomber or sabotage an aerodome district. The type of unit that makes me keep some of my units off of the front line in case someone is gonna show up at my back door to interfere with my bombers.
Honorable Mentions:
-Bring back customizable palace designs and city view from Civ3. Heck, don't just bring it back, make it better. Give us a 3d rendering. Let me fly around my capital with an aerial view. Let me sit on my throne and look at my empire.
-Let canals and bridges be two tiles long/wide. I know coding the tile restrictions can get difficult, but just say canals have to be on a flat tile adjacent to water and bridges have to be on a water tile adjacent to land. If someone wants to make a dumb canal that can't ever connect, that's on them.
-repeatable projects for us late-gamers who don't have anything else to produce. I know there are mods for this, but still
-group army movement.
-better AI, specifically for the type of units they make and where they move them during combat.
-Civil wars/revolutions. I know I mentioned this earlier but it was in reference to another idea. So I wanted to make sure this was on here
-would love to see them continue to develop the corporations/industries idea. That was a super neat concept.
-customizable end eras. similar to how you can choose your start era, you can also choose the last era that you are able to keep researching