BE - fixing it

Here's a list of things that I think would make the game at least playable. Pure numbers and cosmetic tweaks, no need for additional graphics or sounds. Something that can make it into a patch, rather than an expansion.

I’ll divide the thread into two segments.

a. The Combat AI
b. Trade routes
&
c. Quests and resources
d. Culture
e. Diplomcay


a. The Combat AI

"Firaxis, make the combat AI better, please". Can't happen. With the new canyon system, there's no way in hell, except perhaps playing on a huge map that doesn't exist, that it will ever happen.

What can be done instead is to move the battlefield to where the computer is good at - the numbers game. And Frxs already provided the perfect tool for it - the satellite layer. It’s Sci-fi! Combat *should* be multi-dimensional!

- Adding the ability to create outposts that don’t grow into cities would be huge. Primarily so that Aircraft can be stationed there, but also for “tagging land” and adding a whole new set of cool stuff to diplomacy. Rocket artilleries (see below) could/would provide it with some defense, if stationed there.

To make it much easier for the AI, I suggest making land-based combat purely melee. Aircraft and satellites could provide the necessary ranged abilities. There is much room and much to be gained from making satellites essential to the battlefield. Not only is it a hex-grid with no obstacles for the AI, but also fits in naturally into the environment.

Naturally, existing units should be changed to reflect the new combat system.

Code:

Infantry - good vs cities, outposts and neutral trade hubs.
Rovers - good vs infantry
Aircraft - good vs Rovers
AA satellite - good vs aircraft
Ranged units - good vs satellites
combat satellite - good vs infantry

- Add multiple satellite types and strenghts (and earlier in tech tree).
- Ranger stops being a ranged units and becomes good in moving through rough/miasma terrain instead.
- Rocket Artillery stops being a ranged unit (retains its attack vs sats) but when stationed within city provides increased city attack radius and strength.



b. The Trade System

Yes, its tedious and too strong. New outposts need to have a way to grow, I understand. We also need a way to make peaceful co-existence be attractive. I get it. But this is not the way to do it.

- Internal trade should be automatic.
- Internal city boosts should be targeted.
- International trade should be targeted.

As was the case with initial Civ5, internal trade or “money gain from having multiple cities” should be automatic.

If you want to boost a city, it could be quite simple: each trade vessel could *take* 20% of food and production surplus from a city and have 50% of it reach the target city if convoy (75% with road, 100% with magrail), 75% if boat. Have 4 internal trade routes? 80% of your city surplus food and production goes away. I would keep this at the current max of 2 per city, with 2 more added throughout the game, to a maximum of 80% going away. But, since its optional, it could be used or not. The efficiency of this could be increased by ideas and buildings.

Code:

Example:
Capital A has 20 food surplus and production of 40.

A trade route to a newly founded city B would be either for:
   a) 4 food and 8 production, 
   b) 4 food, 
   c) 8 production.

City B would receive:
   a) 2 food and 4 production by convoy without a road.
   b) 3 food and 6 production by convoy with a road or by vessel.
   c) 4 food and 8 production by convoy with maglev.

The capital would now generate 16 food surplus and 32 production.

This would also add to the “tall vs wide” gameplay choices, as having one mega city feeding 2 smaller ones or vice versa would have a significantly different approach from having 16 smaller cities that can’t afford it.
Also, optinally there could be 3 options for each trade route: production, food or both.


International trade routes (including outposts) should remain targeted as is, but yields should be a zero-sum game.

Trade science for energy*
Trade energy for science*

*based on the two cities’s pop average divided by two.

This way, again, tall nations could trade away science, wide nations could trade away energy. Or they could simply not trade. Or trade with a less threathening trading partner.

Code:

Example:
Capital A with pop 16 is trading with a Capital B with pop 12.
A single trade vessel would transform via trade either:
: 7 science for 7 energy, or
: 7 energy for 7 science
Add multiple vessels if you want to trade more.

 

Reserved for part deux.

 

I think this is not so good idea. It would remove a big part of the tactical element in war. If there were no ranged units, the second line of units in battle would be just sitting there doing nothing, until the first line dies or retreats. With ranged units you get two "first lines", more action and more tactical decisions.

Having satellites, melee units and ranged units is good, because you have a lot of options and a lot of clever things you can do.

 

+1, interested.

I also think we could have a map generation setting which has no canyons/mountains, just yieldless tiles in their place. The AI can't manage bottlenecks, but even in player vs. player I find they're overly abundant, and having a single line for battles means that the player in the lead unit techwise has a bigger advantage than is due, even if the other player has greater numbers.

 

I agree. Ranged has been part of civs forever now. The problem is making the AI use it well. I have seen the AI deploy planet carvers but it needs to make better use of phase teleporters and aircraft generally.

 

The Orbital layer should have more power

Suggestions: Teraforming
Strong, Missile like attack