Beyond Earth wishlist

If the planet has ice caps (which seems logical), the ability to transit the poles seamlessly has very little gameplay value that would justify the amount of work to implement.

If that's not the case, and if there is for example a desert planet on which habitation of the poles is important, then maybe it makes sense.
 
Is this game going to have seriously flawed AI and Diplomacy? It sure starts to look like it since there is NOT A SINGLE WORD from Firaxis about the issues. It seems they think AI and Diplomacy in Civ 5 was fine?
If they can not identify the problem, they can not fix it.

Firaxis, dont mess this up please. Read the forums, read your own Facebook page; A lot of people want to see radically improved AI and Diplomacy. It is easily the biggest thing for people right now. TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
 
Well, according to the latest 2K community rep (is that the 4th or 5th one we've had so far?), everything should be great.... After checking with the Dev's 1st of course. So take that for what it is worth. You should head over to the thread and check it out, the irony is vastly amusing.
 
1. Better AI of course
2. Let me look at the global diplomatic situation during AI turn diplo conversations with me!!!
3. Casus belli system - if an AI bullies an allied CS, or plops a city down right next to me, or spreads her religion into my nation against my wishes, etc... I should have fewer penalties for going to war with them.
4. Better equality and transparency in diplomacy. I want to know what the consequences of my actions will be, and I want to the AI and myself to be playing the same game - for example, the whole "what are all your units doing near my borders!" conversation (which also plays into #3).

5. An offline game mode (exactly like how Civs have always been) and...
6. An online game mode - this would have daily/weekly maps, you would log in through steam, you would play "standardized" games and then be able to compare your performance to others (being able to watch basic replays of others, for example, or even layering your own replay over another...). I know some people will cry foul at this suggestion, but I would really enjoy being able to gauge my performance against others - obviously there is demand for this, since Civ Fanatics basically runs game like this already.
7. Along with #6 would be a better analysis of gameplay at the end. For example, a "Kobayashi Maru" type map where you're not really intended to win, but just seeing how badly or not-so-badly you lose (or how you cheat) would be very interesting, when you are compared to others.

8. That's all... for now...
 
They've been saying that all along. It doesn't mean any more now than it did four years ago.

Agreed, especially with the amount of CR's we've had. Hence the irony.

OT: I would like it to be truely (and fully for that matter) MOD customable (ala Civ IV/BTS) as opposed to the partial aspect current. For a supposed "Most custom MOD Civ ever", it seems to be lacking in that area. Considering all the hard work and effort all the great modders put forth on these boards (not to mention actually improving the game), you'd figure 2K/Firaxis would actually want the help.
 
Bigger maps, able to have an optimum game with more than 5 cities, and balanced affinities.
 
Is this game going to have seriously flawed AI and Diplomacy? It sure starts to look like it since there is NOT A SINGLE WORD from Firaxis about the issues. It seems they think AI and Diplomacy in Civ 5 was fine? If they can not identify the problem, they can not fix it. Firaxis, dont mess this up please. Read the forums, read your own Facebook page; A lot of people want to see radically improved AI and Diplomacy. It is easily the biggest thing for people right now. TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

At the risk of getting my own hate, I can live with the AI and Diplomacy, at least until Civ6. I would appreciate Faraxis acknowledging the problem, and I would be quite happy if they say its not something they will be addressing anytime soon. I am okay with the silence on the issue as well, because I think it is mostly a distraction.

As the saying goes, better the devil you know, than the devil you don’t. I don’t trust Faraxis to fix this, and if they try, well things could be much, much worse.
 
They have already said diplomacy has expanded options due to no UN or Galatic Council.
 
I would love to see giant maps. GIANT maps. Or difficult to explore. In Civilization 5 you can - with proper unit spam and automatic exploration - uncover the entire world in the mid game or most of it in the classical era. I wouldn't like it in a game about space exploration :p
 
I would love to see giant maps. GIANT maps. Or difficult to explore. In Civilization 5 you can - with proper unit spam and automatic exploration - uncover the entire world in the mid game or most of it in the classical era. I wouldn't like it in game about space exploration :p

Since you arrive in some giant space ship one would expect it to orbit the new planet a few times to scout for the ideal landing site. Logically there should be no need for exploration in this game.
OTOH it's a fun mechanic and so it will probably remain part of the game.
 
Something I like to add to the previous ideas:

-special stuff/events/anomalies (like in Galactic Civilizations) that don't necessarily happen in every game = adds a unique feeling to the game
-for a deeper strategy = hidden cities/bases (with energy field e.g.) in caves, underground or under the sea (the base/city could rise to the top if needed or spotted) + special unit/technology to find these hidden cities/bases
-alien technology stuff with unexpected negative and/or positive effects
-I like the idea of surviving, instead of building (too) many cities to prosper = too much like CIV games
-rare resources and they should lead to conflicts
-fungi

... more to come
 
link plz?
That's not quite what was said. They've said that diplomacy will be pretty much the same as in Civ V, minus the World Congress, but with additional diplomatic "vectors" or points of conflict, such as the orbital layer, affinities, attitude towards alien life, etc. Don't expect anything new and exciting from the diplomatic system.

http://time.com/59516/sid-meiers-ci...lpha-centauri-sequel-youve-been-waiting-for/#
TIME: Diplomacy’s arguably one of the weaker spots in the Civilization games, framed with fairly limited options and based more on obfuscation and mystery and a sense of algorithmic capriciousness. How does diplomacy work in Beyond Earth?

Pete Murry: We’re still building on where we were at the end of Civilization V, so I think the level of diplomacy that’s going on is going to feel very familiar to a Civilization V player. To some extent, playing a boardgame with a human opponent, they can be capricious too, so some of it’s about keeping that aspect of it. We do the best we can for the audience that we’re trying to reach.

Anton Strenger: We’re definitely adding new diplomatic vectors, like the orbital layer, so your A.I. opponents aren’t going to be very happy if you launch a satellite over their lands. So diplomacy in Beyond Earth is going to be very responsive to all of the new gameplay systems. But at the same time, we’re trying to appeal to Civilization V players, since they’re our core audience, and we want diplomacy to be familiar and transparent. I think transparency’s a really big deal to make an A.I. feel fair.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/04/12/c...he-new-factions-aliens-technology-and-more/4/
PC Gamer: Have you taken another look at diplomacy? How will interacting with other factions work?

David McDonough: Diplomacy fundamentally is the same as in traditional civ when you call them up and you talk about whatever it is you want to talk about, but there's a lot more to talk about. IN addition to where you're settling and where your borders are, there's your attitude towards the aliens, you're riling them up and attacking my settlements, or there's a lot more covert ops, there's black hat ways to undermine your diplomatic relations. There's the orbital layer, 'don't put sattelites over my territory', and there's the divergence of affinity. As you choose Supremacy and your opponent chooses Harmony, those are not - attitudes are going to mesh, so that's going to lead to increased tensions, increased competition for resources. Your opponents are more oppositional by definition I think, because of the way your trajectories diverge over the course of the game.
 
Back
Top Bottom