The things that never get talked about when this idea is discussed, just a handful:
- who's going to design another 50 or 150 leaders, at the least, and 150 to 600 national units, to make these new civs up to standard with C2C minimums?
- how's the game going to be consistent with having major "cultural" civilizations in the game, like the more generic "Native Americans", side by side with specific political entities like the "Iroquois" tribe? Same goes for having Arabia and Babylon at the same time, however this being an historical inconsistency. This is already bad enough as it is, with more civs it's going to get worse.
- what's the turn time going to be? What's the level of diplomatic micromanagement going to be? (Who on earth is going to enjoy micromanaging a hundred or two hundred relationships with all their ramifications?)
- what are C2C specific things like hidden nationality units going to play like with so many civs?
- is the AI going to have the least idea about expanding and warfare with so many opponents? At all?
- how is resource distribution going to ever work? Would have to turn ALL natural resources into a raw variant that can be refined ad infinitum to allow a simulation of actual global trade, since you can't trade "half a copper" to two civs. A lot of work is already done but not all of it here.
In other words, the good old "you asked so long if you could do it, that no one stopped wondering if it was a good idea".
I for one would much rather see some more effort on graphical polishing of units and cultural styles for existing civs, giving a much more consistent look to units sets across cultural groups that is. I hate having samurai swordsmen and archers alongside barbarian looking axemen, for instance.
I also suspect that the technical side of things is being used as a shield to not even address any of these implications
My entire idea was BORN because of the MEGA PACK OF CIVS that is currently SVN-compliant as well.
And C2C stopped having "national units" eons ago, lol.
That question applies to the 40-civs map as well, exactly in that form: it has Native Americans and other Native Indians ALREADY.
Whereas the MEGA PACK doesn't have any "generic" civs to begin with (or I don't recall any).
So your question is rather backwards.
And with so many civs, we could eliminate ONE (or maybe TWO, somewhere), if it gets us FIFTY instead.
Arabia isn't a counter to Babylon, and I HAD tried to suggest going for RFC-style "historical sub-maps" to counter precisely that problem.
Heck, AGAIN, the 40-civs map has USA alongside Native Indians - which is a much worse "inconsistency".
Micromanaging was HELL in C2C ever since, it makes very little difference between 40 and 200 civs in that regard.
And turn time has very little to do with the number of civs on-map, even politically.
After all, if you have all of them still on the map - you are playing a stupidly SLOW game yourself, lol.
Or you shouldn't care much about micromanaging in the first place, if it's like still Prehistory, ya know.
Hidden nationality works the same no matter how many civs have it.
In fact, it simply makes the unit a technical Barbarian to begin with, so that wouldn't even change much.
Does it now?
I see AI struggling with being competent even as it is now - so that is a problem once again unrelated to the number of politics it has to deal with.
Limiting resources is a fun feature in the first place.
Not entirely fair, but this was never fair to begin with, lol.
And it's beyond simple to make it that each city (that is, each "factory-type building" built somewhere) has a "manufactured resource" of its own, thus making it actually MORE realistic all along.
Oh, and that's how it already works on some resources anyways, so this is really rather minor.
I still don't see how any of this is a "bad idea", besides memory problems that might even not BE there, or be different from what we all are afraid of.
And now I'm the one telling you that C2C is built on the exactly opposite idea to "cultural diversity based on civs".
If anything, I'm hoping for it to go even deeper into "cultural diversity based on in-game cultures", thus eliminating much of "cultural diversity of civs" to begin with.
After all, C2C is very much built around in-game cultures now - and I find to be a very FASCINATING change from the way Civ4 works everywhere else.
