1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Changes to cIV or latter expansions, or games prefered

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Englor, Sep 17, 2006.

?

Desired aspect changes

  1. Religion

    18 vote(s)
    32.7%
  2. Growth

    8 vote(s)
    14.5%
  3. Health

    4 vote(s)
    7.3%
  4. Waste/pollution

    5 vote(s)
    9.1%
  5. Commerce

    10 vote(s)
    18.2%
  6. Trade

    20 vote(s)
    36.4%
  7. Resources

    14 vote(s)
    25.5%
  8. Civics

    13 vote(s)
    23.6%
  9. Government

    12 vote(s)
    21.8%
  10. Production

    5 vote(s)
    9.1%
  11. Diplomacy

    30 vote(s)
    54.5%
  12. War

    21 vote(s)
    38.2%
  13. Wonders

    7 vote(s)
    12.7%
  14. Gameplay Aspects

    16 vote(s)
    29.1%
  15. Other

    14 vote(s)
    25.5%
  16. Bad Poll

    7 vote(s)
    12.7%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey
    This is a poll I created to gather the results pertaining to the popular preference. Multiple choices are available and since these are topical voting options, some explanation is als required to aid in the results as to further accurately portray what the stance is of the general majority and minority. if this is a replica of an all to recent poll, I appologize. Please be as honest as possible when voting, and as thorough as possible when and if explaining. This also pertains to the warlords expansion, and any or all patches to date. I have ever only played approximately 20 hours of just the game itself, no pathches, no expansions.
     
  2. Karam

    Karam Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    92
    Civilization isn't there, I think Babylon should be in.
     
  3. Tyranausaurus

    Tyranausaurus Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    163
    Same here, BAbylon MUST be in.
     
  4. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey
    Thank you both, I'll make a note of that. I feel really silly that I forgot to put civiliazations as a voting option, but I'm glad you addressed it this early. I'll see if I can edit the poll. If not, I'll keep those ideas in mind and well spoken for. Thanx.
     
  5. bitplayer

    bitplayer Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    Messages:
    259
    I voted war. As the modern age war is lacking.

    Wouldnt mind seeing the babs either though.
     
  6. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey
    I made this thread, because after the course of three days being here and active usage amounting to 15 posts per day, I found it rather surprising how much less attention is employed to ideas and suggestions. Now I don't mean to brag, though I've got incredibly refined and well drwn out ideas that address major issues and have recieved alot more yea sayers than nay sayers. My goal is to make games great. And continue making great games, even greater. And I hope as always, continued success to the civ title and existence. It's always been my saviour kinda game. YA know.;)
     
  7. 3 EMS

    3 EMS King

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Messages:
    775
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NC
    I voted bad poll. Not because its a bad poll. I think the poll is a good one. I'm just pretty happy with the game as is. They should just add Civs, units and scenarios.

    I did think of one thing after I voted. I would like to see the ability to create a custom CIV added. Name my Civ as I like, same with the leader. Choose his traits and pick a UU.
     
  8. ferenginar

    ferenginar Grand Nagus

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2001
    Messages:
    1,262
    Location:
    Cloud ****oo Land
    I'm not going to be happy until we go back to Civ II caravan building type of sytem. Resources would need to be traded by caravan from the city who's fat cross to any other cities wishing to bebefit from that resource; and for example that one source of horses could be used by the owner city and traded to say 5 others. If you wished other cities to have access to horses then you need an extra horse resource.
     
  9. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey
    Ok, thank you for your honesty, it helps to see how things are going to stack up, I'm hoping this poll gets more attention, and once again I appologize for foolishly not remembering to have such things as units and civs and scenarios, though I guess gameplay is going to have to take those loads as well. Scince technically they are start off qualities anyway. Well see.

    And I to have had thoughs and reservations about customiziation again like in cIIv. It'd be pretty cool to be able to choose precisely as preferred, yet because of pressing bonus reality, some form of Special grants that can match the game could also be placed.
    Perhaps something as a unique unit.
    The decision first clarifies from which tech it'll be gained, what resource requirements there are, and finally, what unit-prototype it is a replica to, so that the statistic are fair and equally proportiante. This way no one can abuse the nature of this choice. Picking traites is simply preference shopping, as well, civics favourites. Than there is the choice of special building and flag design editor which may simply refer to a list of simbles and colors. And finnaly, the concept is theoretically reborn.:)
     
  10. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey
    You know, I have also thought about this as well, however, it'd be a layered thing, since games are capable of such wealth in option now.
    It'd be more valueable and regard enhancing to personally ship off a trade unit to a city. This could be for establishing trade routes, or they can just be automated at an expense of both nations by building caravans and clicking the make establish route to any foriegne caravan icon on the trade screen. This'd because both ntaions made an initial investment. Once trade routes are established, the simple lines on the map appear. Highlights whatever keeps the graphics and interface pleasant enough.
    Also, if it is a one time deal, then it'd be logical that you have to send out a caravan to the destination.
    And again, I'd like to see, caravan(requires camal, horse or elephant), caraval, and freight back in the game. Than you expand them in the methods as previously epxlained. Via build caravan, or send caravan points to trade reserve per turn. (thinking that points from working lands and improvements with resources grants limits or somehing.)
     
  11. Powerslave

    Powerslave Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    388
    Location:
    USA
    Too much of the game is downright boring or tedious. Spreading religion throughout your empire requires you to make dozens of missionaries and move all of them individually. This isn't fun. It's just tedious. I already have workers that I have to micromanage, and I end up with what seems like hundreds of units during times of war. Religion should spread by itself, not force me to micromanage yet another aspect of my empire that's no fun. How would I fix it? Spread rate should be based on religious civic choice.

    Spreading the "Good Word" around makes for a strong hegemony. Look at Europe; most nations there are Christian. They should, in general, have strong diplomatic bonuses with each other, such that they are more willing to band together to attack infidels and heretics.

    Discouraging people from actively converting to your religion should give a very strong boost to culture. Christianity has spread so far and wide that you really can't make many sweeping statements about it. Some Christians believe in a Trinity, while some don't. Some believe in creationism, while some take a more scientific view. Judaism, however, has remained comparatively pure over the millenia, with little in the way of schisms. Most Jews will practice the same Judaism, no matter where they live. Having such a protectionist stance on your religion/culture is bound to cause friction with your neighbors, however. Everyone likes to be surrounded by people exactly the same as themselves.

    The civic choices are rather bland. Serfdom, for example, gives a boost to your workers' speed. Wow. That's rather underwhelming, considering the wide-ranging effects serfdom had on the world. Free Market gives you one extra trade route. In the real world, free market economics was revolutionary; it toppled monarchies due to the rise of the merchant class and the fall of the old aristocracy. Widespread inequality, pollution, and exploitation followed, which were addressed by other economic principles, such as socialism and communism. But all we get is an extra trade route? How about some more realistic effects, like an anger penalty, increased unhealthiness, and a massive boost to commerce?

    I've thought off and on about making sweeping changes to the core game, but there are issues: some people simply won't load mods (perhaps they can't figure out how to download and install them?), playtesting, time involved in implementing all these ideas through the SDK, reprogramming the AI to take advantage of the new gameplay dynamics, etc.

    Overall, I think Civilization is a glorified war game, with delusions of being a realistic simulation. Firaxis should decide whether they want to make a simulation or a board game, then stick with it, rather than inserting half-assed simulation features into a board game.

    Oh yeah, and the AI cheats too much. I wish more people played MP, so that I didn't have to resort to playing against the AI so often. I can win on Prince and Monarch, but, beyond that, the bonuses the AI gets tend to make micromanagement of your empire more and more important. I dislike how much Civilization rewards micromanagement of boring or tedious gameplay elements, while ignoring the "big picture", so to speak. Disease, famine, and pestilence have had a MUCH stronger effect on human civilization than war ever has, yet you see almost nothing on this front. Too bad!

    I like conquering pesky neighbors, but I hate moving all those units every turn. A new paradigm is called for here. One solution would be for the game's AI to optionally control your units for you, like automating your workers. Another solution would be for the board game elements to be removed altogether, replaced with something less tedious, but I think that would essentially remove every that makes this game Civilization. It's a loooong, drawn-out, three to six hour game of Risk, rather than an empire simulator, like the back of the box promises.

    I like Civ 4, but I loved SMAC. I would have preferred Civ 4 to be more in-depth and involved, like SMAC, or been more of a simulation and less of a board game, like Sim City (but with tanks!). But that's just me.
     
  12. kristopherb

    kristopherb Protective/Charismatic

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,210
    Location:
    British Empire Soul:Tesco
    you missed all the above
    dont get me wrong civ4 is brill but they can all be improved
     
  13. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey

    ^^ Well it is obvious that you and me are thinking along the same lines.:agree: :high5:
     
  14. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey
    Ok, I can understand and appreciate your quarrels, the game did seem to have a fair amount of unbalanced application in certain aspects, as to balance the entire game inaccordance with percentage effort. At least tat is the best way I might look at it in total.
    In my religion idea, the matter is that culture is what bares the frequency of religious influence, which is fed by a cities "influence strength". That quantities and intesities of this strength may be, in a manner of speaking at plain value, as to respect the actual religions most accurately and properly, produced in relgion and civics alone. If one is to desired greater achievement that that, my idea also suggests myriad options to go about doing so. Where as the effort to have it merely exist is fairly basic and streamlined into play, with basic spread standerds as a buyproduct of good city governing. Whereas, religious dominance is a cause to work towards as is most logical. And making room for all kinds of "eggs" and bonuses is something that is good, and can be easily implemented.
    For more on my idea with this aspect, just go to, "balancing religions for better experience."
     
  15. JavalTigar

    JavalTigar Overlord of the West

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Messages:
    607
    Location:
    Local # to the end of the universe
    How can you not love cIV if you loved SMAC? They took almost all the great aspects of SMAC and poured them into cIV.(missing the unit design)

    Why would you want the tanks, if you hate moving them?
     
  16. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey

    Well this is frequent focus into revere, in which focus is on the direct actions of the point why commandable things are in games. It does help though, when the game is though of in a well rounded fashion keeping fresh and disticnt pictographic and verbal recollections when applying suggestions for implementation. THough Quite honestly it just appears he was making a simple comment and I have no objectiong to that. And quite honestly, I am against acronyms as they cna easily infracture communication, hense, and sorry to say, I'm not familiar with what SMAC stands for.:blush:
     
  17. Englor

    Englor General

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Middletown, New Jersey
    Hold on here, My intended goal is not to keep ongoing argument ongoing, my goal is get the most of what may be obtained from agumentation and make it work. Cleaning the rest up might merely be a matter of changing the subject which is harsh enough to crush off any relational concept.
    My point being, that it is not just whether a civ turns out in the style of either board or simulation game. As aligned with my philosophical zenneth, it is took enact any and all of the best aspect of both as thoroughly, as the material placed within this great game, which happens to be war-inclusive, even despite the massive otions recently made achieveabl, again with balanced ease. Thank you for your post, my dad believes you to be a proffessional developer as he sotr of is, from reading your post, while I was doing yardwork.
     
  18. RussianRoulette

    RussianRoulette Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    39
    SMAC=Sid Miers Alpha Centauri

    Its one of the best enhancements to gameplay in my opinion. The bombs were even realistic. You could send a huge missile to destroy a city and it would actually get destroyed....No units,land around the city was destroyed,etc. I loved that element the most because it brings much more fear into using them and getting hit by them. The civ 4 missiles create fallout and may destroy a unit? Sorry not realistic enough. The bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki totally annihilated the people and city leaving it in ruins.

    I would like to see more detailed battles. It could zoom up to the battlefield and you could control units movements in the same way that Rome Total War does. You could have cities build bunkers,machine gunners,etc for extra defenses. Although that requires a lot of time and may get old after awhile for most,i find that id rather determine the outcome of a battle with my strategies than have a computer with mathematical equations calculate it. Many battles over history have been fought and won even with much less superior numbers by tactics alone and i just feel this was a crucial missing element.

    I miss the SMAC ideas of customizable units. In fact idc if they change just the appearance of the units. Id love to see my OWN type of tank roll in and destroy a unit. Id also love to see technology upgrades for armor and firepower of a unit. Just like upgrading the unit to a newer age you could pay gold to lets say...add Adamantium Armor?
     
  19. Tekee

    Tekee Bahama Mama

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,162
    Location:
    Pidoria
    Thy need to focus more the Economy and other parts of the game other then War
    Since it is like a Glorified War game after all
     
  20. marioflag

    marioflag History Addict

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    Napoli, Italy
    I'm in the majority.
    -Diplomacy can be a lot strenghtened like making it more dynamic with more modifiers so you don't have bad relations with a civ just because 4000 years ago you refused to give her a pig or a sheep.There would be a lot of other improvements AI permitting.
    -Religion. Personally i think it's the best addition in this game but it is a lot unbalanced.I don't see why a muliconfessional city should get so much advantages on a single religion city (culture,happiness,science).
    There should be also some balancement between religions Buddhism, Indu and sometimes Judaism is too much widespread while other religions are just widespread in a few cities.In the religion field there could be so much improvements in terms of gameplay that they can just publish an expansion pack on religions.
    Trade. Trade is just broken only trade routes which can not be destroyed is just silly. Trade routes should be also linked to commerce of resources so when you make a deal with another civ the transport of this resource is possible through one trade route which if destroyed don't allow you to make use of imported resource.This is just one idea but there would be so much others.
    Last aspect which is not in the poll is sea power.In this game units, gameplay concepts in sea warfare are just bad implemented.
    There is no specific combat promotions,, a few units, no specific bonuses to make warfare interesting instead of it just a linear list of units which are stronger and stronger.
    And naval warfare would be really easy to make more funny with just some addon or changes to units.
    I don't understand why they just don' make a paper-stone-scissor system to submarine-battleship-destroyer and add a powerful bombardment to battleship units.
     

Share This Page