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

Civ 5 Ideas (The Future Of The Civ Series or Me Ranting?)

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by Fiend777Fits, Oct 13, 2006.

  1. Fiend777Fits

    Fiend777Fits Social Parasite

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    Agrasse Knoll, Texas
    The Civ series is great. No doubt about it. They've done much in the way of simulation. Unfortunately they tend to follow the creed of not fixing whats not broken too strictly. Recycle this, reuse that. Add in a new idea here and there. Main focus is graphics and giving you a little spoonful at a time (expansion packs). To hell with realism. They'd prefer just to use the same old time tested civ 1 gameplay every time.

    What I'd like to see is more world-based scenarios. The random maps are a bore to me honestly, they never turn out really real. The civs never react to each other like they would in the real world, because you have celts living next to incas and forming alliances against the japanese. All on a continent that has terrain thrown everywhere and only holds maybe 4 civs if you're lucky. Sure if you really don't pay attention to any of this and dont want a realistic world unfolding, this probably isnt a problem.

    And the settlers, always settling. Spending every sec expanding your borders before the other civs take the land (until there is no more room left, then conquest). How about not relying on founding cities so much? You know the world was not as empty as 4000 b.c. makes it look like. What if instead of building settlers to found cities all the time, you instead had to convert your brethren around your start city. By military or diplomatic might this would be succeded. Imagine cities (more like huts) all over the map of uncivilized peoples. The ones nearest your first city would be your brethren while the others would be other civs brethren and combinations of loyalties. Even better, what if you started this game as one of these little huts. Struggling to understand the new tools you've fashioned at say 10,000 b.c. Some civs would have an easier comprehension than others... egyptians, mesopotamians, and sumerians. But the rest would just have to wait there turn to come to understand civilization. In the mean time, they could work on uniting their tribe and eventually bringing others under their domain.

    How about this for an idea? A timeline not based on turns, but on the technological progress of civilization. Say it isn't 1500 a.d. or so until gunpowder is discovered by one or two civs. And as for technologies in civ games. They're not all really technologies. Some of them really are just intellectual concepts. Buddhism, republic, nationalism. Does any nation really spend money to research these? No, they're passed along and thought up by the intellectuals and spiritual gurus. These should be separated into some other kind of fund you can invest in. Different types of government should have different values in this affair. Communism would have an iron-grip on the spread of most intellectual ideas in their state, for example.

    Propaganda would also be a nice add-in. Imagine convincing your own people of their superiority and need to fight a war (to keep them happy of course). With this you could convince the world at large of you're good attentions (if you're a propaganda efficionado) and perhaps sway neighboring civ cities to join you and rebel.

    Religions have been overplayed in civ 4. They are the key element in the game now. They should be an element to unite your nation. Instead they are mostly a fixture of civ to civ relations. And what about most civs adopting buddhism first. This isnt even near realistic.

    Culture is only represented in borders and swaying neighboring cities. Culture should be something mostly unique to every nation, its effects differing becuase of regional ties. The whole border thing really pisses me off. I gotta spend all my time making buildings with so-called culture just to keep other civs culture from overrunning me. Borders should be established by military presence and negotiation as well as if the land is being worked.

    Which brings me to another issue. The limiting of a city's appetitie to 21 squares all equally distanced around it. I think any land in your territory should be available for consumption for any city. The only limit being the distances affect on your stockpile accumulation rate and any loss that may occur en route. Workers should be eliminated altogether. You should decide where the cities should focus (farmiing, mining, commerce, road to's, etc.) and how much of each should be done before coming back to que. Tiny workers flowing out of city to accomplish these tasks while you sit back and manage other affairs. Sounds nice. Of course you will need a small contingent of engineers to handle certain affairs (forts, castles, and to accompany your armies to build their defensive structures if you wanna give your soldiers a break).

    Production, another area misconstrued. I believe this part should be mostly automated as well. With the choices being which sector of the city you will focus more gold on: industrial, commercial, scientific, religious, entertainment, defenses, etc. Marketplaces, libraries, and harbors are obsolete. Instead of having to specificly build these. They will be developed as your city grows all depending on how much of each you choose to finance. The limits being availabily of material (i.e. stone or wood you have accumulated), manpower (related to population size), and your funds. Of course every once in a while a project should come along that you might want to focus special attention on. Some kind of wonder, or an aqueduct or colloseum. As these were no easy undertakings and shouldn't be necessary for every growing city.

    Units should be conscripted out of the local population and trained (with barracks). If you take the time to keep soldiers trained in your barracks you can have units ready anytime. The amount of time they spend training determines their initial skill (could never exceed anything a battle-hardened unit could achieve). And their weapons and armor (and horses or whatever) would be another material concern. If your civilization has enough iron forged (and smithed) and enough horses stabled (and trained) you can have as many knights as you want. Thats right iron and horses for all (well most all), but quanity is the key word here. Iron and other resources should be a figure based on your terrain and the work done to it. One iron resource supplying your massive armies so you can invade your ironless neighbors is ridiculous.

    Unit size should be a choice when creating units. And taking different sized units and forming a cohesive fighting force should be commonplace. As armies were. No more waiting for a random event to build an army. Your generals, formed with the creation of an army, would be able to help enlist other units as needed. Their battle-hardened experience (reputation) would help enlistment rates when they visit cities. Mercenaries should be available to hire (in foreign and domestic cities), to fill your ranks (after losses) or just to fight alongside your units. Not many battles in ancient times or modern have been fought like they are in the civ games. With one unit waiting to attacking after another. A dynamic army battleplan would be possible, where you could decide how your army should attack the enemy. Mounted flanking maneuvers, box formation, ranged attack support, etc. This, of course could be set, if you didnt want to get down in it. The possibility of withdrawals to non-mounted units would be nice, too. If one army withdrew and the other didnt follow up, a draw. Statistical losses and opinion really would decide that. Supply trains should determine much of the mobility of these large units and armies. If a supply should be intercepted by an enemy unit or army, you would need to buy some grub out of a nearby city before your supply ran out or risk mutiny. Terrain conditions affecting health. Units based on health, stamina, and loyalty as well. Stamina being based on how long a unit has been moving (and if double-timed) as well as the terrain conditions. Loyalty being decided by the units make-up (non-national, mercenary, slave) and its losses, stamina, and health. Propaganda could play into this as well.

    Finally, this may sound crazy. And will probably prove rather difficult to hash out but... no terrain squares. That's right. Think warcraft or one of those other real-time games. Except turn-based. Destination orders, waypoints, and alerts when other civs armies are spotted. Then you can change destination to intercept (if you can). Of course mounted units will move faster than infantry. And they might just slip by you while you try to intercept them.

    But these are just a few ideas I thought of... (much in due to a very old shareware version of a game called Imperial Conquest)
     
  2. Pitboss

    Pitboss Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    300
    Location:
    Belgium
    I do agree, there should be more balance.

    I don't realy see that as being a problem, since each game is a different reality based on civs of this earth. Besides if were more accurate, it would become predictable, ...

    That sounds a lot like Civilization : Do it the Roman way ;)

    :goodjob:
    It's true that firaxis has some strange fixations.
    And forgets, that certain concepts don't need to be invented : such as capitulation, religion, border agreements, etc ...
    But especialy the timeline is something that bothers me as well ... it kinda kills it for me

    Don't you have radio towers for that ?
    True they come very late in the timeline game, but the possibility allready exists, they've just labeled it with cultural propaganda.

    I've started a thread about this, since it would give religions more chance to be equal versus each other, then it's now.
    But I must agree on this one that the relions have changed the game in certain ways, that aren't always as good as they're ment.

    Well ... if they add the ability to use tiles outside the city radius, then it would be a good idea.
    But strictly based on military presence ... :undecide:

    Bring back the colonies, but inside 'the cultural borders' in other words.

    :goodjob:
    I've been saying this too, ... repeatedly
    Basicly it's the AC concept

    :goodjob:
    You should have a resource stock of that resource indeed.
    You don't run to the hill for some iron, just because you need to build a unit on that moment.
    Very good idea (Like they did in CivCity)

    That might be hard to implement.

    :confused:

    If it inspired you for this thread, I'll have to look it up pronto :D
     
  3. Fiend777Fits

    Fiend777Fits Social Parasite

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    Agrasse Knoll, Texas
    its old school. think it came out in 92 or something. graphics are as basic as possible. but the gameplays mostly in the raising of an army and slaughtering your enemies. and make sure you slaughter them or your ass will be left hanging in the wind.
     
  4. Öjevind Lång

    Öjevind Lång Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,371
    So do I. If the core game is removed, it's no longer Civ. I like new tweaks, but I want the game's essence to remain. It has indeed stood the test of time.

    I like the random maps, though the ones in Civ II were better.Not the graphics and the resources, of course, but the maps as such - the continents and islands.

    Öjevind
     
  5. Fiend777Fits

    Fiend777Fits Social Parasite

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    Agrasse Knoll, Texas
    maybe i'll start a poll. is that possible now? or do i have to make a new thread. dammit.
     
  6. Pitboss

    Pitboss Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    300
    Location:
    Belgium
    You do have to start with a poll, or you can't add one later, unless you're a mod, or admin. If you're going to add all of those lovely ideas, you might wanna make it a poll with multiple choices :)
     
  7. ProfessorK

    ProfessorK Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Messages:
    47
    Location:
    Newton, Iowa
    It sound more like you are describing a different game than Civ4 because if all or even most of the changes you suggest would be made what would result would hardly be recognizible as a Civ game. But that's okay. The game that you are envisioning sounds very interesting and entertaining. I'd give it a shot.
     
  8. Fiend777Fits

    Fiend777Fits Social Parasite

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    Agrasse Knoll, Texas
    i'm a visionary. change is the ultimate goal. static things piss me off.
     
  9. s.c.dude

    s.c.dude Invading N.C.

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Messages:
    870
    Location:
    SC. Dude.
    quit cussing:nono: .

    otherwises your ideas are but i agree with the guy a couple post up. a civ game should in essense be civilization 1 with lots of improvements
     
  10. Trade-peror

    Trade-peror UET Economist

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Location:
    Princeton, NJ, USA
    It's great to see that radical new ideas, even if they change the core components of Civ, are still coming up and being discussed. Civ should strive to be continually adapting and providing the most original entertainment possible! :)
     
  11. Fiend777Fits

    Fiend777Fits Social Parasite

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    Agrasse Knoll, Texas
    read your uetII. nice to know theres other people lookin for an upgrade to civ's dynamics to be more realistic. unfortunately you do know this will make micro-managing more like nano-managing. i would suggest some automation processes where the player could define how it would like a lot of the more complex areas to be handled (and then could turn them off at times to tweak). possibly a profile of city management could be stored and replicated. but otherwise, you've nailed it in a game theory much more thought-out than my thesis.
     
  12. Trade-peror

    Trade-peror UET Economist

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Location:
    Princeton, NJ, USA
    Thanks for considering my ideas. The UETII is now several years old, and I am actually in the process of reformulating it, now that I have the context of Civ4 to consider.

    But in general, the UET's individual processes are designed to be mostly automated (in the same manner that a unit going into battle is automated as far as the fighting). Laying out the mechanics of the UET may be lengthy, but during actual play, there will be a much more intuitive sense of how things work. And because the UET is designed from the perspective of individual units, what can happen in the long run is pretty much unlimited!
     
  13. Fiend777Fits

    Fiend777Fits Social Parasite

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    Agrasse Knoll, Texas
    your game theory really has impressed me enough that i've been inspired to make my own... i've been thinking about a new combat model for a while. will implement it in a game theory looking to improve on the warfare aspect. gimme a couple days or hours (depending on my creavite impulses) and i'll have it posted
     
  14. LlamaCat

    LlamaCat Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,212
    I agree with many of your ideas and concepts. Here are some of my own that I think should be explored to make the next generation of Civ really leap into something new. I think it can be done even on today's medium-level computer platforms.

    1. Make city management more fluid and dynamic, with options that a mayor for that particular city would have. The cities themselves should be more unique from each other. Right now, buildings are built, but then they just sit there in your queue, providing the benefits. Make the buildings have upgrades or the ability to be transformed for other benefits. There can be rewards/consequences for doing these things. Expand the trade route options. Introduce cultural concepts into the buildings themselves: sports teams that compete with other cities (domestic or foreign) for increased benefit. These kind of things...

    2. The tech tree concept is interesting, but the bottom line is you still need to research 90 percent of it to get to the higher level techs so it's anticlimatic. The tech tree should have truly different paths you can take, with each path providing all the military, economic, and scientific benefits you need to beat an opponent who takes a different path. I can research gunpowder and get musketmen, while you can research some similar concept and get a similar type of unit, but with different advantages/disadvantages. Or even better: the tech tree is HIDDEN for future research, so you truly don't know what new invention will come next, just like REAL LIFE. But you can steer the scientists in a particular direction, stressing cultural or military research and changing the emphasis at any given time.

    3. I like the idea of getting rid of the terrain squares for unit movement.
     
  15. Fiend777Fits

    Fiend777Fits Social Parasite

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    Agrasse Knoll, Texas
    no squares for movement, no squares for terrain, no squares.

    actually there will always have to be squares. but the idea is they will be much smaller. to place anything in a game you have to have COORDINATES. coordinates are the lines i'm thinking along. this would greatly increase the terrain variables, making more realistic and accurate maps (when creating). of course they're gonna have to beef up their random map generator to keep up.

    and the turns as we know them shall be no more. SIMULTANEOUS is what i'm thinking here. the only stops being reminders of builds, enemy troops spotted, foreign envoys, etc. you could choose to pause the game at any time to reassess your situation or fast-forward or slow it a bit. perhaps even a rewind feature (for viewing purposes only). this would quite reasonably make the game much more a simulation.
     

Share This Page