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 6 balance changes wishlist for future patches and DLC

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by MantaRevan, Apr 16, 2017.

  1. MantaRevan

    MantaRevan Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,537
    If we want to put pressure on Firaxis to get Civ 6 to the point where Civ 5 was gameplay wise, I though it would be a good idea to come up with a list of bug fixes, mechanics additions, and other changes to the game that we'd like to see. I'm not counting new civs or leaders here, because those are a separate issue and not really related to the game as a whole. Firaxis has greater incentive to add new civs than to polish the game features, so that's what this post focuses on. If there's anything you'd like to see on the list that isn't on here, comment below and we can discuss. I'll update the post as we go along. Ideas suggested by other users are attributed in parentheses.

    Civilization 6 Changes Wishlist

    Game Pace
    • Unlink district :c5production: cost from :c5science: progress and put in place a scaling system similar to workers and settlers. Increasing :c5production: cost per district of the same type is one option, and it discourages placing the same district in every city.
    • [S} Rescale district repair :c5production: cost. Districts should never cost wildly more to repair than to build in the first place (@gettingfat ).
      [*]Change era scaling so that standard speed looks more similar to quick speed. The base game is a little slow.
      [*]Reduce inspiration and eureka percentage so that it accommodates the player's play-style, rather than determining it. 30% is a spitball number here. This would also keep the game clock more tied to the real world, no more modern era in 1350 AD. China's bonus should still remain 10% above the standard amount. Alternatively, keep the existing boost percentages but make boosts more difficult to obtain across the board. (@nzcamel )
      [*]Fill out the unit lines. Musketmen don't upgrade until Infantry right now, because Riflemen are missing. The same goes for Macemen/Longswordsmen and Trebuchets.
      [*]Fill out the late game tech tree for something other than pure military. The late game tech tree is rather bare right now, and it could use some extra unlocks to make these techs more useful and less two-dimensional.
      [*]Rework the way legacy bonuses scale so that they work more equally across eras. Something like doubling the bonuses they currently provide might help Legacy bonuses become a more serious part of the government-choice decision. This should make legacy bonuses non-negligible, and remove the overwhelming dominance of ancient governments from the legacy system (@Zigzagzigal).
      [*]Great People shouldn't be removed from the pool based on the most advanced civilization's progress through the game. Use the average civ era system from Civ 5's WC to eliminate great people based on the average era that civs in the game are in. Tech/Civics runaways are common in upper difficulties, and there are still many GPs I have never seen before at because they always get deleted from the midgame pool by the runaway (@Arlequin).


    Soundtrack






        • Alter the DJ's algorithm so that the extra B-side tracks play more than once or twice per game in the ancient era. This would help Civ 6's musical variety without actually adding new music. Diplomacy themes should back off a little bit compared to ambient music.
    Movement






        • Increase road movement speed :c5moves:per era. Civ 6's movement system is very punishing, and roads do very little to actually help your units move faster, especially compared to civ 5. For most of the game, your melee units will still only be moving 2 tiles, even when travelling exclusively on roads. An added .5 :c5moves: per road upgrade from the classical era onward might be a good idea.
    Victory Conditions






        • Add a Diplomatic Victory with the UN/AP/WC. This gives players more flexibility in pursuing victory paths, and the WC can make for some fun inter-player relations. I would suggest a combined approach from Civs 4 and 5, where only a few candidates are nominated for Secretary General elections, rewarding players who actually manage diplomacy with AIs, rather than letting them buy diplomatic victories from CSs, which should also play a role in elections.
        • Ideology Overhaul. Bring back the ideological pressure system from Civ 5, so that the - relations modifier from different governments with another civ can actually be dealt with. This also makes :tourism: a worthwhile yield, rather than being rather weak, as it is now. A more fleshed out final 3 governments will help the late game feel more dynamic and impactful.
        • Give GWAMs a secondary utility like they had in Civ 5 so that they become more valuable generally. This also gives players choice over how to expend their GPs, making them more fun and rewarding players who gave greater game sense. This should solve the issue of having great writers in particular sitting around long after players have run out of slots for great works of writing.
        • Drastically scale back :c5production: costs for spaceport districts or projects so that a technological victory is consists of less waiting around for timers to complete. Domination is currently far and away more convenient than other victory conditions, such a change would remedy this.
    Artificial Intelligence






        • Fix the AI's weirdness about delegations and embassies. Computer players at pleased should always accept delegations. This should give players more of an opportunity to ally themselves with other civs.
    User Interface






        • Lore UI fixes. Examples include @sukritact 's point about the "Ngao Mbeba," and Wats.
        • General UI consistency fixes. No unit on the startup screen should have their description read "a unique land unit". All Uniques should have their effects listed so that players can understand what they do.
        • Great Person UI fix. Mods already exist for this, but fitting all the GPs on one screen without horizontal scrolling does wonders for the game.
        • Unique icons for Unique Districts. A mod also exists for this, but it should be included in the base game.
        • Differentiated tech and civics tree icons like those from Civ 4 will give players more information at a glance. The icons added in the most recent patch are a huge step forward, but this small change would be even better. The icon for a farm on the 'Feudalism' tooltip instead of an undifferentiated star, for instance.
        • The pillage tooltip should tell players what the pillage reward is for the tile their unit is currently on. All sorts of districts and tile improvements in Civ 6 have different yeilds, this is a conveniance that will prevent players from having to consult the civilopedia every time they want to pillage a new type of tile.
        • The Civilopedia should be acessable from the main menu, as it has been in all previous civ games.
        • Add additional fog of war options besides parchment. Civ 5's fog of war provides more clarity, and is easier on the eyes of colorblind players (@Aheadatime ).
        • On the leader select screen, civs with multiple leaders could have a dropdown so that you can select betwean Gorgo and Pericles. Something similar to Civ 4's system would be welcome. This tidies up the menu a bit. (@Zigzagzigal)
    Unit Balance






        • Nerf the overwhelming dominance of cavalry. For an explanation of this problem, take a look at some of FilthyRobot's "How Good are Each Civ" videos where he explains this issue. One or more possible suggestions include:





        • Decrease the :c5production: bonus from the Chivalry and similar cards. Double :c5production: towards cavalry has been a major problem for Civ 6, even after selling exploits were patched.
        • Reintroduce a cavalry :c5strength: penalty against cities. This helps cav specialize towards antipersonnel combat, rather than being the all-purpose monsters that they are today.
        • Remove cavalry combat bonuses from terrain. This allows melee units to function better as meatsheilds and defensive blocking units. That cav can dig in right now is unusual.
        • Substantially increase the bonus that anti-cav units (spears, pikes, anti tank) have against cavalry. The current bonus is too small to make them a dedicated counter.
        • Make military science no longer a dead-end tech. This would make acquiring pikemen less punishing.
        • Buff Melee units through either increased :c5strength:or decreased :c5production:. Right now they are almost strictly inferior to cavalry.
    Game Balance






        • Increase the number of late game wonders. This goes hand in hand with filling out the tech tree. I suspect that we may see the return of the Statue of Liberty and Kremlin alongside advanced ideologies in an expansion.
        • Lower the :c5production: cost of spies slightly, so that they aren't such risky investments, and give Catherine her spy for free at Castles, like Elizabeth got last game.
        • Improve religion and Holy Site districts overall. Holy sites are the weakest districts in the game at present, and could be improved by adding non-:c5faith: yields such as :c5gold:,:c5food:, housing, amenities, or :c5greatperson: to the district buildings. Firaxis did a good job fixing harbor districts, though holy sites need the same treatment. Religions need stronger bonuses to be worthwhile, and they need to spread more effectively through natural pressure and trade routes, like previous games. Diplomatic bonuses from shared religion could be made stronger to reward players for spreading and founding religions. Powerful reformation beliefs could also make a return. Holy sites still need to provide something for players who don't manage to land a religion. If you get beaten to a religion, holy sites are a wasted tile with a huge opportunity cost of early :c5production: (@Zigzagzigal).
        • Buff wonders overall. Many wonders, such as the Hanging Gardens are just too weak to justify building. Some ways to help improve wonders include bringing back fail :c5gold: or other yields so that they aren't such massively risky investments, or giving some lackluster wonders stronger benefits overall. The HG, for instance, should probably provide :c5greatperson: points.
        • International :trade:s should have their base yields increased to the sender of a route, and should also provide a small amount of :c5gold: to the recipient of the route. Internal :trade:s should provide slightly less :c5food: and :c5production:. Internal trade routes are much stronger than international routes at the moment, and this is both historically inaccurate and squanders Egypt's ability.
        • The requirement for all tiles used in a national park to be inside the same city should be removed. This makes no logical sense and makes it even more difficult than it already is to place national parks. Likewise, horizontal diamond formations should be just as valid as vertical diamond formations when placing national parks.
        • Give great prophets some utility after all religions have been founded so that great prophet points are less of a crapshoot, and so that faith districts aren't dead weight for players that don't make it to a religion (@WillowBrook). Examples include building powerful shrines and temples, acting as a super-apostle, giving amenities, ect.
    Diplomacy






        • Reduce diplomacy's dependency on the agenda system slightly. Agenda's should flavor a leader's playstyle and diplomatic goals, but not supplant realpolitik. Diplomacy + and - values from complying with agendas should help determine international relations, but previous modifiers such as sharing a religion or ideology, trade history, compliance or refusal or pleas/demands, use of nuclear weapons ect should be more important than they currently are.
        • Diplomatic penalties from ceded cities should degrade over time, since the city's owner has given up a claim to them (@Victoria ).
        • Until an ideological pressure system is added, diplomatic penalties from different governments should be reduced somewhat, since players have no control over governments of other civs (@Victoria ).
        • The return of the Civ 4's convert religion and government diplomatic options would be a welcome addition to the game. This gives players gunning for religion victories more options besides unit spam, and gives players a way to play around the government system.
        • Reintroduce the ability to bribe players into war against one another outside of the joint war system. This allows for more diplomatic flexibility, and makes less aggressive AIs like de Medici more threatening through the diplomatic game.
    Tall and Wide Play






        • Make tall play more competitive with rapid expansion. This could be done with the introduction of some modest percentage based bonuses, or by increasing the amount of :c5science: and :c5culture: provided to a city per citizen from .7 to 1 and .3 to .5 respectively. Other options include policy cards that reward players who have fewer cities, or general penalties towards ICS. The introduction of a leader with an agenda opposite of Rome's could help in this regard.
        • Giving players some sort of yield bonuses per district constructed in a city could encourage taller behavior. Being able to designate a particular yield for each city to increase on the districts would incentive specialization (i.e. a city locked into the commerce track would get an increased 5% :c5gold: per non neighborhood district).
        • Bring back :c5greatperson: points from specialists to make large cities and specialist slots more viable (@Amrunril ).
    Power Creep and Civilization Balance






        • Address power creep by either reigning in newer civs (Poland, Australia, Macedon) so that their bonuses aren't so unbelievably powerful, or going back to help out civs that have been weak since launch.





        • Norway direly needs help, and their UU could be made a lot better either a slight :c5strength: increase to make the defense penalty less punishing, or the ability to purchase Berserkers independent of Theocracy. The Stave Church will get better when religion does, but until then it is virtually useless. Perhaps lower :c5production: cost, maintenance, or a :c5culture: culture bonus would help this building out.
        • The French Chateau needs to have fewer requirements on placement. Being near wonders, luxuries, and on river tiles is so incredibly specific that the Chateau is almost never worth a builder charge at the expense of putting something else on the tile in question. The Chateau should provide some small amount of housing or defense similar to a fort. The river requirement should be removed to make it less inflexible.
        • India's Satyagraha ability should either provide more :c5faith: per player, or be apply to all peaceful players, regardless of whether they have founded a religion or not. This would make Gandhi's :c5faith:output more meaningful in the early game and give him an advantage towards actually landing a pantheon. It also makes this bonus more reliable and less dependent on the behavior of other players.
        • Spain's mission improvement should provide :c5science: without having to be placed near a campus district. This improvement is too weak to justify building in most circumstances, and this would help make the improvement more competitive with the Ziggurat and similar improvements. The bonus :c5food: and :c5production: from Treasure Fleet intercontinental :trade: should be increased above 1 each to justify actually using the ability and encourage players to settle other continents.
        • Aztecs should have their bonuses swapped so that Jaguars gain :c5strength: based on Aztec amenities, while all Aztec units can utilize slavery (@ShakaKhan ). Aztecs are currently the civ most dependent on game speed, improving drastically on slower speeds and larger maps. This change would help narrow the gap betwean marathon Aztecs and quick speed Aztecs. It also lets players take fuller advantage of the most fun of Montezuma's bonuses, which obsoletes very quickly on standard speed and quicker.
    Quality of Life Improvements






        • Automatic unit scrolling should be set to 'off' by default. Often causes players to select the wrong unit and send units flying off into the distance.
        • Return the Hall of Fame and some sort of replay system. It doesn't have to be as expansive as Civ 4's- just something. Completing games is somewhat underwhelming right now. Consider features like the Histiograph and defeated leader galleries from Civ 3, or on-screen text like Civ 4. A map timelapse is a no-brainer. I have little doubt that this feature will arrive in an expansion pack.
        • Reintroduce the restart feature.
        • The feature to remove a civ from the random pool at the custom game screen would be a welcome addition. (@The googles do nothing )
        • Give players the option to toggle certain popups off to reduce visual clutter.
        • Pressing 'C' should center the camera on the currently selected unit.
    Bugs and Miscellaneous






        • English cites controlled by other civilizations that do not already contain archaeology museums should not be able to construct 6 slotted British Museums.
        • Spawned rebels should be flagged as rebels and not barbarians, so that they focus on causing problems for the target civilization, rather than roaming the map and hurting neighboring players (@Speckthommy ).
    Anything I forgot? With all this text, I'm bound to have slighted quite a few people. Feel free to debate any of the points above, and to pose your own suggestions and modifications. What would you change to help improve Civilization 6?
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2018
  2. Speckthommy

    Speckthommy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2017
    Messages:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Change the revolutions, so that they don't be simple barabarians. They often attack your enemy's and help you in war. They should be a own faction, and cooperate with enemies of the mother civ.
     
    Thibaulthc, c4c6 and MantaRevan like this.
  3. Amrunril

    Amrunril Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,065
    Lots of good ideas here. My one major disagreement would be with changing the eureka/inspiration percentage. The cost benefit ratio is definitely off, but I'd rather fix this by making them harder to get. This way you would continue to get major bonuses to the things you specialize in or that your terrain is particularly well suited to, but you wouldn't be able to decrease your tech/civic costs nearly across the board by doing a little of everything (I think this is a significant issue at the moment, as it removes a lot of variation from one game to another).

    As for my suggestions, I think there's a lot to improve and that getting it right will require many iterations, but I think a relatively small list of changes could solve the biggest issues:
    • Remove district scaling with tech cost -I've been following these forums since Civ VI was announced and still have yet to read any compelling justification for this mechanic. A scaling system based on number of districts built (possibly type-specific), like those for settlers and builders, would make far more sense. Then again, maybe having low cost districts would be just as good an idea. Districts are already limited by population, and most (all?) have a building that unlocks at exactly the same time, all in a game where production is far too consistently the most important resource. Most of the scenarios have dramatically reduced district costs, and they actually seem to play better in that regard.
    • Decrease science and culture from population -Achieving a high population should give you the potential to generate more science and culture, but it shouldn't give you so much of it automatically (like the first change, this would also help address the imbalance between production and science/culture).
    • Add great person points to specialists (in addition to buildings and districts) -Returning utility to the specialist system would make tall cities more appealing (without detracting from the value of expansion) and add more depth to city management and great person races.
    • Adjust AI difficulty bonuses (reduce head starts but increase bonuses over time) -As the game stands, it's more or less impossible to set up a game that will have your desired level of challenge (whatever that level is) all the way through. Recalibrating difficulty bonuses would make competition for early great people, religions and wonders fairer, while also allowing the AI to remain a serious threat beyond the first 50-100 turns.
    I also think culture victory and trade routes need some major tuning, but that would probably be more numerical jiggering than conceptual changes (I do think there should be non-victory effects of tourism, but that seems more like expansion material). And, of course once the major systems are settled down, there will be plenty of room for more specific changes to civs, units, wonders and so forth.
     
    c4c6, nzcamel and MantaRevan like this.
  4. MantaRevan

    MantaRevan Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,537
    Added to the post.

    I actually did not know that they didn't do that. Turns out specialists are even worse than I thought. Added to the post. Can you explain a little bit more about what you mean when you want to reduce science and culture per pop in terms of making tall more viable?
     
  5. Amrunril

    Amrunril Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,065
    My point about science and culture per pop is that increasing your population (whether by going wide, tall or both) should be an important step to increasing your science and culture, but that those benefits should come primarily from unlocking districts, constructing buildings and running specialists rather than from the population simply existing. My comment about making tall cities more viable was actually in reference to adding great person points to specialists (as tall cities will be able to run more specialists).
     
    c4c6, nzcamel and MantaRevan like this.
  6. ShakaKhan

    ShakaKhan King

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Messages:
    829
    Just this player's perspective-

    -the district cost scaling thing doesn't just need to be reigned in but rather completely retooled. It makes no sense that it becomes more costly to build districts as the civilization becomes more advanced (and inherently more efficient.) Rather, the cost should scale with the number of districts that your civilization has already created, the cost goes up a bit more with every district that you have and a bit more of a bump in cost for every district you have of the same type. This would address the commercial hub in every city strategy and it would inherently make religion more appealing. I would also like to see the output potential of districts increase, and the most likely source would be one of your other proposals- increasing the output of specialists. They are currently very low yield and that yield never increases. I agree with you that they should provide great people points, probably more than the districts and buildings provide, but also their yields should increase as the game progresses; much like mines get one extra hammer with apprenticeship and industrialization, each specialist should get two or three boosts when discovering certain techs or civics. An engineer, for example, would get +1hammer with this tech and another with that tech, and +1beaker with this civic. In addition, add a card similar to secularism from Civ5. The point to all this is twofold- first, the cost becomes more reasonable until you make it unreasonable by having too many districts which inherently means that you're powerful enough already, and second, if the cost scale is high enough and the output potential is high enough, having a tall empire becomes a possibility again. As the game is now, wide is better, always and in every way. If you could crank crazy yields from lots of specialists, you may be able to be competitive with fewer but taller cities. Wider empires wouldn't be able to have enough amenities to grow enough and take advantage of it. There could also be theming bonuses with specialists, I'm just spit-balling here but the point is the game could have both tall and wide be nearly equal possibilities (wide would probably still be better, but tall could be more competitive), specialists are currently nearly moot and could be the key to leveling that playing field, and district cost currently makes no sense and needs re-tooling, I'd appreciate it if while it is being re-tooled they had empire composition in mind.

    -I actually like the gaps in unit progression because it makes you think. The quintessential example of this is Scythia. Getting 2-fer-1 on cavalry units is an insanely powerful advantage, but look at when it applies- pretty early with horseman/saka, but the next time you get a unit that qualifies for that boost isn't until you get all the way to cavalry. Granted Scythia is still a very powerful civ, maybe the most powerful, but the large gaps in unit upgrade make that ability game-breakingly powerful but in very infrequent intervals instead of just game-breakingly powerful. If horsemen upgraded to knights and then cavalry, it would make the game much more straightforward and much less interesting for Scythia.

    -Instead of Aztec jaguars being able to keep their worker-steal ability with upgrade, I'd rather see two of the Aztec bonuses switch which units they apply to. Currently, the worker steal is a bonus that only the jaguar gets, but every unit gets the bonus strength from luxury. I'd rather see the jaguar be the only unit that gets the luxury bonus strength, but all Aztec units can worker-steal.
     
    MantaRevan and Orange1861 like this.
  7. MantaRevan

    MantaRevan Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,537
    This is a sensible suggestion. It also means that Jags could keep up if strength if the Aztecs expand enough. Generalizing the slavery feature to the whole civilization generally is also a good idea, since its a lot of fun to use. A combat bonus from amenities doesn't really feel like something the player has too much control over. I'll alter the post.

    I still think we should have light-heavy cavalry distinciton, but there should be more stepping stones in the line so that chariots don't remain useless until stirrups.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  8. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,122
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Very nice list!

    I think barbs need a bit of work:
    Scale barb camp and unit spawns based on difficulty and/or provide more than an on/off option for barbs in the game setup. Scaling would include: how soon after the game starts the first camps appear, how far from the human player the early camps appear, how frequently camps spawn, the rate at which they produce units, and perhaps the strength of horse units.

    In the category of religion buffs, I'd like to see the ability to continue to get great prophets after all religions are founded (but very limited in number for later eras). All prophets would have an alternate ability to founding a religion (e.g, add a belief and spread religion three times; get three apostle promotions; build shrine and temple with extra yields). Perhaps a reformation belief could only be added with a great prophet.

    Also, pretty much all the UI changes in the CQUI mod.
     
    c4c6 likes this.
  9. Orange1861

    Orange1861 Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree with all of the balance suggestions except for the game being too slow. In fact, I find Civ 6 1.5x faster than Civ 5 games if I actually focus on tech and greedily use eurekas . Most of my games, I can get to future tech by turn 350.
     
  10. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,710
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Great idea MantaRevan :)
    I just would like put my own spin on a few of your suggestions.

    Who was it who suggested that instead of this, Eurekas and Inspirations should be a little harder to get? I think that is a better idea; as the pay off for getting either should still be significant enough to drag you away from your pre-existing plans. 50% does seem about right to me...

    I love what they have done with movement, and I think the balances of it have been very well thought out. I think most of the adverse reaction to roads has been by people not having their expectations from prior games met; rather than them giving the new system a fair go, and then deciding. I know I was certainly surprised when I first built roads to find that they made no change to the movement of my units, except in regard to rough terrain.

    Elsewhere it has been suggested that there could be multiple bodies to compete over rather than just the one 'world congress'/'UN' and that you would need to get a majority in say two out of three of them or something along those lines to get a diplomatic victory. So you could have the U.N., the World Trade Organization (WTO), and, I dunno, say, some world council of religions (they exist lol). Obviously people who have stronger commerce get to dominate the WTO easier. People who have a stronger religion get to dominate the religious body easier (though maybe you wouldn't have an international body for the diplomatic victory that ties to another existing victory type - but I'm sure you get what I mean). And people with better relations with other Civs and to a lesser degree CS would dominate the U.N.
    I'd certainly like to see the diplomatic victory made harder to achieve than it has been.

    If they did this, I think more needs to be added to it again, so that there are options that you can use -maybe via espionage- to try and propagate your view on civics to the world.

    They have to tread carefully here. Over do it, and we are back at V. I don't think that adding policy cards that cannot be used in many empires is a good idea; unless, say, they massively expand the wildcards to include all sorts of different options to now, including what you are suggesting.
    Given that districts are tied to population, giving districts the boost -rather than straight out population- could be a more subtle way of boosting bigger population cities. Like the second district you build in a city adds this other small bonus 'x' regardless of what type of districts you have there. The third district adds bonus 'y' no matter what districts you have there. And so on. Larger cities will have a strength over smaller ones, but it will be set a step further back from straight out population growth.

    And give us the wait key back - please! :wallbash: The keys for next/last unit will usually start by taking you back to the last unit you skipped over. If I have skipped over that unit, I don't want to hear from it till I have resolved all other available units! I don't want to have to keep skipping past it till I have moved everything else. That is surely not hard to implement as it has been in the game before.

    I'd be interested to hear what you have to say about the couple of things I have said where I have actually fleshed it out a bit more lol :mischief:
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2017
  11. MantaRevan

    MantaRevan Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,537
    Edited and credited the post to include this suggestion. Your point still accomplishes the goal of making tech and civics move slower and preventing every eureka from being a must get every game. Problem is, overhauling the trees to be more difficult is a lot of work, and the other suggestions on the list are already somewhat labor intensive. Good idea.

    This is a very cool idea, and it adds something new, although I'd like inter-player diplomacy to have a place in the game for something other than joint war coalitions. A world council of religions seems like it overlaps a tad with religious victory however. An alternative like ideological blocs for the expansion of this mechanic maybe? I like the Civ 5 concept of religion fading into the background as Ideology takes a lead role in determining interstate relations. But maybe an apostolic palace equivalent for earlier could provide the foundations for the other organizations later.

    Agreed that direct population growth isn't the answer. Too passive a play-style. But we also want to encourage multiple ways to play. Bonuses to the city center per district constructed are a solid idea, just watch out because Kongo can exploit the mechanic with cheap Mbanzas.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  12. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,710
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    I think any bonuses could not apply to any district that can be built more than once in the same city...or would only apply to the first district built of that type in that city.
     
  13. The googles do nothing

    The googles do nothing Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    323
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    My suggestions:
    Land units not being able to put costal cities to siege. No land units should have ZOC in water.


    Suggestions i've read in the forums:
    Be able to remove civs from Random draws (i.e. no Gilgamesh)
    Be able to choose what pop up occurs. (i.e. turn off rumors)
     
    c4c6 and nzcamel like this.
  14. MantaRevan

    MantaRevan Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,537
    The former of the two has never been in a civ game before, but it would be a nice addition. The latter is direly needed. Added to post. Do land units exert ZOC in water tiles?
     
  15. The googles do nothing

    The googles do nothing Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    323
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Yes - ZOC in determining if a city is in a siege at least.. It's not a situation i've run into for awhile but I haven't seen anything in the patch notes indicating it changed.
     
  16. Browd

    Browd Dilettante Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    11,627
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Land units do not exert ZOC over water tiles (even (or especially) for sieging purposes). As a corollary, they also do not exert ZOC across rivers.
     
  17. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,710
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Isn't The googles do nothing refering to embarked land units?
     
  18. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    10,200
    I believe the following will fix a lot of issues with diplomacy
    1. The -18 You occupy my city penalty should degrade and not to slowly and maybe it should match the era WM points ... so -6 to -24
    2. The -20 razing my city should degrade but a lot slower.
    3. Ceding a city should remove the -18 penalty for that city only but you should still get the Warmonger points with everyone else for taking it in the first place. Maybe reduced.
    4. Ceding a city should also stop a casus later on.
    5. Liberating a city wiping out all those warmonger points is a joke and should just reduce them by a % or a sum based on era
    6. You should not be able to liberate any city when you were the one who originally took it (to stop the gifting exploit)
    7. Troops near my border should be triggered when troops are in close proximity to each other, not spread across the globe.
    8. There should be some strong penalties for using Nukes
    9. There needs to be a united nations of some sort that has some ability to kerb nations. especially steamrollers.
    10. There needs to be a limit on the different governments modifier... it can get pretty bad. The agenda has its own modifier it does not need to double the standard penalty... The standard penalty does seem to get high sometimes too even without the agenda. not sure it its a bug.
    While varying agendas may annoy people varying amounts they do make for a challenging gameplay and I feel they are not really broken. Certainly not t the level of the above changes. Some of the strong agendas can seem harsh but thats life and Catherine looses advantage in diplomacy if you water these down. Knowing secondary agendas can be quite useful. If you want realpolitik to be more in the ascendancy then reduce some of the harsher numbers should do it. Most only punish you -6 now anyway.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
    MantaRevan and nzcamel like this.
  19. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,122
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Also, an event log! I should be able to walk away between turns and come back and see what has happened. It would include all the things that show up in the center of the screen, on the right sidebar, battle outcomes, and new barb camps. You could filter it by event type.
     
    vit_sin and nzcamel like this.
  20. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,710
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    They do have it in each leader screen, but it's a hassle to go through and look at each. A collated place is a must surely!
     

Share This Page