Civ 7 Feature wishlist, whether reasonable or not!

There has been discussion on a few threads, including by myself, that a spinoff (but official numbered game) of Civ, in the vain of Colonization, SMAC, or Beyond Earth, but being like Age of Mythology is to the Age of Empires series, in theme, would be nice. But, as a separate spinoff game.

That would not be an official numbered game, just like Colonization, Alpha Centauri and Beyond Earth aren't.

(also: it's 'vein'. Vain is when you care too much about your appearance)
 
What could have been interesting as an extra game mode, like those in Civ 6, but which could easily become controversial, so better left up to modmakers, would be to enhance the religious gameplay with supernatural elements, where all the various gods in the game exists and interacts with the game world in supernatural ways as well. Usually I’m not that interested in adding “fantasy” elements to the main game, but if done well, it could have been interesting.

I think if you go well over the top with it, it's not quite as controversial. Like you could easily have a game mode that was part Apocalypse mode and part Heroes and Legends mode, where you used apostles basically instead of soothsayers to cause all those disasters. Or you changed it so that whenever you lost an apostle in religious combat, that was the trigger for the natural disaster. Throw in a few more fantastical Apostle promotions, and it could work.
 
limit the technologies barb camps have access to ie. barbarian aircraft carriers and Giant death robots strike me as really dumb. Jack move the makeshift shanty & off the F35 runway we've got a tribe meeting around the burning oil drum at 8.00pm tonight to discuss Aircraft carrier milestones/project planning
 
Barbarian SFX and attack sound moved from music to sound effects. That's something I would really like. I always turn down the sound effects a bit, but leave the music up. When there is an attack my ear drums just perish...

My setup:
Ambient: 100%
Music: 80%
Sound Effects: 30-40%
Voice: 60%
 
Domination victory is a victory because you're in charge of the entire planet.
Scientific victory is a victory because you're spreading through space and thus pretty much by definition outcompeting all other countries.
Cultural victory is a victory because everyone looks to you for their culture.
Religious victory is a victory because everyone looks to you for religious guidance.
Diplomatic victory is a victory because you're elected world leader.

Ecological victory is a victory because... you're morally superior?

No, I'd much rather have Economic victory: a victory because you control the entirety of the world's economy.
Pretty much this. Every Victory Condition should provide a reason for the remaining Civilizations to submit themselves to you and declare you leader of the world.

Ecological worked in Alpha Centauri (where I think it was called Transcendence?) becuase in that game's lore, Planet was a separate, telepathic entity that you could merge and harmonize with. There is no such hope for that in Civilization proper, beyond the realms of a Fantasy Mode.

Ecological efforts could be tied to Diplomatic, Economic or even Cultural victories as a different means to the same end, but to make them a win condition by themselves is a bit too counterintuitive.
 
I would love for Civ 7 to do more with repurposing or evolving a building/district/improvement. What I really like in Civ 6 is the dam that you in modern times can turn into a hydroelectric plant, and the city walls that later on add culture. I feel like it would make so much sense to have the purpose of a place change through the ages.
Like, when you put down an entertainment district now in ancient times, it stays an entertainment district forever. Including the little jousting knights you see in the close-up animation. I think it would be fun to be able to see a thing stop being useful and change it into something else. E.g. a castle becoming a prison, and then a museum or a university. Each with its specific benefits. Or perhaps even the ability to flat out destroy it; at the cost of loss of culture score but to the benefit of economy and efficient use of space. Y'know difficult choices.
 
In Civ4 when you reach a certain tech level windmill improvements turn into wind power stations (visually only). They also get a higher commerce yield with discovery of Electricity.
 
In Civ4 when you reach a certain tech level windmill improvements turn into wind power stations (visually only).

I remember as a kid I always thought this was just basic expectations, probably influenced by Dutch (my native language) having the same word for both of them.
 
I'm hoping they bring back the ability to exchange maps. It should require technologies like astronomy or cartography, but it seems a little weird to me that this hasn't been an option at all since at least Civ V.

Here are some thoughts on how to keep that interesting and fair. I look forward to hearing any of your thoughts on this.

1. Inaccuracies in Traded Maps

  • Strategic Ambiguity: Introducing inaccuracies in traded maps could add an element of risk and uncertainty, forcing players to verify the information through exploration or further trades. This would prevent players from relying solely on traded maps and encourage continuous engagement with the game's exploration mechanics.

2. Selective Detail in Maps

  • Diplomatic Nuance: Limiting the details shared in map trades (e.g., omitting natural wonders, resources, or cities) based on the relationship or level of trust between civilizations could create more meaningful diplomacy. Players could negotiate for more detailed information, perhaps using open borders or alliances as leverage.

3. Cultural Map Styles

  • Historical Immersion: Incorporating different map formats based on cultural backgrounds (e.g., Greek maps vs. Polynesian navigation) would not only add a layer of visual and thematic variety but also reflect the diversity of civilizations' worldviews. This could influence how players interpret the information and plan their strategies.

4. Stagnant Fog of War

  • Ongoing Engagement: Requiring multiple trades to keep maps updated would add another strategic layer, as players would need to maintain ongoing diplomatic relations and trade agreements. It also reflects the historical reality that maps were often outdated, requiring constant revision and exchange.
 
  • Ongoing Engagement: Requiring multiple trades to keep maps updated would add another strategic layer, as players would need to maintain ongoing diplomatic relations and trade agreements. It also reflects the historical reality that maps were often outdated, requiring constant revision and exchange.

This is amazing in theory, but in practice it is simply annoying micromanagement for little gain. A case of gameplay having to trump realism.
 
Better AI sure but playing to win would be horrible, nothing more immersion breaking than hearing about an AI planning a Domination victory.

Exactly. Civ iV did it perfectly, IMHO.

This is the way:

 
I have complex feelings about map trading.

On one hand it should be possible, as I have always been annoyed by civ games without it requiring literally personally discovering every tile until satellites. In real life not every country has sent explorers to map the world lol, the knowledge has simply... spread.

On another hand I recall map trading from some other strategy game (can't remember which though) and I recall it completely trivialized exploration - you just perform one or two diplomatic actions with some major civs on the other side of the world and bam, you instantly have 90% of the world mapped.

Maybe knowledge in this regard ahould simply slowly spread on its own as in EU4? In this game explorers still have massive time advantage.
 
Better AI sure but playing to win would be horrible, nothing more immersion breaking than hearing about an AI planning a Domination victory.
Why is an AI planning Domination immersion breaking? That should be fine, they should just not tell you in the Gossip, that's silly
 
Top Bottom