Civ Ideas & Suggestions Not-Worth-Their-Own-Thread

[steveg700]

I think Civ needs to improve upon its late game, which is currently only very rarely a race for the finish. I'd like world politics to rise to prominence iin the post-expansion eras to breathe in some new life, perhaps using concepts like corporations and wonders like the United Nations as a way to keep science, diplo, and cultural victories from being an exercise in walking the bases.

Also, add younger "up-and-comer" nations to the game like Canada, Brazil, Italy, (modern) Israel, maybe Pakistan.

And howabout post-industrial scenarios, like world war two...or three. A world war with GDR's!

 

[Vandal Thorne]

I'd like to see a WW 1 scenario. Something I meant to write onto this forum a while ago, is that I'd like to see a Switzerland DLC that takes the Landsknecht from Germany and has a unique Clockmaker building to replace the Windmill. Germany would gain a unique Artillery to replace the Landsknecht. This would open the door for a WW1 scenario with Bulgeria and Italy added into the mix of nations with WW1 era unique units (this would be Bulgeria, France, Germany, and Italy).

 

[Infantry#14]

UN expanded like civ4. I would like the UN have other voting propositions beside the diplo win. Propositions like open borders with all members, all players DoF with a certain player, all players denounce a certain player, all players adopt a social policy (freedom, autocracy, order), stop warring with a certain member, and return cities to original owners. Of course, one can defy the resolution. The UN should appear sooner like Mass Media.

More city buildings in the later eras. Shopping malls, groceries, parks, arcades, custom house (foreign trade routes), etc.

Religious UU. Like the Christian crusaders, Muslim mujaheddin, Buddhist monks, and etc.

 

[OmniPotent42]

Fix diplomacy.
I don't care if therebare any more civs or units, just fix it.

 

[StMikael]

When you build Settlers, they don't carry with them the religious beliefs of their hometown. So when you found a city with the Settler, that city becomes unreligious, which means you have to send in a Missionary to make it religious.

I think it would be useful, both historically accurate and gameplay friendly, to have Settlers from a religious city carry with them the religious majority of that city.

 

[TheHanzou]

1. Yes if implemented properly which is hard to do.
2. No, doesn fit with the current game design
3.
a) not needed
b) not needed in the game, and sniping buildings?! really?
c) not a good idea, overcomplification where we already have promotion system
d) no, paratroppers are exeptionally strong, i dont think you use them correctly
4. Yes but not as a boring flat bonus system. If done properly why not.
5. another overcomplification that doesnt add a lot to actual gameplay. Generals have their roles, as have city defense buildings.
6. Cannot do this, production is valued roughly 2-3 times more than gold or food. Thats the whole reason there is no such improvement in the game, it would be insanely overpowered. As for the fort thing, we have an old suggestion for canal type improvements that would work for that.
7. No to both, even more since you didnt specify how it would work. But religion victory is not gonna work with current religion system.
8+9+10. Definitely cant go wrong with that one
11. More buildings yes, but not an SDI that works on a % base
12. Going to say no here as well because it would lead to abuse. You seem to favor tailoring your terrain to whatever is best (if we look at 6+12) but this removes strategy and risk/reward in the game, and thats not how it should work, removing forests or jungles is a permanent decision with benefits and disadvantages and its up to the player to decide if theyre worth it or not.
13. Yes needs a lot more options and incencitive to not be at war permanently (especially with other players).

Some more suggestions from me:

Dynamite can destroy mountains/make them passable
Spy satelite Network wonder that shows you a strip of the map that moves further around the map each turn( like real satelite)
More espionage options (poison cites, disable ressource, block trade routes etc)
Buy enemy terrain with culture/faith, costing more the further away from your city the tile is or for each adjactant enemy city tile
Complete diplomacy overhaul
New Civs
Slavery (important part of world history)
Diplomatic influence as a ressource
New buildings (Airports, Train station)
New unit types (new scout type units etc)
new unique tile improvements (canal, Airbase, entranchments/bunkers)
Turn by turn play option that can be changed on the fly in game for every turn separately
patent law
Crusades and Crusader Units
More diversification for existing civs (each one gets one more new UU/UA/UB)

 

[Gucumatz]

Ill add some too.

Name the Expansion

Civ 5 :: Guns, Germs, and Steel

Work a deal with Jared Diamond for voiceovers.

=======

Include a more colonial and Africa feel. Add a whole new feature :: Disease. But rather than make it a purely penalty thing, make it a bonus/set of choices that you can develop as a weapon. Buidling certain buildings can increase immunity to diseases. Other buidings can increase a new point system (similar to faith, but related to disease) which works in the developing of diseases. You can then spread them to other civs through trade, foreign trade routes, during war, etc.

To do this would use a separate screen where you can choose the direction where you want the disease to spread in.

This would be more a late game feature. Starting in medieval you can start working on building diseases, but the real benefits/unique styles can be built and focused only in the more modern eras.

========

And the choice of civs would be more colonial/non European focused

A couple of choices for me

Israel
Tibet
Comanche/Apache/Anasazi
Zimbabwe
Morocco
Portugal
Indonesia (Rather than the Java Kingdoms or Majapahit)
Kongo
Brazil

 

[orikos]

Ill add some too.

Name the Expansion

Civ 5 :: Guns, Germs, and Steel

Work a deal with Jared Diamond for voiceovers.

=======

Include a more colonial and Africa feel. Add a whole new feature :: Disease. But rather than make it a purely penalty thing, make it a bonus/set of choices that you can develop as a weapon. Buidling certain buildings can increase immunity to diseases. Other buidings can increase a new point system (similar to faith, but related to disease) which works in the developing of diseases. You can then spread them to other civs through trade, foreign trade routes, during war, etc.

To do this would use a separate screen where you can choose the direction where you want the disease to spread in.

This would be more a late game feature. Starting in medieval you can start working on building diseases, but the real benefits/unique styles can be built and focused only in the more modern eras.

========

And the choice of civs would be more colonial/non European focused

A couple of choices for me

Israel
Tibet
Comanche/Apache/Anasazi
Zimbabwe
Morocco
Portugal
Indonesia (Rather than the Java Kingdoms or Majapahit)
Kongo
Brazil

Good idea.
Do you have ideas for the new units ?

 

[oliver]

Like the Idea of tourism but rather have a new tech corporations which when researched a corporation starts which would like religion but u dont choose anything it randomised.

 

[fdelbene]

A bunch of ideas/suggestions, mainly things I miss from earlier games.

1. Remove terrain improvements: workers should be able to remove improvements, not only roads.
2. Plant forests: workers should be able to plant forests.
3. Air base: workers should be able to create air bases as terrain improvements.
4. Airports: reintroduce this building.
5. Submarine: don't permit submarines to fire over land, or at least change animation.
6. Submarine: allow them to enter other Civ's seas, if discovered diplomatic penalty.
7. Civilization splits: allow civilization to split (when capital captured or when culture, economy or happiness is really bad).
8. Culture expansion: terrain and cities should be allowed to switch civs when culture "pression" is much larger, with a diplomatic penalty if accepted.
9. Terrain trade: it should be possible to trade terrain.
10. Map trade: it should be possible to trade maps.
11. Tech trade: it should be possible to trade tech.
12. Terrain agreement: to avoid negative penalties from "They covet your land", allow to define an agreed border line between civs.
13. Spying: include more options, like destroy building, terrorism, etc.
14. Barbarians name: in modern eras rename them to rebels.
15. Barbarian XP: XP should be awarded when fighting advanced barbarian units (cruisers, infantry, etc.).
16. Partisans: spawn partisans when capturing enemy cities, under certain conditions (culture, religion, etc).
17. SDI: reintroduce a building or wonder shielding (at least partially) from nukes.
18. Terrain bombing: should be possible to bomb terrain improvements.
19. Air reconnaissance: air units should be able to reveal terrain.
20. Air bombing: air units should be able to bomb tiles not visible.
21. Wake up all: easy way to wake up all air units present in a city.
22. Remunerative war help: fighting (destroying?) enemy units in friends' territory, should award a diplomatic bonus.

 

[SMA333M]

3.
a) not needed

I won't comment about what you said about the other things.. it's your opinion.

Anyway, about the Modern Carrier... if you say it's not needed, I guess you don't use Carriers much... I like wars in Civ (especially "modern" wars, when I have all tech - and without GDR, which is out of my games).

I play with "abundant" resources because I find it more fun this way. I use maps that have enough land but enough water too (like Continents, Small Continents, etc). I don't invade my "neighbours" all the time... sometimes I want to invade a civ that is on the other side of the map, on other continent. So, they have many ships, many airplanes (with abundant resources they can really have many) and a lot of ground troops. My tactic is to use a lot, and I mean A LOT of bombardment: from Jet Fighters, Bombers, Stealth Bombers, warships & artillery (when possible). My ground troops are not that many usually. I make more airplanes than ground troops...

So as an example, from a game: 30 Bombers and 9 Jet Fighters. I needed 13 Carriers for that ! With a Modern Carrier that will be able to transport 4 airplanes, I will only need 10. If it will be able to transport 5, then I will only need 8... that will decrease the maintenance, the building time, they will be easier to defend + the Modern Carrier should be faster too.

Also, new units are always good. Did we need WW1 units ? No... but having them, makes the game more fun and interesting. Now we have WW2 Carrier... I want a 21th century Carrier. At least for the look of it. Someone demanded a robot and they added it ! lol... and I want a carrier

I would also like to see a way to lvl up your Carrier. Like... it should be able to bombard, even if it's for really low dmg but at least it gets xp. Or maybe it can get xp when the airplanes on it get xp... I don't know...


PS: now I play on higher difficulties... probably I will need even more carriers

 

[Gucumatz]

Good idea.
Do you have ideas for the new units ?

In regards to the OP

Tourism would be welcome. But should work in a different method I think. Friendly states/declaration of friendship states provide a higher rate of gold on world wonders than unfriendly civs.

If you are at war with a civ, they will provide no tourists for your wonders. Or after a certain amount of turns of denouncing.

=========

And for units:

Units I would love a Stealth Fighter, but perhaps to control Stealth Bombers.

Drones would be a cool very modern unit. A drone could be stationed to fly over/patrol a certain set of squares (3x3 or 2x2) and attack 2 units per turn in it. It would be an aircraft unit and only fighters could kill it (to give fighters an additional important purpose)

In regards to naval units - maybe make a unique modern work boat that can set 2-3 mines. This way you can have more strategy in the late game naval warfare. Because at the moment once you get battleships/subs You can destroy navies much easier and little ability to deal with a lack of terrain in the seas.

======

Also add Scurvy and change Citrus to a strategic resource and add an important missing luxury resource instead. (Tobacco or Coffee)

 

[Teleon22]

Tile improvements:

Rail-Roads: Rail Roads should not replace roads, rather, when a Rail-road and road exist in the same tile, the Rail-Road should be offset and parallel to the road. Rail road tile improvements should have a slightly higher up-keep cost than that of roads but also, cities connected by rail-road should receive a percent increase in wealth generation and production.

Canal: A canal would be a tile improvement that would only be available in a single tile that has shore or ocean on two opposite sides as to not allow the creation of very long canal systems. This tile improvement would not be available until the industrial era. A Canal would allow the passage of ships over a single land tile that has water on two opposite sides. The strategic benefit of a canal would obviously be likened to the strategic importance of the Panama Canal in South America.

Diplomacy Improvements:

The single most important enhancement in the diplomacy arena of Civilization 5 for both multiplayer and single player is the need to customize the duration of a treaty, which is to include indefinite. The second most important need is the ability for Civilizations to withdraw from a treaty at the costs detriment to diplomatic relations between the two parties of a treaty.

Moderator Action: Merged into a bigger thread.

 

[Jabberwockxeno]

snip

Agreed for the most part. The duration of a peace treaty, or any type of trade or deal should be adjustable.

As far as breaking it and getting a large diplomatic penalty, I thought about this, but at the same time i'm not sure how exactly this would work.

It would have to lead to near irreparable damage to the relations with that civ, and severe penalties in other relationships as well.

 

[Teleon22]

Agreed for the most part. The duration of a peace treaty, or any type of trade or deal should be adjustable.

As far as breaking it and getting a large diplomatic penalty, I thought about this, but at the same time i'm not sure how exactly this would work.

It would have to lead to near irreparable damage to the relations with that civ, and severe penalties in other relationships as well.

On the other-hand, it would be even better if players could simply re-negotiate an existing treaty with the AI or other players as to make an initially fair and good treaty that has soured, again mutually beneficial.

For example, If I offered an ally Gold Per turn for X amount of turns, yet, before the duration of the treaty ends, my empire starts to lose money, I would like to re-negotiate the terms of the treaty to reduce the amount of money I’m sending rather than break the treaty altogether by a declaration of war.

I think it is really important that the diplomacy seriously get looked at and enhanced for a more friendly player experience.

 

[Harv72b]

On the other-hand, it would be even better if players could simply re-negotiate an existing treaty with the AI or other players as to make an initially fair and good treaty that has soured, again mutually beneficial.

For example, If I offered an ally Gold Per turn for X amount of turns, yet, before the duration of the treaty ends, my empire starts to lose money, I would like to re-negotiate the terms of the treaty to reduce the amount of money I’m sending rather than break the treaty altogether by a declaration of war.

I think it is really important that the diplomacy seriously get looked at and enhanced for a more friendly player experience.

The issue I see is getting the AI to abide by such a system in anything approaching a rational and consistent manner, unless you're talking about allowing such adjustments only for human players. I can already see AI renegotiation spam coming in for every deal I negotiate, or treaties being broken the turn after they were agreed to when an AI suddenly decides that I'm founding too many new cities or gets angry that I'm winning my war against the 3 empires that DoW'd me without warning.

On the other hand, such an enhancement should be relatively easy to implement for multiplayer, and would be a significant improvement.

 

[Teleon22]

The issue I see is getting the AI to abide by such a system in anything approaching a rational and consistent manner, unless you're talking about allowing such adjustments only for human players. I can already see AI renegotiation spam coming in for every deal I negotiate, or treaties being broken the turn after they were agreed to when an AI suddenly decides that I'm founding too many new cities or gets angry that I'm winning my war against the 3 empires that DoW'd me without warning.

On the other hand, such an enhancement should be relatively easy to implement for multiplayer, and would be a significant improvement.

It would be nice if it worked for both, however, multiplayer would be fine by itself for human interaction.

 

[fdelbene]

A few other things that come to my mind:

• Nuclear weapons: first use of nuclear weapons in a conflict should be frowned upon, with a very large diplo hit and at least some other civs declaring war.
• Multilateral pacts: would be nice to have pacts with more than one civ, like defensive or offensive alliances.
• UN resolutions: they were really fun.
• Building bombing: it should be possible to bomb specific buildings, and -why not- wonders (they could be restored at a fraction of the original price).

 

[plumsmugler]

I think global warming should be something that affects the game in the last era. Considering we're already starting the feel serious affects from it now it seems like something that would be pertinent to a game like Civ.

Perhaps as the game is nearing an end you start seeing stats of everybody's carbon footprint and what the global carbon output is. Once carbon output reaches a certain number it's game over and everybody loses. Perhaps at certain levels of carbon output natural disasters start randomly occurring throughout the map such as droughts, floods, and hurricanes which will start damaging or eventually destroying cities. Maybe even affecting armies.

The trade off will be that civs which don't care about how much they pollute will be able to produce more and have better armies but will suffer severe diplomatic and trade penalties.

It could also be tied to a diplomatic victory as somebody who convinced the world not to destroy itself would be the ultimate diplomatic achievement.

 

[Peacemongerer]

Tourism definitely needs to come back. Maybe also add a building option "national park" in cities which have Natural Wonders unlocked at Ecology which can become a tourist attraction immediately.