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

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by Camikaze, Oct 17, 2010.

  1. SMA333M

    SMA333M Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    Romania
    Also another idea: you should be able to chose in each era to stop... I mean, maybe I want to play only in Ancient era... ? Maybe I want to play only in Industrial era... Right now you can choose in each era to start but not the end era.
     
  2. ahawk

    ahawk King

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    935
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    I've thought this, too.

    I remember playing Empire Earth years and years ago now, and there was an option to do exactly this. That way, you didn't have to tech up through the various epochs to play the game with the units you wanted to play with, and at the same time you didn't have to worry about becoming too obsolete since there was only a little room to research and tech within that epoch.

    As devil's advocate, however, such an option wouldn't necessarily be as successful in CiV: consider Korea, Babylon, or any other side that counts on being scientifically ahead by quite a ways to achieve its goals. Beyond that, consider that some sides are geared to succeed only in certain eras: Rome's units don't keep any significant promotions when upgraded, so they absolutely have to fight wars in the classical era and are at a disadvantage later on to a side that got to keep its promotions, such as China. Because the game centers so much on attacking or researching at the right time, having an option to fight only in one era with minimal research might drain some of the challenge/fun out of the game.

    All that said, it should at least be offered as an option to start and finish within the same era. After all, what could it hurt? We already have the option to play as Aztecs with raging barbs on, or England or Carthage with an almost all-water map. If we already have options that can imbalance the game for or against us, why not add a simple feature to play within a single era?
     
  3. ahawk

    ahawk King

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    935
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    I know they have a bonus in unforested hills as well as snow, but I feel that even a bonus in open hills is not enough to offset the fact that there's rarely much snow in default-map-settings games. Would it be too much to give them a bonus in open tundra as well? I usually see a lot more tundra than snow.
     
  4. fdelbene

    fdelbene CivFanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    101
    Location:
    Roma, Italy
    • Colonies: Workers and work boats outside own territory, could build colonies on luxury/startegic resources, at the cost of being expended, connecting the resource to you and putting that tile under your control.
    • Combat XP: each unit should be able to gain XP only for "n" times (by diminishing returns) for each type of unit fought (independently if barb or regular), maybe taking into account also terrain.
     
  5. SMA333M

    SMA333M Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    Romania
    Combat XP never seems enough if you ask me... my units get 5-6 promotions and I still want more lol. And that's the way it should be... many promotions, not just 1-2. This way you can specialise your units.
     
  6. Harv72b

    Harv72b Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2005
    Messages:
    552
    This one occurred to me as I was redoing the improvements around yet another puppet city earlier today:

    Allow for the removal of resources.

    As in, just enable the player to delete them with a worker, no longer on the map. Besides making it easier to control populations in puppet cities, I can think of other situations where it would be advantageous: getting rid of unneeded iron resources during the late game on what would otherwise be farmable tiles, removing sheep from a hill as the Inca so you can put a terrace farm there, etc. It's certainly not beyond the real-world realm of the possible to completely remove a resource from a given area, so why not allow it here?
     
  7. SMA333M

    SMA333M Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    Romania
    If they add corporations, all those resources should give something even in future era... like gold, etc. ... that will be better than removing resources.
     
  8. stfoskey12

    stfoskey12 Emperor of Foskania

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2010
    Messages:
    839
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    35° 12' N 97° 26' W
    I would kind of like to see a new Civilization Chronicles with all of the versions up to Civ V: G&K, as well as both versions of Colonization, and popular mods for all Civilization versions. However, since the original Civilization Chronicles was just released six years ago, it might be good if they waited until Civ VI comes out.
     
  9. Bechhold

    Bechhold King

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    645
    Gender:
    Male
    Please give Naval Units the Honor Policy upgrade of "Discipline" heck rename Fleet X or something.
     
  10. fdelbene

    fdelbene CivFanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    101
    Location:
    Roma, Italy
    What I'm saying is not that you should get less XP, just in a different, and imo, more rational way.

    Why a unit should not gain XP when fighting a never seen and maybe advanced barbarian unit (after gaining 300 years before the capped 30 XP from them)?
    Why a unit should get an infinite amount of XP fighting the same unit on the same terrain?

    What I propose is that each unit can gain XP, say, only three times from fighting:
    • Warriors on plains and grasslands;
    • Warriors on hills;
    • Warriors on forests and jungles;
    • Archers on plains and grasslands;
    • Archers on hills;
    • Archers on forests and jungles;
    ... and so on for each combination of unit/terrain.

    An addition could be diminishing return (first 10 XP, second 8 XP, third 6 XP, etc.) and taking into account also nationality: spanish warriors not the same as chinese warriors, etc.
     
  11. Culture Bomb

    Culture Bomb Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    298
    We need the ability to challenge rival leaders to duels, so we can add some realtime combat action for those who are bored of all the strategy. :lol::mischief:
     
  12. stfoskey12

    stfoskey12 Emperor of Foskania

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2010
    Messages:
    839
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    35° 12' N 97° 26' W
    I actually think that could be an interesting idea in multiplayer. Someone else could take the place of whoever got killed.
     
  13. Ozymandias9891

    Ozymandias9891 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    271
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Montreal, QC
    I would like to see the following:

    • Removal of the Giant Death Robot: I find it's too unrealistic. Personally, I've never seen any in real life, and when I play a game of Civ, I like to make it as close to reality as possible.
    • Expansion of Tech Tree/Eras: I would like to see a Prehistoric Era, which would add +/- 2,000 years to the game, and be a precursor to the Ancient Era. Include techs such as Fire, Hunting and Gathering, Fishing, Language, Basic Weaponry/Stone Tools (i.e. spears, stone ax, etc...), Ceremonial Burial and Counting. Additionally, Ancient techs, such as pottery and Animal Husbandry, can be moved back to prehistory, and be replaced by other techs in the Ancient Era. This would allow for more units, improvements, buildings and wonders. I would also like to see the future tech developed a bit more, with the goal of adding another 50-150 years at the end of the game. Of course, given that we haven't yet reached that point in time, this would be a more speculative/theoretical era.
    • Colonization/Revolution/Independence: The ability to colonize other lands, and, subsequently, the opportunity to have those lands revolt or be granted independence, forming a new Civ.
    • City-States → Micro-states: Rather than having single-city city-states, I would much rather see microstates. Each would have as little as two or as many as 3 cities, and act as an independent nation with a leader and all, but serve the same purpose as city-states.

    That's all I have for now. Hopefully, some food for thought :)
     
  14. ahawk

    ahawk King

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    935
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    There's a bit of a paradox, I think, to suggest they remove the GDR because it's unrealistic, yet suggest they expand the future tech era which you admit is speculative/theoretical anyways. Anything they do in the Future tech era could be considered unrealistic because you or I have yet to see the future, and would be open to the same problems as saying the GDR is unrealistic because we have never seen one.

    All that said, while I obviously disagree about your point of removing the GDR, I agree that the Future tech (Information era in G&K) era could stand an extra unit or two, or something more, to make it feel less tacked-on.
     
  15. Ozymandias9891

    Ozymandias9891 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    271
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Montreal, QC
    I was waiting for someone to point that out. It's something I was well aware of while writing, but decided to go with it either way. I very much doubt that we will be seeing Giant Death Robots any time in in the next half century, but am of the belief that warfare will become more and more sophisticated with regards to mechanization and automation. Remote controlled robots are already being used in military warfare, so perhaps to go along with something like that would make more sense. I just find that the GDR is an extremely drastic jump into the future, and more akin to something you would find in a space game.
     
  16. SMA333M

    SMA333M Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    Romania
    I don't like the GDR in game either. I don't think it should be totally removed though... they should just add an option to remove it, at set up game. They should do this for nuclear weapons too, in case you want to play without. I changed some files for that.

    Also I'd like to see an entire scenario full of units like GDR ... robots, etc. But just not in the main game...


    P.S. > the japanese launched a robot that looks like GDR and will go to mass production next year :p ... I think in 50 years they will be everywhere in combat.

    Spoiler :
     
  17. stfoskey12

    stfoskey12 Emperor of Foskania

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2010
    Messages:
    839
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    35° 12' N 97° 26' W
    One other suggestion is multiple leaders per civ. They could make an expansion pack with about 15-25 different leaders for preexisting civs and then add a rebellions game mode option as well as colonies.
     
  18. Harv72b

    Harv72b Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2005
    Messages:
    552
    This brings something else to mind--why not go the distance & assign different leaders (with different UAs) to each civ and have them apply to specific historical periods? This could also go some ways towards balancing the immersion factor with ancient civs vs. more recent ones; each civ gets a less powerful UA during historical eras in which they didn't actually exist, but gets better abilities as their historical leaders come into play.

    In other words, playing as America (for example) you'd get some relatively generic UA up until 1776 (or the corresponding tech level, such as rifling), or even no UA at all. Then Washington rotates in as your leader and you gain something more powerful; +20% production of gunpowder units or something. Lincoln takes over in 1861 or whatever & your UA changes to +1 happiness/city or +1 hammer for each worked tile with at least one hammer already--something to represent emancipation. In 1932 FDR takes the helm and nets you an additional +15% production from factories or something.

    Babylon on the other hand might get their current science bonus and/or something to do with happiness up through the demise of their historical empire, at which point they'd get a generic UA (or none at all) until the end of the game.

    If balanced properly, this would give more ancient empires a distinct head start over modern ones, but the more recent powers would get bigger bonuses in later years which could level it out (assuming you survive that long). Would definitely add another layer of strategy to the game, depending on which civ you chose.

    Obvious potential hangup is what to do about regions which were a major power in different eras & under different names, i.e. Rome/Italy. I suppose you could gain UAs during the appropriate eras & then lose them in between or something.

    Just an idea off the top of my head.
     
  19. fdelbene

    fdelbene CivFanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    101
    Location:
    Roma, Italy
    • Spherical maps: Real planets!
     
  20. Jabberwockxeno

    Jabberwockxeno Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Messages:
    487
    I second this.

    It'd be really interesting to be able to shortcut accross the globe that way.
     

Share This Page