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

[Aparioss Frank]

I think Civ 6 takes war way too seriously, and strictly. There is no civ that is good with raiding. every war must be declared, and cannot be shorter than a few turns.
There should be a civ that is more oriented toward raiding (no, not simply gaining buff to pillaging and such). A civ that has the ability to enter peace negotiation after only 2-3 turns of war, and greatly reduce Warmonger's penalty for a war that ends without a city captured (people who conduct raids are very happy about it, after all it's one way to earn make living). Normally, skirmishes that deal damage to the city, pillaging productions, but do not overtake the city is an indication of raids right? The whole point is a civ that do not need to commit deep in wars, but rather quickly enter and exit wars with pillage bonus and favorable negotiation. Generally, when you kill some units and pillage some districts from the AIs, they would already make a favourable negotiation.
The Viking is supposed to be like that, historically they used to raid villages, force trade furs, and collect ransoms. Instead we get this weird ability that all ships can coastal raid, but you cannot do coastal raid if you are not commited in a full scale war in the first place.

 

[Aparioss Frank]

I have some ideas for game mechanic changes:

- Surprise war buff: Lower the number of turns where you can Make peace after starting a Surprise war. A simple situational buff, if you declare a war that has not much reason to back it up, you suffer more penalty of course. But you also have easier time backing off from it, since there is no formal reason for you to be committed in it. Against a human player, this buff might not be as meaningful, since if someone declare a Surprise war and fails to gain such advantage that his opponent wants to end war early, then his opponent will just hold on to the war, play defensively to cripple the former's economy.

- Declare Victorious & Admit Defeat: In Make peace deal, the options to Declare Victorious and Admit Defeat will be added to each side (not required for Make peace deal), along with other deal items. The two options are semi-independent: If one side Declare Victorious and the other side does not Admit Defeat, the Make peace deal can still come through. Both side can Declare Victorious in a war. A side may Admit defeat without the other side Declare Victory. However, 2 sides cannot both Admit Defeat.

Effect:

+A side can choose to Admit Defeat, taking 20% more Warmonger penalty and 20% more War weariness; but against an AI, this will improve its friendliness with the player Admitting defeat. Also, trade routes toward the former opponent's cities gain bonus yield (maybe Gold and Production) (This bonus could be made to yield even more bonus depending on the type of Casus Belli of the war 2 players engaged in earlier: +Faith for Holy War, +Science for Colonial War, +Culture for Territorial Expansion War, etc.)

+A side can choose to Declare Victorious when ending a war, recovering 30% Base War weariness (calculated before other modifiers) and instantly gaining 30 Loyalty to all of his cities; but against an AI, this also worsen its friendliness with the player Declaring victorious. Trade routes toward an ally's city and internal trade routes gain bonus yield.

*For some Casus Belli or Emergency war, Declare Victorious is only possible when at least 1 goal was obtained (For Emergency, it is only possible when the Emergency was successful for you. For Casus Belli: Victorious Reconquest war,Liberation war or Protectorate war can only be declared when at least one valid city of the sort was liberated. Victorious War of Territorial Expansion, Colonial War, Holy War can only be declared when you captured at least 1 city. The Defender, or the one got declared a Casus Belli, may end the war and Declare Victorious at anytime. Etc..)

++ Declaring Victorious has no effect when both side Declare victorious. But it is still there, in case you want to worsen the relationship between you and an AI.
++ Declaring Victorious has amplified effect when the other side also Admit Defeat in the Make peace deal, recovering 90% Base War weariness (Yes, this may result in a surplus in Amenity) and gaining 90 Loyalty.

Declaring Victorious and Admitting Defeat are part of the Make peace trade deal, so no one can declare them without the other's agreement. Players have to pressure the opponent enough to make them agree to Admit defeat or Declare Victorious. Both side can Declare Victorious, but neither would gain any bonus for that, to prevent abuse for online players.

I am not a good modder, but this might need an evaluation value for the AI to use the declaration.

- Economic Victory: A new victory condition, comes along with some re haul to Gold value. As said by John Adams 1826: “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” Players obtain Economic Victory by having their Gold reserve higher than or equal to 33% of the whole world, and retaining that position for a few turns (a nation's Gold reserve = Gold value for that nation * amount of Gold it has). This is not well thought out yet, and I'd need to research more into macro economy to refine the concepts.
Basically, Gold does not have the same value for all players, but rather depends on the player's total Production yield, total Gold yield, out going trade routes, incoming trade routes, resources, districts, buildings ... (international trade routes changes your Gold value based on the receiving civilization's Gold reserve, so war can cripple a civ's Gold value, and thus, its economy). Gold value will be checked for changes every 3-5 turns. Value of Gold in trade deals are not equal for both side, but the AI can calculate it. You can also intentionally cause "inflation" to lower your Gold value, thus lower the amount of gold you have to pay through trade deals (Germany after WW2 inflated their Mark in order to pay for reparations). The actual cost for maintenance, unit & building purchases are always the same. In the menu, costs are displayed in term of your own current Gold value, and will scale up if your Gold value reduces, or scale down if your Gold value increases.

It is an idea I am still working on, but I hope it sounds interesting and not too complicated.

 

[Jkchart]

I have some ideas for game mechanic changes:

- Surprise war buff: Lower the number of turns where you can Make peace after starting a Surprise war. A simple situational buff, if you declare a war that has not much reason to back it up, you suffer more penalty of course. But you also have easier time backing off from it, since there is no formal reason for you to be committed in it. Against a human player, this buff might not be as meaningful, since if someone declare a Surprise war and fails to gain such advantage that his opponent wants to end war early, then his opponent will just hold on to the war, play defensively to cripple the former's economy.

- Declare Victorious & Admit Defeat: In Make peace deal, the options to Declare Victorious and Admit Defeat will be added to each side (not required for Make peace deal), along with other deal items. The two options are semi-independent: If one side Declare Victorious and the other side does not Admit Defeat, the Make peace deal can still come through. Both side can Declare Victorious in a war. A side may Admit defeat without the other side Declare Victory. However, 2 sides cannot both Admit Defeat.

Effect:

+A side can choose to Admit Defeat, taking 20% more Warmonger penalty and 20% more War weariness; but against an AI, this will improve its friendliness with the player Admitting defeat. Also, trade routes toward the former opponent's cities gain bonus yield (maybe Gold and Production) (This bonus could be made to yield even more bonus depending on the type of Casus Belli of the war 2 players engaged in earlier: +Faith for Holy War, +Science for Colonial War, +Culture for Territorial Expansion War, etc.)

+A side can choose to Declare Victorious when ending a war, recovering 30% Base War weariness (calculated before other modifiers) and instantly gaining 30 Loyalty to all of his cities; but against an AI, this also worsen its friendliness with the player Declaring victorious. Trade routes toward an ally's city and internal trade routes gain bonus yield.

*For some Casus Belli or Emergency war, Declare Victorious is only possible when at least 1 goal was obtained (For Emergency, it is only possible when the Emergency was successful for you. For Casus Belli: Victorious Reconquest war,Liberation war or Protectorate war can only be declared when at least one valid city of the sort was liberated. Victorious War of Territorial Expansion, Colonial War, Holy War can only be declared when you captured at least 1 city. The Defender, or the one got declared a Casus Belli, may end the war and Declare Victorious at anytime. Etc..)

++ Declaring Victorious has no effect when both side Declare victorious. But it is still there, in case you want to worsen the relationship between you and an AI.
++ Declaring Victorious has amplified effect when the other side also Admit Defeat in the Make peace deal, recovering 90% Base War weariness (Yes, this may result in a surplus in Amenity) and gaining 90 Loyalty.

Declaring Victorious and Admitting Defeat are part of the Make peace trade deal, so no one can declare them without the other's agreement. Players have to pressure the opponent enough to make them agree to Admit defeat or Declare Victorious. Both side can Declare Victorious, but neither would gain any bonus for that, to prevent abuse for online players.

I am not a good modder, but this might need an evaluation value for the AI to use the declaration.

- Economic Victory: A new victory condition, comes along with some re haul to Gold value. As said by John Adams 1826: “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” Players obtain Economic Victory by having their Gold reserve higher than or equal to 33% of the whole world, and retaining that position for a few turns (a nation's Gold reserve = Gold value for that nation * amount of Gold it has). This is not well thought out yet, and I'd need to research more into macro economy to refine the concepts.
Basically, Gold does not have the same value for all players, but rather depends on the player's total Production yield, total Gold yield, out going trade routes, incoming trade routes, resources, districts, buildings ... (international trade routes changes your Gold value based on the receiving civilization's Gold reserve, so war can cripple a civ's Gold value, and thus, its economy). Gold value will be checked for changes every 3-5 turns. Value of Gold in trade deals are not equal for both side, but the AI can calculate it. You can also intentionally cause "inflation" to lower your Gold value, thus lower the amount of gold you have to pay through trade deals (Germany after WW2 inflated their Mark in order to pay for reparations). The actual cost for maintenance, unit & building purchases are always the same. In the menu, costs are displayed in term of your own current Gold value, and will scale up if your Gold value reduces, or scale down if your Gold value increases.

It is an idea I am still working on, but I hope it sounds interesting and not too complicated.

I do like the idea of both sides boldly proclaiming victory upon peace...very dramatic/realistic

 

[Aparioss Frank]

I do like the idea of both sides boldly proclaiming victory upon peace...very dramatic/realistic

Yes that was the idea. In game play, I'd expect that you only gonna Declare Victory for both you and the AI when: The war seems aimless, fruitless, consuming, and you have an emergence to deal with. So you want to end the war quickly, and make peace with the AI. However, you want to leave your relation with the AI bad enough to start a war later on, and so you choose to let both you and the AI Declare Victory.

If you really want peace, just Make Peace normally.

 

[ezzlar]

Dark times ahead: Why not introduce random time frames in time where declaration of war means light/no penalties for aggression. This would be on a global scale at the same time.

 

[Segaman]

I think that in the next game there should be an option to create a new civ where you can write your name and pick one of a few stock leader images but the unique traits and units would be determined after you start the game and it would rely on the random spawning location for example if you spawn near a lot of elephants your unique unit would be the war elephants like Gandhi had in civ 5. something like that would be more realistic and i think that it would make the game even more replayable

 

[Naokaukodem]

Dark times ahead: Why not introduce random time frames in time where declaration of war means light/no penalties for aggression. This would be on a global scale at the same time.

I had to read your suggestion multiple time before i get the idea. But it seems very interesting ! Not sure how it would be linked to dark times though, do you mean the penalties would be lower for the civs in dark age if you declare a war, or for every civ if you are in dark times ? The first would make more sense... sort of. But without linking this to dark times, it could still be an interesting mechanic, encouraging wars during "money times" (not a clue of what that means here but it sounds cool). Or you could link it to golden ages : less penalty where you are in one ? That could be a better reward than the actual ones... but i like 'random time frames', it sounds very gamey like a TV show and it sounds exciting.

I think that in the next game there should be an option to create a new civ where you can write your name and pick one of a few stock leader images but the unique traits and units would be determined after you start the game and it would rely on the random spawning location for example if you spawn near a lot of elephants your unique unit would be the war elephants like Gandhi had in civ 5. something like that would be more realistic and i think that it would make the game even more replayable

The problem with that kind of suggestion is that except elephants, what else ? And traits according to starting location seems hard to do, except if you can choose from a list a possible ones, and yet, starting near forests would make you the Celts, near jungle or forest the Aztecs, near flood plains Egypt, near desert Arabia, near mountains with hills Incas, but it's really limited to terrain types and there's not many, plus it's not always logic. (flood plains don't make you build wonders faster)
But one thing I always wanted and looks like your suggestion, is NO TRAITS, NO UNIQUES, but every country past and present with city names. Add the option to start with culturally linked countries in the real world (aka neighbours), and you could recreate History more immersively. I've always found that disabling culturally linked starting location and not allowing them at all to be immersion breaker. Of course I don't say every game should be like that, if you pick up the same country it could become boring to have always the same neighbours, but at least proposing the option. I had my best games in Civ2 when playing France and beating the **** out of England... but that's probably immature and doesn't last. But for young people / newbies, I think it would be a cool feature to play with their own country, or a country they like for a change, and "recreate History". Alas, you can't make UNIQUES for everyone tastes. Not to mention that choosing UNIQUES denies you all the others ones, heh. OK, I like UNIQUES. (they are *very* popular)

 

[Auramagma]

Another Victory Condition: Happiness Victory. It triggers, when 80% of citizens globally in your country and that of your allies are happy. That victory will counterbalance warmongers by pushing countries to be long term allies, who are trying to improve well-being of their citizens and not just impress others.

Another unrealistic idea would be:

Having all countries at reaching certain era completely deviate from each other in future development.

• That would include different path through the tech trees, which includes unique technologies
• Different units, buildings and improvements
• Different event and decisions, etc.
• And Most Importantly: Different Victory Conditions

Here are examples of the factions and their victory conditions:

1. Cyborgs, they slowly transform all environment and citizens in to machines. Their ultimate goal is to build global SuperMind.
2. Post Human - developing along scientific route, with ultimate goal project, which allows them to take all sources of nature / energy on the planet under their control.
3. Steampunk faction. Developing along steampunk part of the tech tree, with steam engines working everywhere on the fields and in the cities. Ultimate project - Huge Fortress in the Sky.
4. Children of Nature, believers that the planet is alive and dealing with it accordingly. With the planet helping them grow and produce resources, etc. Ultimate goal - complete awakening of the planet consciousness.

Once the Ultimate project is complete, the faction, which completes it wins. Then the end of game screen tells us that all of the remaining factions had to leave the planet in search for the new home.

Then, there should be an option to launch Civ BE with those factions, which left...

 

[Henri Christophe]

Ethnic Units
The idea is, despite each Civ just have one or two unique Units maybe they can have ALL units unique, but some units are shared by some civilizations, 4example: Knights was common in Europe, so all European Civs can have Knights and other Civs can have another unit with the same "status". This idea can have some problems, there I will list them and also say some solutions.

New Civs (As USA)
Some civilizations just start to exist at some moment in history, as the USA who kind of born in 1776, which Ethnic Units they can have before the Minuteman? The first idea is they share the Ethnic Units with England because the heritage, the second idea is they use units from Civs from North America as Iroquois, or the third (and the best idea) if both are made, just think how cool if we can play USA Civ with Mohawk warriors and Longbow archer?

Civs who was destroyed at some point in the history (As Aztecs)
Jaguar warriors can be upgraded to Eagle warriors, but then? The idea is to the history of the country who is the same location (Mexico) as a continuation of Aztec Empire. Maybe after the Aztecs can have the Conquistador and then some units as the "Mexican revolutionary", as shown in the image below, and if one day this game put civilizations as Zapotecs, Olmecs and Toltecs they can share the units after Spain colonizations as fellow Mexican.

Civs who never used horses (As Zulus)
The first solution is don't have units, and some Asiatic and African Civs can have an Elephant branch separate from the horses. But to don't be suck to play Civs without horse the Civilization can also use the fantasy. Just try to think how cool if we can play with Impis in Zebras? (Or Inca warriors in Llama). Another solution to advanced horses in the Zulu kingdom is using some Boers cavalry, that can be controversial but the Zulu is the precursor of the South Africa nation, the rainbow nation.

 

[Ospin]

I want that in the main menu screen when you go to "create game" and go to "select a leader", instead of getting a long list of the leaders which are difficult to find and can't hover on their bonuses, you should get a division between tabs of the 5 continents on Earth and find each leader accordingly (say in Europe you find England, France etc).

It would be really practical and efficient to search for leaders between continents instead of the current way which is going to get worse with the gathering storm expansion where you are going to have so many civs to scroll for. It becomes annoying.

More or less like this but with tabs on the top with each continent.

This is a slice of life change but it would be really nice.

 

[Lars.Recré]

If wish I knew how to make a Civ... the North Sentinel tribe as a Civ would be so awesome.

 

[JJOne]

Allow repairs with gold instead of production. I can buy that factory in one turn, but I can't repair it if I have the cash? Come on!

 

[Meowzer]

A civilization with a unique unit that is civilian instead of military or support.

 

[whiskee]

I'm rather sure this has been covered, but what turns me off the most in the sixth installment is no worker automation. The amount of micromanagement tends to grow out of proportions, particularly if I'm having a war with lots of units to move each turn.

I see it's wise to decide which tiles to improve, but is there a mod for this?

Oh, and there should be a more "clear" city screen.

 

[awesome]

A civilization with a unique unit that is civilian instead of military or support.

I've been trying to think of a good one. "Extra charges" for buulders already seems to be a thing, so that wouldn't work.
Maybe a unique spy?
A unique religious unit? There have been some of those talked about in some of the threads on here.

 

[MonkeyPaw]

Cultural Alliance allows Civs to build eachother's unique improvements (if they have one)

 

[old_andy]

Hi guys

A few ideas, and I obviously have no idea how easy/impossible they might be to implement, or for them to be modded (any modders who want to chime in, please do!)

Mini map and Zoom functions
Could the mini-map have a function so that it can be enlarged (say twice the size)? This for people playing on smaller devices like phones and tablets.
In the same vein, could the map be further zoomed out (maybe only in strategic view) to see the whole world map (the explored area) at once.

Climate Change
At the very extreme of climate change, biomes should slowly transform, and this can only be halted by unlocking a terraforming technology in the future era. (since you'll already have coastlands and marshes becoming shallow waters, this seems like a natural continuation of screwing up the planet..)

Artic tiles => Tundras
Tundras => Marshes
Marshes => Grasslands
Grasslands => Plains
Plains => Deserts

Deserts can only be halted by planting forests on adjacent (non desert) tiles.

Any luxury/bonus resources disappear when the tile transforms, which would be the planets way of saying "Tough s**t for screwing up the planet". Strategic resources would be unaffected because they're mostly deposits that can be mined, and aren't affected by climate (unless, of course, they end up under water.)

Allow builders/engineers to plant forests outside of their territory to combat rising C02 levels/droughts.


Polders:
A further development of polders would allow them to be built with only 2 land tiles (and a polder tile) attached, followed by allowing polders to be built with only one land tile (and a polder) attached.(Call them level two and level three polders)

In the modern era artificial islands technology could be unlocked that can be built on any shallow water tile (this technology is open for everyone, but the dutch would get a eureka bonus if they've fully developed polders)

Artificial islands and level three polders act as natural flood barriers.
Regular polders can be upgraded to level three to take advantage of the natural flood barrier function.

Bring back the river levees from Civ 4 to combat against river flooding and allow rivers to be used as canals.


Failed states
If. for whatever reason too many tiles belonging to a city are destroyed/pillaged by war or climate disaster, rioters/terrorists (aka barbarians) will spawn near the city, just like the spy mission incite revolt. If the rioters/terrorists take the city it becomes a free city that starts producing barbarian units, which in turn will try to take down the next city.. creating a domino effect.
There could also be a world council request for peacekeeper forces, which would be sort of like levying unit from city states, except the player doesn't control the units, but grants them open border access to hunt barbarians and liberate the free cities.



okay, that's my two cents. Love the game, love what you guys are doing and looking forward to GS.

 

[old_andy]

Gathering Storm -
Can you sequester carbon? Is it done w/ planting Woods?
Can sea levels go back down after rising in the course of the game?

I don't know -yet.. we'll see in a month ;-) ..but I'm pretty sure you can arrest the increase of carbon emissions by switching to greener energy forms.

I think the sea levels just stop rising at whereever they are at that point.

 

[CoconutTank]

Probably a common source of complaints, but I wish the Viking Longship was a Naval Raider instead of a Naval Melee unit. Bonus points if it didn't also outright replace the Galley. The assumption is that this also changes the Viking Longship to having a ranged attack instead of a melee attack, and I'd personally be fine with it being 1 range. It could also lose stealth, though Norway's opening narration hints at hidden ships. It's really the ranged attack that I'm looking for anyway.

Few reasons for this:

Having a ranged attack would just be more useful overall.
It would allow the Longship to capitalize on its Raid ability more often. Too often there's a barb or something sitting along the coast right on the goody hut or barb camp, and so there isn't really anything the Longship could do except sail off looking for other opportunities. Having a ranged attack mean it could at least pick off the barbs to get at the goods.

It would also give Norway another way to interact with land units early on, which imo they really need in order to establish proper coastal superiority. It'd also give them some meaningful naval superiority as well.

Being a Naval Raider would be much more thematically aligned.
They're Vikings! They raid stuff! And the entire Naval Raider kit fits Vikings so well.

Having a melee attack on an early ship unit is not helpful.
What utility does having a melee attack on an early ship unit have? There are only 2 available targets so early on (maybe even for the rest of the session): cities and other ships.

There usually isn't enough shallow water for naval melee to maneuver in naval melee combat. Naval melee combat is basically one ship bonking another while traffic piles up behind both. Being able to repair in neutral territory helps here but this is a arduous practice in general. I guess researching Shipbuilding helps with maneuvering, but getting Shipbuilding takes forever and is difficult to prioritize over other techs.

Trying to bonk cities with naval melee is probably even worse. Cities usually only have 1 or 2 hexes exposed to water, which even Shipbuilding can't help with. Taking cities with melee units only is a special suffering, both on land and at sea. Even if you manage to take the city... do you really want to? Without a land force to hold the city? And if your land force could reach the city... why are you bothering with naval melee?

 

[old_andy]

Okay, so I don't even know if this is in GS or not -it might be, but I'm just going to voice this in any case.

A late game city project / wonder for civs to become completely emissions free.



Fusion.

New World Wonder: The ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) that's currently being built in Saint-Paul-lès-Durance.
Comes as a proposal before the world forum, everyone who buys into it receives the Fusion reactor tech before the other civs do. The wonder acts as it's own reactor towards the city it's built it and acts the same as a regular power source.

New city projects:
Decommission Nuclear Reactor - safely dismantles the old nuclear reactor (adds a bunch of uranium to the stockpile though)
Build Fusion Reactor - puts a reactor building in the industrial zone (you can even use the same graphic for it) it just has more output than nuclear reactors (and no risks of fall out)

All three take a crap load of time (the wonder as well as the city projects), but ought to be worth it late game.