ShadowWarrior
Prince
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2001
- Messages
- 411
1. Cities should be able to share food and shields as long as they are connected by some kind of transportation network such as roads or airports. This gives more flexibility for players to choose where to build cities. It also make more sense. Cities in a country often rely on each other. No one city is completely self sufficient.
2. Airports should provide some commercial benefit rather than simply producing veteran units.
3. Harbor should increase the number of units of food produced on ocean sqaure by two, not one. Harbor should also be able to provide some commercial benefits.
4. When a city rebels, it is reasonable to expect some military units stationed in that city to be lost forever or get damaged, but not to the extend that all of the units are lost, especially if that city has ten or twenty military units to begin with. It is hard to see how rebellion got started in the first place if there are ten or twenty military units.
5. Future technology should provide some benefits. For example, once players get five future technologies, all of the military units get a bonus in offense. Once players get ten future technologies, shields productions are increased by fifteen percent. Once players get fifteen future technologies, food productions are increased by fifteen percent.
Another way to do this is to divide future technology into four categories of economic, military, and research. When players finishes researching every single future technology and begins to research future technology, players are given the option to direct the research of future technology to either economic or military application. Directing research of future ontechnology to economic application will give economic bonuses. For example, for each future technologies discovered, there will be five percent increase in shield production, or food production or tax revenues. Players can't determine which kind of economic bonus will they recieve. It will be random.
6. Corruption should be determined by political system, implementation of improvements, such as courthouses, that fight corruption, as well as relative distance.
In all of the civ games, corruptions is determined by distance. The assumption is that the further away a city is from the capital, the less easier it is for the central government to control and administer that city efficiently, therefore the more likely that the governor of that city will cheat and become corrupted.
This assumption is only partially right in that it neglects the effect of technology. As communication and transportation technology advances, it becomes easier to go to places that once took years of travel on foot. This advance in technology in communication and transportation means that the central government will be able to rule and administer a city that was once too far away more efficiently.
In short, corruption should be determined by the relative distance. Relative distance is itself determined by technology or the era in which the civilization is in.
7. An additional era, the future era, should be added to the game, and the time should end at 2500 AD. Adding the future era will enable us players to play the game using the benefits of future technologies that I suggested above, as well as modern military units that often come too late to make an impact.
8. The graphics of the city view is impressive, but it looks kind of empty. The city view consists nothing other than all the improvements that we have build as well as some random small houses. Designers should either get rid of the city view feature, or improve on it. The one thing about city view that I have a big problem with is that I am in the modern era, and the raods in my city view are dirt road, not concrete roads. And there are no cars. I think city view in Civ I is much better, even though its graphics isn't as impressive.
9. The movement rate should be poportional to the map size. For example, on a small map, a warrior unit can move one square per turn. On a giant map however, the same warrior should be able to move three squares per turn. Corruptions rate should also be poportional to the map size.
10. The palace feature is kind of weird, too. In a game I am playing now, I am in the modern era, and yet my palace is so crappy looking. It doesn't have a paved road leading to the center of the palace, yet. I rather not have the palace feature at all, but that's just a minor thing.
11. Since it is hard to play multiplayer game on Civ III, the fun and challenges of this game can only come from the intelligence of the AI. Civ III's AI, having been drammatically improved, still do things that just don't make sense. AI must be improved more. I don't know anything about computers, so what I am going to say may sound stupid. But they now have computer AI that can defeat the greatest human chess player on earth, so why can't Civ III designers create an AI that can actually be a challenge to us human players without having to resort to cheating?
12. The trading system in Civ III is excellent. It definetly get rid of the fatigue and annoyance of having to drag every caravel/fright unit across the globe to the other side just to make a trade route.
But In Civ III, the only trade that takes place between civilizations seem to be trading of strategic/luxurious resources.
I think more than the trading of strategic/luxury resources, international trade should also generate some revenues, like it did in Alpha Centauri. International trade should work like it did in Alpha Cenaturi.
Trade between two civilizations should provide scientific bonus like it did in Civ II. The civilization that is relatively less advanced, in particular, will recieve more scientific bonus than the civilization that is more advanced if the two civ trade. The assumption is that the less advanced civ has much to learn from the more advanced civ. But since the less advanced civ has little to offer to the more advanced civ, the more advanced civ will recieve less science bonus.
However, the more advanced Civ will have an upper edge in cultural influence if trade occurs between the more advance civ and the less advanced civ. This assumption is based on observation of our modern world. Western cultural influence permeate the world because of its global coporations and the global commercial enterprises.
13. A minor thing. We should be able to forcefully, using our military units, deport enemy civ's units inside our national boarder without causing war. I am tired of telling the AI to move their units out of my country, and they, having agreed, keep on going deeper inside into my teritory.
14. In the area of management, I think Civ III has been a drammatic improvement. Yet, there is always room for even more improvement. I often find myself in situation where I need to drag twenty military units to the same location. If possible, let there be a feature where I can select the twenty military units and give them destination order at the same time so that I don't have to drag all twenty of them twenty times. It is very annoying.
I also find myself in situation, especially toward the modern era, when I have buid all that there is to build and set the city on wealth mode. And then a discovery of a new technology gives me the chance to build a new improvement. This means that I have to go into every single city, and change the production from wealth to building that new improvement. For those of us that have a huge empire of thirty cities, this becomes incredibly tedious.
If you can think of any other management shortcut that should be added to the game, please suggest them. I think one thing that makes Civ III a very long game is all the moving and micromanagement that we have to do. Shortcuts would make this game so much better.
15. Lastly, please make the combat result more realistic. To have my 20th century tank be destroyed by stone age clubmen is just ridiculously frustrating.
These are the ideas that I have for now. If I think of more, I will post them. I hope the designers will serously consider my suggestion. I think these suggestions will make the game much better. If any of you do not like one or more of my ideas, please let me know. I like to hear your comments.
2. Airports should provide some commercial benefit rather than simply producing veteran units.
3. Harbor should increase the number of units of food produced on ocean sqaure by two, not one. Harbor should also be able to provide some commercial benefits.
4. When a city rebels, it is reasonable to expect some military units stationed in that city to be lost forever or get damaged, but not to the extend that all of the units are lost, especially if that city has ten or twenty military units to begin with. It is hard to see how rebellion got started in the first place if there are ten or twenty military units.
5. Future technology should provide some benefits. For example, once players get five future technologies, all of the military units get a bonus in offense. Once players get ten future technologies, shields productions are increased by fifteen percent. Once players get fifteen future technologies, food productions are increased by fifteen percent.
Another way to do this is to divide future technology into four categories of economic, military, and research. When players finishes researching every single future technology and begins to research future technology, players are given the option to direct the research of future technology to either economic or military application. Directing research of future ontechnology to economic application will give economic bonuses. For example, for each future technologies discovered, there will be five percent increase in shield production, or food production or tax revenues. Players can't determine which kind of economic bonus will they recieve. It will be random.
6. Corruption should be determined by political system, implementation of improvements, such as courthouses, that fight corruption, as well as relative distance.
In all of the civ games, corruptions is determined by distance. The assumption is that the further away a city is from the capital, the less easier it is for the central government to control and administer that city efficiently, therefore the more likely that the governor of that city will cheat and become corrupted.
This assumption is only partially right in that it neglects the effect of technology. As communication and transportation technology advances, it becomes easier to go to places that once took years of travel on foot. This advance in technology in communication and transportation means that the central government will be able to rule and administer a city that was once too far away more efficiently.
In short, corruption should be determined by the relative distance. Relative distance is itself determined by technology or the era in which the civilization is in.
7. An additional era, the future era, should be added to the game, and the time should end at 2500 AD. Adding the future era will enable us players to play the game using the benefits of future technologies that I suggested above, as well as modern military units that often come too late to make an impact.
8. The graphics of the city view is impressive, but it looks kind of empty. The city view consists nothing other than all the improvements that we have build as well as some random small houses. Designers should either get rid of the city view feature, or improve on it. The one thing about city view that I have a big problem with is that I am in the modern era, and the raods in my city view are dirt road, not concrete roads. And there are no cars. I think city view in Civ I is much better, even though its graphics isn't as impressive.
9. The movement rate should be poportional to the map size. For example, on a small map, a warrior unit can move one square per turn. On a giant map however, the same warrior should be able to move three squares per turn. Corruptions rate should also be poportional to the map size.
10. The palace feature is kind of weird, too. In a game I am playing now, I am in the modern era, and yet my palace is so crappy looking. It doesn't have a paved road leading to the center of the palace, yet. I rather not have the palace feature at all, but that's just a minor thing.
11. Since it is hard to play multiplayer game on Civ III, the fun and challenges of this game can only come from the intelligence of the AI. Civ III's AI, having been drammatically improved, still do things that just don't make sense. AI must be improved more. I don't know anything about computers, so what I am going to say may sound stupid. But they now have computer AI that can defeat the greatest human chess player on earth, so why can't Civ III designers create an AI that can actually be a challenge to us human players without having to resort to cheating?
12. The trading system in Civ III is excellent. It definetly get rid of the fatigue and annoyance of having to drag every caravel/fright unit across the globe to the other side just to make a trade route.
But In Civ III, the only trade that takes place between civilizations seem to be trading of strategic/luxurious resources.
I think more than the trading of strategic/luxury resources, international trade should also generate some revenues, like it did in Alpha Centauri. International trade should work like it did in Alpha Cenaturi.
Trade between two civilizations should provide scientific bonus like it did in Civ II. The civilization that is relatively less advanced, in particular, will recieve more scientific bonus than the civilization that is more advanced if the two civ trade. The assumption is that the less advanced civ has much to learn from the more advanced civ. But since the less advanced civ has little to offer to the more advanced civ, the more advanced civ will recieve less science bonus.
However, the more advanced Civ will have an upper edge in cultural influence if trade occurs between the more advance civ and the less advanced civ. This assumption is based on observation of our modern world. Western cultural influence permeate the world because of its global coporations and the global commercial enterprises.
13. A minor thing. We should be able to forcefully, using our military units, deport enemy civ's units inside our national boarder without causing war. I am tired of telling the AI to move their units out of my country, and they, having agreed, keep on going deeper inside into my teritory.
14. In the area of management, I think Civ III has been a drammatic improvement. Yet, there is always room for even more improvement. I often find myself in situation where I need to drag twenty military units to the same location. If possible, let there be a feature where I can select the twenty military units and give them destination order at the same time so that I don't have to drag all twenty of them twenty times. It is very annoying.
I also find myself in situation, especially toward the modern era, when I have buid all that there is to build and set the city on wealth mode. And then a discovery of a new technology gives me the chance to build a new improvement. This means that I have to go into every single city, and change the production from wealth to building that new improvement. For those of us that have a huge empire of thirty cities, this becomes incredibly tedious.
If you can think of any other management shortcut that should be added to the game, please suggest them. I think one thing that makes Civ III a very long game is all the moving and micromanagement that we have to do. Shortcuts would make this game so much better.
15. Lastly, please make the combat result more realistic. To have my 20th century tank be destroyed by stone age clubmen is just ridiculously frustrating.
These are the ideas that I have for now. If I think of more, I will post them. I hope the designers will serously consider my suggestion. I think these suggestions will make the game much better. If any of you do not like one or more of my ideas, please let me know. I like to hear your comments.
)
)
