Civ IV wishlist
- Thread starter Mr. Dictator
- Start date
- Status
baldeagle
Copper Miner
I'd like terraforming, refrigeration and such to be brought back.
I'd also like to have the ability to build bridges between continents/islands when there's only on tile of water between them. It could be done by workers in the same way you create colonies/outposts (i. e. the worker is "consumed"), only that it would take two workers - one on each side of the water tile.
I'd also like to have the ability to build bridges between continents/islands when there's only on tile of water between them. It could be done by workers in the same way you create colonies/outposts (i. e. the worker is "consumed"), only that it would take two workers - one on each side of the water tile.
Civil wars would be fun. You could be running the risk of haveing a civil war when your in a state of anarchy or when more then half of your cities/population is revolting or due to distance/corruption.
Would like to see the ability for ships to travel up major rivers, like what's the biggest ship to travel up the mississipi river?
And some sorta canal thing would be nice too. You got the Panama Canal, Suez Canal there's even the St. Lawrence/Great Lakes seaway.
Better governments and less corruption
Would like to see the ability for ships to travel up major rivers, like what's the biggest ship to travel up the mississipi river?
And some sorta canal thing would be nice too. You got the Panama Canal, Suez Canal there's even the St. Lawrence/Great Lakes seaway.
Better governments and less corruption
farting bob
ThEy MaDe Me Do iT.
i dont think i could watch the AI paly themselves for a whole game, especially since usually they end up either always at peace or when they fight only a few cities change sides, then a stalemate begins. watching a Always War AI game woudl be good if it coudl be programmed.
farting bob
ThEy MaDe Me Do iT.
and i like the civil war idea. soem cities become barbs or somethign for a bit, and could get more cities to join them if you dont make them happy again. this coudl be triggerd by any city in disorder for 5 turns or somethign and a warnign after 4. so a long democracy war coudl be bad if your not a religous civ, since yuo coudlnt change gov't withotu bringing all cities but the capital into civil war.
As I painted my house yesterday I thought about how what kind of government I system I would create if I were in charge of Civ4. Here's my what I came up with, borrowing from both Civ3 and SMAC:
Like Civ3 you would have base governments (anarchy, Despotism, monarchy, republic, and democracy, and communism). In addition to this, there are several modifiers to the base governments. The base governments have an effect on corruption and control what modifier options are available. I'll explain:
I came up with 4 modifiers off the top of my head.
1) The police level of the govenrment (full police state with no limits on the government, a police state with some limititions, a state with full civil rights for citizens, no police force at all).
The fewer limits placed on the police force, the better it is at unhappy -> content, but it also reduces the number of content -> happy. Less WW with more restrictive police, but a less productive population. For example: full police state allows 3 military units to quell 2 unhappy people each, but the number of content people made happy are halved.
2) The level of commercial regulation (from a complete communism, throgh a socialist government, capitolism with some oversight, pure capitolism).
The less government interference with business, the more tax income generated and the more productive the population, but the greater the chance of rebellion/WW/unhappyness. For example: perhaps under pure capitolism factories are 1.5x as productive, but also generate 4 unhappy faces (poor labor conditions).
3) Religious Freedom (Religion controlled government, an official state religion, full religious freedom, no religion allowed.)
This could be too controversal, but I think it's realistic. The more religious the government the greater the effect of religious structures and less WW, but perhaps also the religious government reduces scientific output (think opposition to natural selection, or the earth going around the sun), and maybe the religious structures cost more to maintain.
4) Centralization of government (From a fully centralized capitol through a complete decentralization of power).
Basicly would determine the distribution of corruption. The less centralized the government the more evenly distributed the corruption.
The base government you choose would limit which options you have to select from the modifiers. For example, monarchy would require you to have at least an official state religion (kings power comes from God), a democracy requires citizen's rights, communism requires a communist economy, etc.
Anyway, this is the rough sketch of the idea. Don't know why I am putting this out there, except maybe someone would think it interesting.
(edited to repair a couple of typos)
Like Civ3 you would have base governments (anarchy, Despotism, monarchy, republic, and democracy, and communism). In addition to this, there are several modifiers to the base governments. The base governments have an effect on corruption and control what modifier options are available. I'll explain:
I came up with 4 modifiers off the top of my head.
1) The police level of the govenrment (full police state with no limits on the government, a police state with some limititions, a state with full civil rights for citizens, no police force at all).
The fewer limits placed on the police force, the better it is at unhappy -> content, but it also reduces the number of content -> happy. Less WW with more restrictive police, but a less productive population. For example: full police state allows 3 military units to quell 2 unhappy people each, but the number of content people made happy are halved.
2) The level of commercial regulation (from a complete communism, throgh a socialist government, capitolism with some oversight, pure capitolism).
The less government interference with business, the more tax income generated and the more productive the population, but the greater the chance of rebellion/WW/unhappyness. For example: perhaps under pure capitolism factories are 1.5x as productive, but also generate 4 unhappy faces (poor labor conditions).
3) Religious Freedom (Religion controlled government, an official state religion, full religious freedom, no religion allowed.)
This could be too controversal, but I think it's realistic. The more religious the government the greater the effect of religious structures and less WW, but perhaps also the religious government reduces scientific output (think opposition to natural selection, or the earth going around the sun), and maybe the religious structures cost more to maintain.
4) Centralization of government (From a fully centralized capitol through a complete decentralization of power).
Basicly would determine the distribution of corruption. The less centralized the government the more evenly distributed the corruption.
The base government you choose would limit which options you have to select from the modifiers. For example, monarchy would require you to have at least an official state religion (kings power comes from God), a democracy requires citizen's rights, communism requires a communist economy, etc.
Anyway, this is the rough sketch of the idea. Don't know why I am putting this out there, except maybe someone would think it interesting.
(edited to repair a couple of typos)
@Ordep - that is one of the best suggestions I've seen for Civ3 in a long time. 
Maybe you should move to Baltimore to be on their development team. . . .
Maybe you should move to Baltimore to be on their development team. . . .
A second vote for bridges.
Doesn't have to consume workers - should just take a long time.
the length of the bridge I can build should change with tech.
If I can build a pyramid in 4000BC why can't I build a simple stone arch bridge covering 1 tile
If I can build a RR in mountians why can't I build a steel frame two tiled bridge over coastal waters.
If I can build a space rocket, I should be able to build a 4 tile suspension bridge over the sea.
All of which would be very vunerable to bombardment from air, land or sea.
Doesn't have to consume workers - should just take a long time.
the length of the bridge I can build should change with tech.
If I can build a pyramid in 4000BC why can't I build a simple stone arch bridge covering 1 tile
If I can build a RR in mountians why can't I build a steel frame two tiled bridge over coastal waters.
If I can build a space rocket, I should be able to build a 4 tile suspension bridge over the sea.
All of which would be very vunerable to bombardment from air, land or sea.
Originally posted by Turner_727
@Ordep - that is one of the best suggestions I've seen for Civ3 in a long time.
Maybe you should move to Baltimore to be on their development team. . . .
Thanks, Turner, though somehow I doubt they are looking to hire molecular biologists with no game design or programming experience.
(and my wife gets a little upset with my Civ obsession as it is, I couldn't imagine what she'd think if it was my job. Honey, I'm not "playing" Civ, I'm doing research. . . )
Actually, why wouldn't they?
Look at it this way:
You're a scientist, so you go through things systematically.
You're willing to adhere to a set of rules.
You're intelligent, and capable of using the old noodle.
You don't have game design or programming experience, so you're not limited to the 'old school' methods. (Which some software companies might look for.)
And you're an addict, so Civ'll come first!
Sounds like a good resume to me.
No reason why you couldn't be on the concept design team, (assuming they have one) or at the very least armchair-quarterback the developers. That is, if they were willing to take you seriously.
Look at it this way:
You're a scientist, so you go through things systematically.
You're willing to adhere to a set of rules.
You're intelligent, and capable of using the old noodle.
You don't have game design or programming experience, so you're not limited to the 'old school' methods. (Which some software companies might look for.)
And you're an addict, so Civ'll come first!
Sounds like a good resume to me.
No reason why you couldn't be on the concept design team, (assuming they have one) or at the very least armchair-quarterback the developers. That is, if they were willing to take you seriously.
Pirate
Emperor
Tunnels, not bridges. Bridges are unrealistic. The longest suspension bridge in the world is 2 kilometers long in Japan. Even if it were possible to build one 10 times that long it still wouldn't be one tile of a map. Bridges of that size are too unstable. Tunnels are the way to go. The Chunnel is 50 kilometers long. With the tech available in the game, it should be possible to go 1 tile max with a tunnel. And tunnels like that take enormous amounts of technology and money - not possible until the late Modern Ages.
Your comparisons are just not accurate. Nothing like a 4 tile bridge, or even a 2 tile coastal one, has ever been seen in this world and most likely won't be seen.
Your comparisons are just not accurate. Nothing like a 4 tile bridge, or even a 2 tile coastal one, has ever been seen in this world and most likely won't be seen.
Ordep i love your ideas for goverments as a base type, with modifiers applied to them. it really does allow more freedom to how you play it, and more importantly it allows the computer to have differences between the races.
as for the actual suggestions,
i think that 3 and 4 should be there, there is no reason why they are not feasible. and they should be there from the start.
as for 1, [police state] i think this should not come into play till the industrial age and nationalism.
as for the actual suggestions,
i think that 3 and 4 should be there, there is no reason why they are not feasible. and they should be there from the start.
as for 1, [police state] i think this should not come into play till the industrial age and nationalism.
I figure the limitations would be based upon the type of government you are using, with some options requiring specific technologies. As a possible example:
Despotism (high corruption):
(1) must be full police state
(2) no communism allowed
(3) no limitation on religion
(4) must be fully centralized government
In addition, in order to have socialism you must have researched industrialism or in order to have a religion controlled govenrment you must have researched polytheism.
I haven't tried to go through and figure out what all the details would be for each govenment, but you can imagine all the possibilities. Instead of just choosing a democracy, you could have a socialist democracy with an official state religion and a fairly dispersed government. Instead of having a USSR based communism, you could have a utopian communism with full religious freedom, full civil rights for the people, and a completely decentralized government.
I agree that the goverment you are using would impose limitations on what changes you could make.
but the crucial factor has to be, that they are tech triggered.
the earlier gov's should have more limitations on what they can affect. while the later ones, democracy, communism and fanaticism should have more freedom.
actually, what you think about racial tollerance in the game?
but the crucial factor has to be, that they are tech triggered.
the earlier gov's should have more limitations on what they can affect. while the later ones, democracy, communism and fanaticism should have more freedom.
actually, what you think about racial tollerance in the game?
Mr. Dictator
A Chain-Smoking Fox
i think that certain civs should be almost 100% sure to be a certain gov't, because i really hate when everyone is a democracy and Propaganda doesnt work
speaking of spies, they should be revamped greatly, like bringing back the individual units
speaking of spies, they should be revamped greatly, like bringing back the individual units
The Great Apple
Big Cheese
I posted this a while ago, but it seems to fit here, and nobody much read the first post... 
(Quote has been edited slightly for sense reasons)
Comments?
(Quote has been edited slightly for sense reasons)
Comments?
The Great Apple
Big Cheese
I agree, but I think they'll have to be carefull not to 'do a CtP'. In a game of Civ at the moment, I find I've either won, or lost, by the mid industrial age, the third our of four. In CTP it was the same time, the third out of six... by the time you got the cool stuff it was pointless.
I have never tried CtP II or ToT, but at what stage the human usually overcomes the AI needs to be thought of, or you risk long drawn out endgames...
- Status
