Civ V - One World Speculation Thread!

[Bechhold]

Just have the individual policies and even the policy tress evolve with each age/technology i.e. Printing Press etc.

 

[Art Grin]

I don't believe a CB mechanic would work well in Civ5 or Civ in general. The mechanic works in Paradox games, but those games focus on a far smaller timeframe and are province based unlike civ.
Just fix how the AI reacts to warmongering and that's it, CBs would be more of a nuisance then a help in Civ5 imho.

What's the need of a colonization focus?
It was a something that only happened because the European civs got a big techlead compared to everyone else and simply went out conquering smaller civs for resources. Just make more advanced civs be more aggressive about acquiring resources from less advnced civs or more interested in founding far away cities if you want colonization/imperialism that much.

 

[Babri]

It isn't an opinion. It is a fact. Any casus belli implementation in the expansion would be awful and I can guarantee we would all be here a week within release saying that implementation is poor and completely out-of-left-field for a civilization game.

No it is not. However it is a fact that what you are saying is an opinion. Since it is not implemented yet nor it ever happened, u can't call it a fact. Does anybody disagree?

Also coming in a thread & calling everybody wrong is a childish behaviour. If u want to share your opinion, thats fine but don't try to force your point down other people's throat!

Sent from my One V using Tapatalk 2

 

[Babri]

What's the need of a colonization focus?
It was a something that only happened because the European civs got a big techlead compared to everyone else and simply went out conquering smaller civs for resources. Just make more advanced civs be more aggressive about acquiring resources from less advnced civs or more interested in founding far away cities if you want colonization/imperialism that much.

I think it was the other way around. Exploitation of the New World enables the Europeans to completely dominate the world for couple of centuries. New trade routes were discovered for example which diminished the value of other Eastern countries.



Sent from my One V using Tapatalk 2

 

[MacAurther]

I completely agree. It was the territory and resources gained by the Europeans after colonization that made their empires so powerful, so a colonization mechanic or social policy has relevance in CiV, in my opinion. If colonization were to be implemented, however, I think it should not be synonymous with imperialism, as imperialism is a much broader category that includes colonial imperialism, economic imperialism, cultural imperialism, political imperialism, et cetera.

 

[Sonereal]

I completely agree. It was the territory and resources gained by the Europeans after colonization that made their empires so powerful, so a colonization mechanic or social policy has relevance in CiV, in my opinion. If colonization were to be implemented, however, I think it should not be synonymous with imperialism, as imperialism is a much broader category that includes colonial imperialism, economic imperialism, cultural imperialism, political imperialism, et cetera.

Really, the circumstances that drove colonization in real life would be hard to duplicate in game. Why did Spain want silver so bad? To trade with the Chinese of course.

As such, you don't need a colonization mechanic. You need improved trade mechanics to drive imperialism.

 

[KingGustaf]

Hello people! long time lurker, but this is my first post

Anyway, I don't think I saw this anywhere, so here is my input on the possible meaning of One World

Historically, after WWII and at the beginning of the Cold War, there was a famous book written by Wendell Willkie called "One World". This is peculiar that they share the same name. And in face, a lot of what people seem to want can be hinted at by looking at what this book is about.

"One World" is basically about America not necessarily imposing their own politics on other nations during the Cold War, but letting nations that were devastated by WWII set up their own stable political systems, independent of the US, so they can fend off the Soviets (alert me if I am wrong, that is the impression I get from it). Once nations can adequately defend themselves from any superpower, they can all band together and become One World made of separate, free nations.

It also does support imperialism, in the sense of pre-WWII levels. Willkie basically states that the kind of government is unimportant to the freedoms it can bring, and imperialism can bring out these rights in the nations. Yet mainly securing natural human rights in these nations works as well. He then goes on, like I said, to claim that some sort of world coalition of power is necessary to keep this balance.

From this I can draw improvements in Diplomacy, as well as various influences in types of government/spheres of influence coming in the next expansion. Possibly the return of specific types of ruling styles (as the basis of One World was to allow nations to use their own political systems), and even colonies. Maybe the connection with this book is pure coincidence and means nothing, but I think that what the game is lacking fits very well into the themes in this book.

I thought this was worth pointing out. And I didn't read the book, but I have read books about the history around the book (if that makes sense), so my thoughts could be wrong. And I tried to look for this throughout the forum, but I possibly skipped over it, so I'm sorry if this is a repeat idea ._.

 

[poom3619]

I just have two ideas.
1. Maybe there will be some kind of factor that duplicate riches from colonization. Like Market-ish and harbor-ish building that cause luxury resource yield more (via trade and work) depended on how far it is from one's region and how rare it is. Trade routes could being established in place of luxury and strategic resource trading via diplomacy screen.

2. Unique Policy, which would be a tier 2 and tier 3 (that you'll adopt to finish a tree) that boost Unique Building and/or Civ's play-style or an buffed version of current one. Ex. China UP may be replacement of Monarchy and +1 Gold and -1 happiness per 4 citizen in 5 largest city.

 

[Babri]

Really, the circumstances that drove colonization in real life would be hard to duplicate in game. Why did Spain want silver so bad? To trade with the Chinese of course.

As such, you don't need a colonization mechanic. You need improved trade mechanics to drive imperialism.

Well that is what colonization feature will be about i.e to make colonization viable unlike cIV where it was more troublesome than beneficial.

Currently we can colonize other continents like on Terra but it is relatively unprofitable & no fun since AI fails to put up any challenge there.

Few ideas regarding colonization:-

Colony cities would act much like puppet cities but much more profitable due to trade routes & gold income they would provide due to rare luxuries.

Colonies might generate revolts depending upon the condition of your empire & their financial strength. So richer colonies would be difficult to hold. As the game progresses it might become a bit more difficult to hold colonies together.

All resources won't be the same, each one providing different small boosts other than happiness. If u capitalize majority of a resource you will get larger version of the boost, thus encouraging colonization & making resources much more valuable.

Some sort of demand & supply system replacing we love the king's day (a simple one). For example the people might demand or request tobacco & if u fulfill it, u get rewards, failure to comply might result in penalties depending upon how important it is. This would promote capitalization of resources.
The demands would naturally depend upon your tech level, the available resources etc. Resources less in supply on your continent would be more valuable for your nation & thus provide bigger boost if u get it.

Sent from my One V using Tapatalk 2

 

[smallfish]

Currently we can colonize other continents like on Terra but it is relatively unprofitable & no fun since AI fails to put up any challenge there.

This is mainly because there is very little incentive to colonize the other continent on Terra, unless you set the CS count really super low (like ~10). For instance, there are no unique luxes there that can't be found back home...

What I would like to see them improve is the map script itself by giving the New World more room and unique luxuries for colonization games

 

[grandgeneralbob]

a CB system isnt going to stop you from declaring war, all it would do is gauge ur diplomatic penalty against other civs depending on their point of view.
i personally like the cb system, but not everybody is going to like everything about every game. people like hexes, or dont, stacks of doom, or dont etc.... most of the arguments are basically saying the same thing, in civ4, if you had the "holy city" of say hindus, there would be more negative relations vs other religions than someone with a few hindu cities. i think that taking that from civ4, and expanding it with new ideas and new options would make the game more enjoyable. and i dont think you should need any cb to dow anyone, as some have said previously.
just think of the real reasons why countries go to war
alliances,religion,territory,resources/land disputes and the list goes on.
personally, the cb system would give us more buttons to push, and i like to push buttons

 

[Babri]

This is mainly because there is very little incentive to colonize the other continent on Terra, unless you set the CS count really super low (like ~10). For instance, there are no unique luxes there that can't be found back home...

What I would like to see them improve is the map script itself by giving the New World more room and unique luxuries for colonization games

I know. That is why suggested mechanics & luxury placement to favour colonization when possible, along with the possible dangers such as revolts etc.


Sent from my One V using Tapatalk 2

 

[True_Candyman]

2. Unique Policy, which would be a tier 2 and tier 3 (that you'll adopt to finish a tree) that boost Unique Building and/or Civ's play-style or an buffed version of current one. Ex. China UP may be replacement of Monarchy and +1 Gold and -1 happiness per 4 citizen in 5 largest city.

I LOVE this idea! I know so many people (myself included) that stay in their shell when it comes to social policies, it would be great to encourage people to try new things and experiment

 

[Kizo]

I LOVE this idea! I know so many people (myself included) that stay in their shell when it comes to social policies, it would be great to encourage people to try new things and experiment

Wouldn't that have the opposite effect, though? A unique social policy would likely be so integral to the way a civ is played that you'd take it every time, rather than diversifying your choices based on your environment.

 

[Pouakai]

Wouldn't that have the opposite effect, though? A unique social policy would likely be so integral to the way a civ is played that you'd take it every time, rather than diversifying your choices based on your environment.

But if you were like me and always took Liberty, Commerce, Rationalism and Order, then having a Unique Policy in Freedom or Honor for a civilization would mean I would go there instead of my normal route

 

[AlazkanAssassin]

But if you were like me and always took Liberty, Commerce, Rationalism and Order, then having a Unique Policy in Freedom or Honor for a civilization would mean I would go there instead of my normal route

But then EVERYONE would ALWAYS go to that policy when they play as that civ. Right now the only problem is that you don't know when to make good use of the other policy trees.

However, it is interesting to think of a civ with SEVERAL unique policies, in mutually exclusive trees. That way you will always get a bonus, but you get to pick it based on how you want to play that game.
Example: +1 culture per city added to Piety completion bonus; AND +1 culture per city added to the Rationalism opener.

 

[anandus]

I want info. Even just a hint would be enough. Something to satisfy my curiosity.

 

[awesome]

The main problem with that is that it wouldn't fit for every civilization. Like, I thought of a couple different possible examples of unique policies, but in the midde of typing then up, a lot of them were in policies that aren't mutually exclusive. Like this is exactly what went on only head: "Rome can choose either extra attack in an honor policy or extra culture in a rationalism policy...wait, those aren't exclusive..." Or maybe that doesn't always matter.

 

[Totibbs]

Would also be great to have something implemented for Migration of Population. From one city to another, but also from one Civilization/city state to another.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I've said few times that I think it would be nice that the policies within a tree would be mutually exclusive, i.e opportunity cost would be present, do you want your Honor to be a defensive or an offensive? and you could mix and match, you can either get a bonus to attacking or a bonus to defending. or something like that