Civ V - One World Speculation Thread!

[kungming2]

If we are on the topic of small textual changes that don't really change anything, I'd like special calendars for every civ, not just the Maya. I want to see Ab urbe condita for the Romans and Year of the Hijra for the Arabs.

Yes! I'd love this! If the Mayans can have their own calendar in-game, the other civs should be able to have them too.

 

[Pouakai]

But the problem with Ab urbe condita in the context of the game would be that the founding of Rome is 4000 BC, not 753 BC, so it'd just be a count from the start of the game

 

[mitsho]

Just as the birth of Christ doesn't make much sense in a game without Christianity? And besides that, how would the brutes in 4000 BC know that it's 4000 more years til the birth of Christ? It's just flavour, nothing more.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I would find having a different calender for each civ to be confusing. I like to have a solid way to compare my progress from one game to the next without having to math it out.

 

[SnowKomodo]

It's just flavour, nothing more.

My response to half the things people say around here when they try to make sense historically of Civ as a game

 

[Pouakai]

I would find having a different calender for each civ to be confusing. I like to have a solid way to compare my progress from one game to the next without having to math it out.

The Mayan calendar has the global date in the tooltip when you hover over it (eg. 1780 AD in the rest of the world)

 

[de_baser]

The Mayan calendar has the global date in the tooltip when you hover over it (eg. 1780 AD in the rest of the world)

Which is arguably dumb and time-consuming design.
I always like to have the clock and date available instantly, be it in-game or IRL.

Think of it like this; why do all phones, smartphones, ipads, and TV's have volume controls installed on them with individual buttons? Cause you wanna have instant access to fixing any potential problems encountered related to volume (and have unexpectged noise blaring way topo loud in your ears is often one of these issues), it's not a thing you wanna go setting -> audio -> volume for or whatever.

The same with date. I think it's annoying with mousing over for the Mayans. I'd like it fixed to see the AD as well, if we can have a format like "Turn 95 - 280 BC - 3.2.34.5.24" that would be nice for any kind of calendar-based flavour.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I can't help but feel this thread is descending into anarchy over a.. calendar :|

 

[mitsho]

My response to half the things people say around here when they try to make sense historically of Civ as a game

I'm not sure I get what you are saying... Is that a critique or are you agreeing with me? (it's minor, I like to add always as well )

I would find having a different calender for each civ to be confusing. I like to have a solid way to compare my progress from one game to the next without having to math it out.

I have to agree with de_baser on that. If you want to compare the progress, it's best to look at the turn number, since the actual dates are off as often, especially in advanced starts. Turn numbers also have the same intervall and not a changing one. So they best show the turn number aside whatever calendar they use. (I think that's already an option to toggle off/on, no?)

 

[smallfish]

I'm not sure I get what you are saying... Is that a critique or are you agreeing with me? (it's minor, I like to add always as well )

Pretty sure he is agreeing with you by saying this is what he does to other less funny folks...

 

[Scaramanga]

Portugal, with the first global empire, should be in an expansion called "One World". Hopefully they won't add too many more nations because it's overwhelming to try to play them all but I'm betting the Shaka and the Zulu will rise again. Khmer and Mali would be nice too. Maybe a plethora of city-states will be included (Kabul, Muscat, Majapahit).

 

[WeneedmoreCivs]

First off, I would like more diplo options. ie. instead of just "i hate you, i love your, or meh" more types of feeling from ai civs as well as more types of agreements.
In my opinion, they could make iron important late game by adding in a steel mill which would increase production or something and consume one iron. You could also make horses useful by building a happiness building for them, or a glue factory .
As far as one thing i do know, if there is an expansion pack, there WILL be more civs. please no more european civs. something different to play with would be nice, massai, sumeria, zulu, bantu, native americans, anything but more euros.
UN seems kinda blah, and i never hear anyone say much about it, so imo it needs revamping.
Two more policy trees would add some spice to the game.
As we all know, with new xpacs comes new units. The main thing i dont like about ciV is the lack luster combat choices. In the beginning u get warriors. Then spear guys which turn into pike guys, or if u have iron sword guys, which turn into guys with longer swords etc. etc. For a game with so much content, seems kinda bland. I like in civ4 its basically axe beats spear beats horsie guy beats axe etc. Im not saying copy it, but make a system of choices for us so we dont just end up spamming 3ish types of units. Also I like the WWI and II additions, but the late game just ends with mech inf., stealth bomber, modern armor, gdr etc. a handful of new "future era" units would be nice to play with too.
With diplo,unit,tech, new additions plus fixes for mp ai etc., i think this game could be on par with civ4, but we all have our own opinions...... except north kor........nm. : )

I agree with you 100%

And I had to comment, I love your idea of a glue factory!

 

[AbsintheRed]

Hopefully they won't add too many more nations because it's overwhelming to try to play them all

Really?
Interesting opinion...

 

[dagriggstar]

It's not so much having so many civs to play as that irks me.....

But when they don't update the pre-existing ones to take advantage of new features. I mean, India and China between them "founded" almost half (5 of 11) the religions you can pick in game - yet have no faith bonuses...While other civs that didn't found a religion get big faith bonuses...

 

[poom3619]

I personally want things in addition to others posted

The victory picture is okay. But I think "okay" is not okay for me, especially in the era that we can Google an awesome picture. I think having well-crafted animation is essential if I want to have some "good old day" feeling toward CiV in future.

I also think hilarious advisers (High council?) could be nice addition to any Civ-game. I never played Civ2 and would feels great if I can have some laugh in CiV.

As a EU3 and CK2 player, I suggest some kind of Casus Belli (Justification for war) to make war actually mean something. Declare War without one or end up conquer more than CB can led to denunciation from warmongering from other (and should affect more as time goes by and people are more "civilized") and if you start war with CB and end up significantly "failed" to fulfill it, You will take some happiness hit and increased risk of rebellion or sort of.

Oh yes, I think national wonders may be tweaked to being more powerful as you have more quantity of strategic resource . I personally don't like sitting on 60 of useless iron in late game. Let's say Ironworks might produce +5 hammer and +1 per 8 iron so bigger civ could get reasonable advantage over smalerl one.

 

[kamex]

I personally want things in addition to others posted

The victory picture is okay. But I think "okay" is not okay for me, especially in the era that we can Google an awesome picture. I think having well-crafted animation is essential if I want to have some "good old day" feeling toward CiV in future.

I also think hilarious advisers (High council?) could be nice addition to any Civ-game. I never played Civ2 and would feels great if I can have some laugh in CiV.

As a EU3 and CK2 player, I suggest some kind of Casus Belli (Justification for war) to make war actually mean something. Declare War without one or end up conquer more than CB can led to denunciation from warmongering from other (and should affect more as time goes by and people are more "civilized") and if you start war with CB and end up significantly "failed" to fulfill it, You will take some happiness hit and increased risk of rebellion or sort of.

Oh yes, I think national wonders may be tweaked to being more powerful as you have more quantity of strategic resource . I personally don't like sitting on 60 of useless iron in late game. Let's say Ironworks might produce +5 hammer and +1 per 8 iron so bigger civ could get reasonable advantage over smalerl one.

I think Casus Belli would be great. If you could state you were declaring war just to liberate CS, and then fulfill it, without taking other cities etc. then you should get diplomacy bonuses with other Civs (except the one you attacked of course)

 

[Liex]

Perhaps a Casus Belli system is what diplomacy needs to be less confusing and arbitrary. Also, it would help the players to keep track of the events, to build a "history" in their minds. Sometimes I'm warring for so long that I end up forgetting the reason; sometimes there isn't a reason at all, things are just... happening.

Then each war could have a name, depending on the Casus Belli and the belligerents. Eg.: "Christian Holy war against Islam", "Mongol invasion of Arabia", "War for Hanoi's freedom", "World War I, II, III etc." (when most players are involved). I don't know if there was something like this in previous civ. games, but I think it would be great.

 

[Gucumatz]

I think a lot of people want a Casus Belli system in Civ. Heres hoping if its done its implemented well

 

[poom3619]

I think Casus Belli would be great. If you could state you were declaring war just to liberate CS, and then fulfill it, without taking other cities etc. then you should get diplomacy bonuses with other Civs (except the one you attacked of course)

Yes, and it might be a way to control AI's diplomacy by limit their un-CBed war and add some flavor to leaders. It can be synched with other existing aspect of game like Just War or God of War or Goddess of Protection belief and some CB may be like "You settle on MY land"(a) "You are infidel that attack my faithful civ" "You took my city (b)" "You are attack civ that I DoF for most of the game so far" "You are warmonger" "You place nuclear weapon near my land" or from AC "You try to frame us for your subversive action" but not something like "I going to lose anyway if I DoW you but I want to kill your kind as many as I can" thing.


Another idea. I am annoyed by the fact that half of the population is "disappeared" when the city is conquered. I sometime feel like "I hate your nation but I love your 30-pop city why you have to die. 15 valuable citizen " I think there should be few more option about what you will do with town you just conquered like "Control" "Conquer" "Plunder" "Exterminate" "Raze" which exterminating and razing will cause diplomatic hit.

(a) with anyone's "land" which is neutral can be shown to and set his own by player, as someone in this thread suggest
(b) As core province in EU3, It is one's city when one settled it or controlled (not puppeted) for 30 turns in Standard game

 

[kaspergm]

We definitely need a Casus Beli. Current diplomacy system is just so unsatisfactory. Warmonger penalties for conquering someone who's been a real nuisance to everybody and who declared war on you is just silly.