Civilization 5

[bestbrian]

I don't know how feasible this would be to implement (and I don't think it would be very popular), but how about having techs spread; sort of like religions, but a much slower rate. You discover, say, MC. After that the MC "leaks" to surrounding civs (at a higher rate with open borders and proximity; less with distance and certain civics, like mercantilism or state prop). Now I'm not advocating AIs gaining our hard researched techs a few turns after we're done, but there should be some leakage (maybe a few beakers worth a turn towards the research of that tech) to reflect apprentices leaving to set up shop, spread of research, etc. Perhaps, there could be an espionage function that serves to slow the rate of leakage? It just seems to me, that knowledge spreads and cannot be contained and that this function would reflect that.

Also for Civ 5, I advocate the inclusion of being able to acquire techs from conquered cities, and the replacement of copper with tin (more historically accurate, but only a cosmetic change).

 

[asder2]

all units should should have a pop. cost

there should be city sprawl in that for every three or so pop. points there would be a new square of city(which would either go to the best adjecent square or the one of your choice) and each square would have its own production queue or they would all work towards the same end. this could play along with the earlier suggestion of being able to build multiple factories/etc. to increase production.

the map should be round after the advent of the proper real world science is found.

public opinon should play a much greater role. each citizen on top of the normal happy/content/unhappy indicator should also be things like conservative/progressive and pacifist/agressive. expansionist/isolationist

civ triats should change over time based on gameplay style. no one would today would say that britian is expansionist.

you should be able to spread resources like planting corn or raising horses into new tiles if you have access to it.

religion should not be rigid. you should be able create your own religion in a more complex version of the civics screen. worship/salvation/deity(deities), etc.

there should be scales on the civics screen on top of a more complex system such as a libertarian/totalitarian civil liberties, communist/capitalist/command economy, etc. as well as a constitution option which would affect happiness and war weariness as well as the stability of your goverment.

empires should collaspe upon ideological,religious,cultural differences and geological isolation.

manufactured goods should be introduced. say you could have one city producing automobiles which you could then trade to another country.

the tech rate slider should be the equivalent of NASA and most progress happens due to what terrian and resources you have access to. most resources(barring metals like aluminum and uranium) would be visible from the start. ex. people with horses will develop horseback riding and island nations will figure out the sail and wind propulsion.

costumizable units are a most and experience should be able to be bulit in with a production cost. e.i. training

civ should start far earlier in mans past and end far longer in to mans future. start with fire and the concept of time, death and end with terraforming and solar wind propulsion etc.

if you have it to were the populize elects you you should have to worry about getting elected agian.

there should be 4 turns per year. it would make it much more realistic.

early settlers should found city states. no race was ever unified from the get go. right now ancient greece can't happen in civ.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

I'd like for them to do every thing they did in Civ 4: Beyond the Sword, but bring back the option that was in Civ III for a military alliance with a civ, against another civ. Where 1 leader could bribe another to go to war against a common enemy that neither of you liked. Also somehow make a way for luxuries and resouces to be traded in combinations with techs. And figure out a way to make this possible and still be fair and unexploitable. For example, as long as you have these turn deals going that it's not possible to declare war on that nation with out...

a)cancelling the deal and having to wait a short number of turns
b)taking a HUGE relations penalty with all other civs for doing so.

I just miss some of the diplomacy options they stripped.

Another thing is this: Why in the entire existance of the game of Civilization has their never been Constantine the great?!?? This is a man that has meant so much to civilization and history itself. It's a true crime that he's not been in Civ! I mean he only was the first to officially reccognize christianity, split the Roman empire into east & west (thus preserving it), founded his own civilization, was the first emperor ever of the Byzantine empire, and founded the super-city now known as Istanbul (formerly Constaninople). The Byzantine Empire lasted for 1100 years and he created it. And his city that he created still stands today as one of the worlds greatest metropolises.

Please put Constantine The Great in Civ!


Oh yea, and I'd like for them to bring back the option to build on to your palace and also see the arial view of how your city looks in 3d with all it's improvment glory (two nice features in civIII.)

 

[Vandal Warlord]

In Civ 5 there should be has to be more Earth maps! Earth maps are awesome but theres no Bts leaders and it really stinks to have to play with the Civ4 leaders.

 

[IcyFrozen]

Well lets face it the diplomatic system in this game sucks.

its look Option A leads to option B leads to option C.

I'll only be satisfied when you can force demilitarization, reparations, threaten other factions when they get too many units near your border, etc.

As far as the Aerial system goes; Since WW1 Aerial combat has been the main stage of all conflicts. And yet in a game based upon civilization as we know it air units have 2 very bland options for usage.. 4 if you count reconaisance and intercept.

 

[IcyFrozen]

A message to the game designers:

For Civ5 please please do NOT give Mao ZeDong to the Chinese.
Giving Mao to China is the same as Hitler for Germany or Stalin for Russia.

As a Chinese, i can't believe someone would identify himself with this murderer.

Thank you

In all honesty I've always wondered why they didnt do that. I realize the unpopularity (and semi-evil nature) of those particular rulers make them taboo but they do represent a major historical period for that particular civilization. I'd love to see Civilization go beyond the social stigmata and represent civilization as it is historical was.

I also think thats why alot of nations are getting excluded from the Civilization line up. People think Canada, for example, is filled with dumb peace-lovers so we dont get included in any civ games, yet were the ones in the war zones cleaning up American mistakes. Theres something to be said for Diplomatic-based factions instead of just military-based ones. Plus i think a peace-based faction designed for peacekeeping and diplomacy would be a really weird and unexpected new direction.. kinda like the Peacekeepers in SMAC.

I also noticed Atrocities from SMAC never made it over to Civ either, I'm guessing again the idea of 'Atrocities' was just too unacceptable for the Civ franchaise. I'd like to see the game a little more opened up like SMAC, you can do horrible stuff like that but you can get nailed with harsh diplomatic/trade etc penalties for 'commiting atrocities'. Maybe adopt a MOO3 system and get voted out of the UN or something like that. Would open the door for stuff like Chemical and Biological Warfare to finally get included as well.

Drop the social-stigamata and lets have Civ5 as an honest real-world representation game instead of candy-coated 'gloss-over-anything-someone-might-not-like' game.

 

[rysmiel]

all units should should have a pop. cost

That would slow growth down way way too much.

there should be city sprawl in that for every three or so pop. points there would be a new square of city(which would either go to the best adjecent square or the one of your choice)

How big is a square supposed to actually represent, though ?

I like the thought of cities spreading, and being able to work larger areas when they spread, but I've never seen a mechanic proposed for that that actually sounded workable; I'd be inclined to think that maybe size 20 or 40 is reasonable for this.

public opinon should play a much greater role. each citizen on top of the normal happy/content/unhappy indicator should also be things like conservative/progressive and pacifist/agressive. expansionist/isolationist

I don't like that as a notion; it would be frustrating if it were outside your control, and I don't really see any way in which it would be fun or useful if you needed to control it at a more detailed level than "citizens you keep happy are more likely to do what you like."

civ triats should change over time based on gameplay style. no one would today would say that britian is expansionist.

Individual civ traits should be scrapped; the differences between civilisations should be entirely at the strategy/gameplay level, and if you really want the specific bonuses that specific traits have, put in a wonder that gives that benefit so players who want that benefit can make it a priority of their strategy to get that wonder.

religion should not be rigid. you should be able create your own religion in a more complex version of the civics screen. worship/salvation/deity(deities), etc.

What would be the point, in gameplay terms ?

there should be scales on the civics screen on top of a more complex system such as a libertarian/totalitarian civil liberties, communist/capitalist/command economy, etc. as well as a constitution option which would affect happiness and war weariness as well as the stability of your goverment.

Civics should be scrapped, and fixed governments reinstalled; I'm all for a wider variety of fixed government options, though.

empires should collaspe upon ideological,religious,cultural differences and geological isolation.

I see no reason to simulate this at a level more detailed than cities going into anarchy when too many people are unhappy, and governments collapsing when too many people go into anarchy; what would it add to gameplay to have a different mechanism in there ?

costumizable units are a most and experience should be able to be bulit in with a production cost. e.i. training

I am very strongly opposed to this. Fixed units, same units available to everyone, no training or experience beyond promotions to veteran or elite as in Civ 3; if you want a unit that's stronger in a specific direction, make it a different unit, not a promotion.

civ should start far earlier in mans past and end far longer in to mans future. start with fire and the concept of time, death and end with terraforming and solar wind propulsion etc.

I'd say a little farther into the past, and optionally a way into the future.

if you have it to were the populize elects you you should have to worry about getting elected agian.

Again, what does it benefit the gameplay to have this work at any level more complicated than anarchy as I describe it above ?

there should be 4 turns per year. it would make it much more realistic.

Realism is only worth having if it makes the game more fun, and I don't see how this idea even adds to the realism.

 

[IcyFrozen]

Civics should be scrapped, and fixed governments reinstalled; I'm all for a wider variety of fixed government options, though.

I agree with most of your points but this. I like the Civics system. As the other guy mentioned, Civs change over time. The English are no longer expansionist, The French are not Warlike etc. Civics are the way that you influence your Civs overall themes.

The problem with the system is the options that have been given and the effects that occur. They need to make the Civics more broad to represent very widespread options. They also need to add another category to represent the Direction your civilization is heading in (Destiny,Goal whatever). Its gotten more goal oriented and has moved away from the idea of it being a civilization wide decision. Plus some things are just not put where they should be, for example Pacifism is not a religious choice. It is, at best, a doctrine of a particular religion (Buddhism). They started to reflect personal choices and not civilization choices.

If they were straightened around a bit I think they could be very effective.

I see no reason to simulate this at a level more detailed than cities going into anarchy when too many people are unhappy, and governments collapsing when too many people go into anarchy; what would it add to gameplay to have a different mechanism in there ?

I'd like to see the pople have a bit more say, maybe just encouraging you to change a Civ or something. Like the people want Representation or something like that. Currently it does seem a bit like your civilization is filled with mindless drones. Even if all you get from saying no is just a minor happiness penalty for a few turns.

Civil warfare might be a bit much.. I'd like to see cities rebel and go independant again though. I question why a border city always jumps to another power.. why dont they just become independant? Start a whole new faction.

I'd say a little farther into the past, and optionally a way into the future.

Strictly speaking the only way they could go further back would be to introduce Clubmen (Axemen with clubs), Basic Tools and Basic Communication as Techs and move the date back. Other then that theres not much further back in history that relates to Civilization.

Strictly speaking Civ picks up pretty much at the end of the Hunter-Gather stage of development which would be really difficult to put into a game.. Pretty much it would be moving from here to here and getting attacked by the odd animal which could be devestating if it wiped out your one or two units.

Plus you'd have the issue of alternate Hominids.. Cromagnons and such.. or if your a Creationist a great hand from the sky dropping your units to the ground.


My other big idea though is to change Religion. I think it should be a playable 'meta-faction'. When you think about it each Religion has a core city (Chrisitian-Jerusalem or Vatican, Muslim-Mecca, etc) from there you could spread to cities controlled by other players and effectively use those cities as though they were your own. Gain resources and such. Produce units( Crusaders and such). I think it would make Religion a lot more interesting if it played more of a role then happiness and civs.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

I'd like to see a Create A Leader option that works the same way Create-A-Wrestler works in those WWE Smackdown games and the EA Sports games to create a player. I think it would be cool to create a leader that somewhat resembles yourself, then name him after yourself and create your own civilization to shape it how you want it. It would be awesome to make an alliance in your name with Washington, or to go to war against Ceaser and Rome etc. It adds alot more fun to the game and let's the player live out their wildest dreams.

With that there should be a way to choose the character traits and unique units and buildings for that leader/civ.

Mods are one thing (those are mostly about history though), but Customization is another and the Civ franchise definately needs some customization to give to it's players... especially for the majority who are not computer programmers and don't know the first thing about modding, even when they try.

 

[Scilly_guy]

Civ 3 had that, although I think you had to stick with just changing an existing race.

The diplomacy needs to be sorted, I don't care how aggressive your neighbour is, if he says he is pleased with you he should not go to war with you with out warning. And why is there only the option to demand tribute, can you not request aid?

Your people do currently want changes in civics, well at least they want emancipation. I agree that they should not necessarily switch to another civ but perhaps try making it on their own.

I've said it in other threads but I'll say it again, have land claimable, instead of relying on culture for your borders to spread, you must be strong enough to support a right to claim land. You could perhaps start slightly earlier in history if you had ownership as a technology; before you discover it you can work whatever tiles you like, the tiles you work is your land, but you have no "border", this works well with the claiming land mechanic.

I have also mentioned creating your own unions instead of just the Apolistic palace and UN, it needs work on the foundations that I have laid but it could be interesting.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

Civ 3 had that, although I think you had to stick with just changing an existing race.

You could never create a leader in civ 3. You could create a scenerio and a map but that was it. You had to own Poser and know how to do graphics if you even wanted to think about creating a new leader. Not only that, but to make it work, you had to use a Civ that was already in the game and go by their characteristics and Unique Units. (Granted you could change statistical variables in the editor.)

 

[Scilly_guy]

So you are more concerned with what your avatar looks like? It would be nice to choose your unique unit, building, civ traits and leader characteristics rather than choosing from a predefined set. Like you say this is possible through modding, as to technical ability required, I would have to say it is very little, I am sure there are tutorials that could teach you how to add your own civ in an hour, 2 tops. People are often scared of getting into modding but when shown its actually quite easy, if there isn't a tutorial I would quite happily make one, I am not sure if my explanation skills are really up to it though.

It would be nice if there was an interface for doing it, that would be a little more work to write but I am sure someone could do it.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

Yeah an interface would be nice.

It is ALOT more complicated and alot more work than you assume to create leader head. Especially without a really powerful computer and lots of money to burn on equipment and accessories for your models.

 

[Scilly_guy]

Oh yeah the head is, but to be honest the head is just tinsel, it just looks pretty, it has no affect on gameplay and you don't really ever see yourself, its the enemy that you see so unless you are that desperate to play against an avatar you've created its worthless, and I am sure that to many fans of civ the actual gameplay is the part they are interested in, not the twiddley graphics bits. I think it is much more work than it is worth.

 

[GUSTAVUS II]

1. LARGER MAP CAPIBILITIES
2. FIX THE PROBLEM WITH CITY RAZING (It must ALWAYS be your own decion to raze cities!
3. More civs--Learn from Great Strategy Games Like EUROPA III
50-100 civs+ would be awesome!
4. A WAY TO HAVE CIVS START AT DIFFERNT TIMES WITHOUT LEARNING
A CODE LANGUAGE!-example: egypt plays from start, but have an
option for rome to start at 600 bc in same game!
5. SIMPLE EVENT SYSTEM TO MAKE NEW NATIONS APPEAR(REVOLT)

 

[Scilly_guy]

2.CITY RAZING PROBLEM

Do you mean where if you capture a city with a small population it gets destroyed? Thats a feature not a bug!

I know what you mean about having civs start later, and new nations to appear, I also think it would be good if some civs decided to stop advancing their techs, or slow right down, I'm thinking of native americans who don't wish to destroy their environment so concentrate on making the most of nature. This would work better with the idea of different tech lines.

 

[Scilly_guy]

Oh and I want to say it somewhere, more civs isn't the answer to everything, I don't get why people want more more more of them, surely more/different game mechanics would make the game fresher, and more fun. One thing I am after more of though is the "random" events, I want more and maybe a bit less random, but maybe not.

 

[jmm]

Feats of discovery:
If you are the first to discover certain techs, you get a bonus for a few turns (e.g.: Construction grants a 10% hammer bonus for 5 turns)

Better map generators.

Use Public Works or Workers option.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

I agree with better map generators. I have generated 5 Terra maps in a row and checked the world builder to see what they looked like, and the enetire new world pretty much looked exactly the same in all 5 of them. Likewise I have never seen more than 2 continents in a Continents map and I play on maximun number of civilizations.

I'd like to see more earth realistic styled maps (and earth itself playable by all leaders for that matter) with many continents and land masses like Austrialia and the Philipines resemble, along with other masses like Greenland, Iceland, Ireland, Hawaii etc. All of the multiple divers land masses that make up the world.

I'd rather have that instead of just 2 simple continents all the time. And the custom continents where you get to choose the number of them are nothing more than squares (with exception to an odd numbered continent) evenly spaced out which is not realistic at all, nor very exciting IMHO.

 

[Scilly_guy]

SPHERICAL MAPS!!!

The new world does always end up looking like north and south America, although sometimes I think it has been flipped horizontally. The map I am currently playing on is pretty different I think, I'll let you know when I am finished.