Civilization 5

I think the biggest and most important thing they need to do for Civ 5 is to refine diplomacy. While very good on paper, the execution of it in game shows there are alot of major flaws in Civ 4's diplomacy. For example how often the AI nags you to cancel deals or go to war with other civs, or begins to hate you for having an open borders deal with a civ they are not pleased or friendly with. This is most problematic in huge map games where there are alot of civs in the game.

Farther more, there is not enough freedom in negotiating trade deals. I like beging able to trade techs for resources and to mix and match all things. I'm sure there is a way they could balance this better than it was in Civ III, but the fact is, it should still be there and in real life there are no limitations like this. Just thinking about these limitations in the game at this moment right now is starting to seriously irritate me.

Farther more, there is something seriously wrong when the best way to win DIPLOMATIC victory is by WAGING WAR until all your competition have been vassalled into submission. This highlights the problems with how diplomacy is in Civ 4. Also, one of the biggest problems is that the AI never forgives or forgets... (IE If it requested that you go to war with another civ or that you give it an expensive tech or 1000 gold, or that you cancel a trade deal with another civ and you couldn't do it at the time it made the request, it will hate you for the rest of the game) ...in combination with "You have traded with our worst enemy".... and the truth is that civ the AI is calling their worst enemy might only have a -1 modifier to it. I wouldn't call that being your WORST enemy. :rolleyes:
 
RulerOfDaPeople said:
I think the biggest and most important thing they need to do for Civ 5 is to refine diplomacy. While very good on paper, the execution of it in game shows there are alot of major flaws in Civ 4's diplomacy. For example how often the AI nags you to cancel deals or go to war with other civs, or begins to hate you for having an open borders deal with a civ they are not pleased or friendly with. This is most problematic in huge map games where there are alot of civs in the game.

Farther more, there is not enough freedom in negotiating trade deals. I like beging able to trade techs for resources and to mix and match all things. I'm sure there is a way they could balance this better than it was in Civ III, but the fact is, it should still be there and in real life there are no limitations like this. Just thinking about these limitations in the game at this moment right now is starting to seriously irritate me.

Farther more, there is something seriously wrong when the best way to win DIPLOMATIC victory is by WAGING WAR until all your competition have been vassalled into submission. This highlights the problems with how diplomacy is in Civ 4. Also, one of the biggest problems is that the AI never forgives or forgets... (IE If it requested that you go to war with another civ or that you give it an expensive tech or 1000 gold, or that you cancel a trade deal with another civ and you couldn't do it at the time it made the request, it will hate you for the rest of the game) ...in combination with "You have traded with our worst enemy".... and the truth is that civ the AI is calling their worst enemy might only have a -1 modifier to it. I wouldn't call that being your WORST enemy. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

:agree: when that happens sometimes you just wanna:badcomp:.
 
Vandal Warlord said:
The Norse gods could be added too, Here are some of my suggestions to the Polytheisms and to other what not...
Click to expand...

These are some cool ideas. Perhaps a mod could be made with this stuff :mischief:
 
OK, ever since DemoGame III started and I heard about factions I was wonering, what would Civ be like if there were Rebellions, guilds, and Secret Inner-Empires?

Idea for Rebellions:
I know Rebellions have been sugested about 10 times now but I'm going to go deeper into it.
Rebellions are commonly the cause of Anarchys and such, so, If a city has to much:mad:( I'm talking seriously:mad::mad::mad: ) that city will revolt, and all your units in a city will be moved out one space away. But, Inside the city will be Rebel units. But, Depending on how much :mad: there was in the city, there would be multible rebel factions, fighting in the city. Now, If your units fail to recapture the city from rebels in 10 turns, the City will become Independent.
Idea for Independent citys:
Also like rebelions if there is too much:mad: but no revolt, the city declares its Independence. The city then cannot be contacted(but can be declared war with). But, If the City causes 2 more citys to declare Independece(or capture two more citys) near the city, they become a new Empire that cn be contacted.
Idea for Guilds:
Guilds. After the Early Guilds tech(new), guilds will form inside a city like a corperation, but will act as an Empire conducting trade, and maybe declaring war. But the guilds will start off with two guild missonarys, andseveral units(see below)

Midevil era-4 knights, 2 Midevil Light Infantry,1 Midevil Heavy infantry
Rena. era-4 Knights,2 Midevil Heavy Infantry, 1 longbowman
Industrial era.-2 calavry, 4 Infantry(?)
Modern Era:1 Tank,6 Infantry

Idea for abandned cities:
Throught history various cities have been abandoned for differnet reasons, there fore I think that they should be put in the game. There would be several reasons for abandoning citys, every one dies in the city, to much sickness, too much :mad:. Now there is only one way everyone can die in the city, if the pop. of the city is 1 but decreasing, instead of stopping, the city hits 0 pop. from that point all you units are removed and the 0 city is like a city ruins, it can be destroyed or, it can be re inhabbited by settlers.
 
it has been several days since anyone posted on this forum. Weird. And I have been busy with the Dem Game three so I descided I would rejuvinte the forum:)...................................................................................... I got nothin':( Dang! Everything worth saying has already been posted! Is this forum no longer needed?
 
If it's not dead, it should be. However, don't worry; someone will restart the exact same thread in less than a week.
 
Vandal Warlord said:
Idea for abandned cities:
Throught history various cities have been abandoned for differnet reasons, there fore I think that they should be put in the game. There would be several reasons for abandoning citys, every one dies in the city, to much sickness, too much :mad:. Now there is only one way everyone can die in the city, if the pop. of the city is 1 but decreasing, instead of stopping, the city hits 0 pop. from that point all you units are removed and the 0 city is like a city ruins, it can be destroyed or, it can be re inhabbited by settlers.
Click to expand...

How could a city's pop reach zero with free food on the city tile itself? I guess in theory if you had built enough sick buildings or its surrounded in jungle, but that seems quite unlikely to happen ever without some special random event.

I don't like the idea of abandoning cities as in history it RARELY happens, and when it does its usually economic or environmental forces. Sure, it would be NICE to be able to "delete" cities at will, but its very unrealistic and exploitive in Civ. Perhaps the only time it would be realistic is if you were in an absolute type form of government where an absolute king or dictator might very well have the authority to tell a whole city to move- but still not a good game concept IMO.

The scenarios that you described for abandoning cities rarely would happen in the game- thus it seems like it would be done "on purpose" by the player to trigger the abandon city event. Not so good IMO.
 
bentley004 said:
How could a city's pop reach zero with free food on the city tile itself? I guess in theory if you had built enough sick buildings or its surrounded in jungle, but that seems quite unlikely to happen ever without some special random event.

I don't like the idea of abandoning cities as in history it RARELY happens, and when it does its usually economic or environmental forces. Sure, it would be NICE to be able to "delete" cities at will, but its very unrealistic and exploitive in Civ. Perhaps the only time it would be realistic is if you were in an absolute type form of government where an absolute king or dictator might very well have the authority to tell a whole city to move- but still not a good game concept IMO.

The scenarios that you described for abandoning cities rarely would happen in the game- thus it seems like it would be done "on purpose" by the player to trigger the abandon city event. Not so good IMO.
Click to expand...

You know who the Maya were right? They abandoned ALL their cities! It doesn't matter if it RARELY happened in history it still HAPPENED!
 
I'd really like to see the towns / villages idea expanded in CIV V.

Do away with the cottage improvement that grows to a town and have settlers build small villages to start with. IF one village grows to a large city size then nearby villages/towns won't grow so much, they'll just become supporting settlements (that can still have improvements, but not as many)

Allow the city to expand and engulf very close by villages/towns.

Villages / towns send all the excess resources to the local city (if one exists)

modern era can have large metropolitan areas that used to be numerous cities / towns (much like all major cities are in real life)
 
The vassal system should be improved. The master should be able to cancel the agreement, it is more historicly accurate anyway. After the discovery of nationalism the vassal system should evolve into somthing like the Warsaw Pact where the master has more millitary control and all of tthe vassal civics become the same as the masters. Also If you conquer another nation within the last 50 turns and realize you can't pay the costs you could release the defeated nation as a vassal and specifing the cities that go to the vassal.
 
:goodjob:
Ninjatrey said:
The vassal system should be improved. The master should be able to cancel the agreement, it is more historicly accurate anyway. After the discovery of nationalism the vassal system should evolve into somthing like the Warsaw Pact where the master has more millitary control and all of tthe vassal civics become the same as the masters. Also If you conquer another nation within the last 50 turns and realize you can't pay the costs you could release the defeated nation as a vassal and specifing the cities that go to the vassal.
Click to expand...

Also Vassals should get more pissed at you if you take recorces from them!
 
what about a system of mass exodus/refugees?? For example when a nation invades another not everyone in the conquered land will want to stay. Also, it can be triggered by religious differences. Maybe a portion of the conquered city's population can move to friendly cities or even other friendly civs if no other alternative is possible.
 
yes.....it could work perfect with immigration as well.

How about if you have much unhappiness/unruliness in your cities the people will start to move to better places to live??
 
Does anyone know if the developers are beginning the production of Civ 5? Has it been hinted at all that they are going to start after they get Civ. Revolution off the ground? Should we be expecting Civ 5 anytime soon or is it still too premature to think about it?

Thanks in advance! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
  • Poll Poll
Strong culture triggers elections at border cities. Strong religion leeches their yields and influences what they construct. Faith provides immunity.
Replies
0
Views
176
Happiness
H
Lord Lakely
TIMELINE: A Civilization concept by Lord Lakely
6 7 8
Replies
151
Views
6K
Lord Lakely
Lord Lakely
J
unit control issues
Replies
0
Views
312
Javaze
J
Vrenir
Age and Legacy Path Enhancement/Overhaul - Detailed Brainstorm
Replies
4
Views
459
Vrenir
Vrenir
Mustakrakish
Help me design a mod to allow civilizations to persist through the ages
Replies
4
Views
905
Mustakrakish
Mustakrakish
Back
Top Bottom