Civilization 5

[RedRalph]

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!

Yes it has. Sid Meier, when asked about Civ 5 earlier this year in an interview about CivRev said "Ask me later in the year". I dont know much about how the industry works, but I think the general impression form people who do is that Civ5 will most likely be announced in autumn/winter of this year and be released either late next year or summer 2010. apparently it makes a lot of money for Firaxis so it's extremely unlikely they would discontinue the series as Civ4 sold very well.

 

[Scilly_guy]

Each civ should be able to set its immigration rates if immigrants and refugees are introduced, I do not oppose to the idea but they are not high on my wish list.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Yes it has. Sid Meier, when asked about Civ 5 earlier this year in an interview about CivRev said "Ask me later in the year". I dont know much about how the industry works, but I think the general impression form people who do is that Civ5 will most likely be announced in autumn/winter of this year and be released either late next year or summer 2010. apparently it makes a lot of money for Firaxis so it's extremely unlikely they would discontinue the series as Civ4 sold very well.

I'm looking forward to Civ 5, but only after they have produced an adequate patch for BtS.

 

[Vandal Warlord]

I personally think that Sid has one more trick up his sleve ie. there will most likely be another expansion before CiV5

 

[caketastydelish]

Some random ideas:

1. Make a scenario where its like world war III. Idk who would be on who's side...

2. Make it to where you can transport some land units by airplane. (although of coarse, those planes could intercepted by a ship)

3. Let there be land mines.

4. There BETTER be a rhey's and fall of civilization for civ 5. And when there is, have scripted golden ages. For example, Germany would get there's sometime in the late industrial age. England would get there's some time in the renisance. I think this would make rhey's and fall more accurate without hurting gameplay.

 

[Vandal Warlord]

Some random ideas:

1. Make a scenario where its like world war III. Idk who would be on who's side...

Here are some possible specs!


Allies:
USA- Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or John McCain
England-???
Poland-???
France-???
Egypt-???
Israel-???
Iraq(Part)-Iraqi president
Axis:
Iraq(Part)-Terrorists
Iran-armademajad
Pakistan-???
Afganistan-????
Saudi Arabia-????
Sudan-Terrorists or Facists


Russia would be at war with Poland, but not on axis of allied.

 

[caketastydelish]

Here are some possible specs!


Allies:
USA- Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or John McCain
England-???
Poland-???
France-???
Egypt-???
Israel-???
Axis:
Iraq-Terrorists
Iran-Osama Bin Ladin
Pakistan-???
Afganistan-????
Saudi Arabia-????
Sudan-Terrorists or Facists


Russia would be at war with Poland, but no on axis of allied.

Iran's leader shouldn't be Osama ben laden, it should be... (spelled as its pronounced) armademajad.

And don't forget, Iraq is an american colony, its part of OUR empire. So put it on our side ok?

 

[Vandal Warlord]

And don't forget, Iraq is an american colony, its part of OUR empire. So put it on our side ok?

OUR? Do you think I am American?

 

[flyingchicken]

<did not read after original post until this page>

I wish they'd add an option to switch graphics around. Like, Civ1 graphics for Civ5 proper--or, since Civ1 and 2 are small enough, maybe the option to play with Civ5 graphics with Civ1 and/or 2.

 

[Scilly_guy]

Here are some possible specs!


Allies:
USA- Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or John McCain
England-???
Poland-???
France-???
Egypt-???
Israel-???
Iraq(Part)-Iraqi president
Axis:
Iraq(Part)-Terrorists
Iran-armademajad
Pakistan-???
Afganistan-????
Saudi Arabia-????
Sudan-Terrorists or Facists


Russia would be at war with Poland, but not on axis of allied.

What an amazing grasp of world politics you have. I also notice you completely ignored India kind of goes with Pakistan them being opposing forces with high tension. Also the complete lack of either of the Koreas.

Political hotspots in the 21st century as seen by Scilly_Guy:
Israel and neighbours
Iran
Iraq
Afganistan
Pakistan
India
Sudan
Zimbabwe
Chinas interest in Africa, selling arms to Zimbabwe
Chinas activities in Tibet
North Korea (died down mostly now, progress with talks with Russia, China, Japan, US, anyone else? South Korea)


I am guessing you added Russia against Polland for old times sake? It just wouldn't work. I think the concept of two sides is fundamentally flawed too, China for instance would not want open war against the US but would do whatever it could to hamper the US economy.

 

[SpArKpLuG]

i think civil wars would be cool.

 

[redmosquito]

corporations should be implemented in some other way if possible. I couldnt figure out what to do with them.

game mechanics and ai should be arranged in such a way that in every game there should be a couple of world wide wars which last for 20 turns or so. after these world wars no country should have strong and long lasting diplomacy penalties

diplomacy system should be fixed in general. you might want to give iron to a civilization only if they attack a certain enemy, or give you some espionage points on a particular enemy. you should be able to request them to attack only a certain city and give temporary diplomacy bonuses if certain military objectives are accomplished in a war.

you might have some limited control over immigration. distant cities might be ethnically different and cause you problems throughout the game. the colonies issue should be something that you dont fully control.

most importantly. it would be great if you can somehow implement a macroeconomic growth model to the game.

revolution might spread to your lands. revolution issue should be something that you dont fully control.

after refrigeration you should be able to transfer food across cities. this should have some cost of course

 

[SpArKpLuG]

i also think that a neat addition would be something like you could create a orginization such as the UN or EU, and you could sent aid to troubled countries or pressure people to join.

 

[Balderstrom]

corporations should be implemented in some other way if possible. I couldnt figure out what to do with them.

Yes, and I can't quite figure an alternate for them yet either.

WW I+, ameliorating diplomatic penalties

Interesting.

diplomacy system should be fixed in general.

Yes multi-tiered diplomacy/trade would be a welcome change.

you might have some limited control over immigration. distant cities might be ethnically different and cause you problems throughout the game. the colonies issue should be something that you dont fully control.

This could lead to Culture Spread along Trade Routes. Acquired culture from other Civ's should improve relations.

I find it irritating the only way to build culture is primarily religion and wonders.
Cities that can't afford to run Artist GPs have limited culture options.
Instead of just infecting tiles with culture, Culture could spread outwards to other cities within your own empire,
AND to foreign cities along trade routes.
Possible game mechanic:

Spoiler :

A CITY will spread 1/X* of its culture outwards to other cities that generate less than Y Culture.

X* :: ( Distance Between Cities / 2 ) ^ 2
[ 4 = 4; 8 = 16; 12 = 36; 16 = 64 ]

A City (within your Civ) would only get distributed/Bonus culture from the highest possible source. Culture would likely get out of hand if it could piggyback and stack completely.

Would likely need to change the first culture growth to 30+ instead of 15.

Revolution might spread to your lands: One of the mods does this, I haven't tried it yet, but its quite popular.

after refrigeration you should be able to transfer food across cities. this should have some cost of course

Possible even before refrigeration, included with inter-city and foreign trade. Before refrigeration there would be spoilage.

Spoiler :

Lose 1 Food, if transported 4+ Tiles.
Lose 2 Food, if transported 9+ Tiles.
Lose 3 Food, if transported 16+ Tiles.
Lose 4 Food, if transported 25+ Tiles.

 

[Scilly_guy]

game mechanics and ai should be arranged in such a way that in every game there should be a couple of world wide wars which last for 20 turns or so. after these world wars no country should have strong and long lasting diplomacy penalties

I strongly dislike the thought of scripting wars into the game, I get the feeling this happens in Civ 4, there always seems to be wars at similar times, why can't wars be purely diplomatic, its just a far superior diplomacy system is needed.

 

[Balderstrom]

Well I wasn't necessarily agreeing with it occuring/required every game, but it WAS interesting to consider longtime diplomatic penalties to be adjusted after a world war, or after most of the planet got involved in the war. I suppose there could be a sweden or so ;-)

 

[Vandal Warlord]

I agree Balderstorm.

Scilly_guy= Why can't wars be purly diplomatic?

If wars were purly diplomatic, There would still be a Roman Empire

 

[Scilly_guy]

I didn't mean in real life, I meant I didn't want there to be a war in 1918 in a game because there was one in real life then. I do not mean removing units fighting for a war, I mean the reason to go to war should depend on diplomatic stances, rather than just going to war for the sake of it. I don't really understand what you mean about the Roman Empire, that fell apart because of revolt and troubles with Goths, Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Germanic tribes and no one really knows why it actually did, but I would say the relations with these tribes can't have been good, ergo diplomacy!

 

[flyingchicken]

Well, everything's abstracted so it can be assumed that every little act of war is justified. Also, the current AI usually goes to war only through a combination diplomatic and pragmatic stances, so I see nothing wrong (i.e. contradictory with what you want) with it (and the player is expected to be an ass, hence the special treatment compared to the AI). You can always roleplay rational declarations of war instead of having a game mechanic do it for you.

 

[Balderstrom]

Well the reasoning's each CIV goes to war is probably blackboxed and handled individually for each CIV. If we consider if the game had an option for World War. Then prior to each AI taking its turn there would be a Declare-War-Check for each AI. If one AI is determined to declare war, then the other AI's would be re-checked.
Thus you enable a feature where on one turn the Romans might declare war on the player, one of your other neighbours might also declare war on you.
One of Romes neighbours might declare war on them to take advantage of Rome....etc.

Thus removing the BlackBox from war declarations, setting up whether a world war can occur, by doing a pre-turn DeclareWar logic loop.

[EDIT]
Also there could be a pre-war declaration, where the AI will contact you, and attempt to bribe you to stop it from joining the merryband of warmongers against you. It could offer to Sweden/Abstain, or perhaps join your defense...