Civilization 5

[mp0011]

Yes, that is what I need

But also:

- resources - each resource tile should have a limited random yield (output?).

You can get e.g. one rice spot with yield 120 "tons" for 120 population and another one for 30 pop.
If you have in your cities 170 population, you should buy 20 "tons"
per turn or deal with 20 unhapy citizens...

You can get 5 very low uranium spot or 1 big.
Mining cost is constant, no matter of yield.

So if you have 5 low yield uranium mines you pay 5x more per turn for extraction
than someone who has 1 big, and you get less uranium per turn.
Buying uranium is cheaper in this case for you, but when nobody
wants to sell you uranium, and you want have a nuke, you need to pay a lot and dig...

Resources should be acumulated like gold.
Storage capacity depends of population in cities.

You can sell 1000 "tons" of rice at once, or sell 10 "tons" per turn for.

Creating one tank consumes eg. 40 "tons" of iron at once, tank consumes 1 "ton" of oil or gas per turn.
Repairing tank in city (not healing) consumes 1 "ton" per damage point, but is instant.
City must have factory and baracks, other building to repair units.

One nuclear plant consumes 1 "tons" of uranium and produces 5 "MW" of energy
for 50 population and/or buildings in all cities.

You can export or import energy. You don't need nuclear power plant in all cities.
If you have lot of hydro plants, you dont need nuclear plants and have free energy.
Nuclear plants, coal plants, hydro plants can be build anywhere in your borders, not only in cities.



- researches - add levels to some of technologies

eg. each tech have 5 levels

first level is basic level (like now)
first who discover eg. "flight" receives bonus - 2 aditional levels of flight.
2nd discoverer (not buyer!) gets 1 bonus level.
It gives free upgrades, higher range, higher strength or less fuel consumption.
Fifth level is unique, and only one player can discover it.

first level is discovered like now (science points per turn),
aditional levels are discovered paralelly to primary research, but for cash.
You can buy technology update for gold in one turn, but this updates should not be cheap.

eg:
FLIGHT * = 4000 science points = gives standard flight like now (can build fighter, airport, carrier, bomber...)
FLIGHT ** = 500 gold / 2nd discoverer = +3 promotions + 2x higher airfield capacity
FLIGHT *** = 1000 gold / 1st discoverer = +2 promotions + 25% higher operation range + all above
FLIGHT **** = 1500 gold = +2 promotions + 25% faster productions + 25% less fuel consumption + all above
FLIGHT ***** = 3000 gold = +3 promotions + great enginier + 33% cheaper advanced flight + all above + extra health and happynes from airport + free updates of previous flying craft (airships)

(or, every next level gives new units? typical fighter => mustang; typical bomber => b52 with nukes)

If you have eg. higher level of DEMOCRACY you get better bonuses from civics enabled by this tech.

If you buy higher level on MINING you have chance to find new sources of iron etc,
and your sources would have higher output.

If you have 5th level of CHEMISTRY (unique) you can make oil from eg. rice or wood

Technology upgrades can't be traded or stolen.



- When I conquer enemy city i gets science points, depending enemy civ science level and buildings in this city.

EG: enemy civ have 6 unknown to me techs, all costs eg. 10000 science points
when i enter enemy city with library, I receives 0% - 5% of 10000 points (0 - 500),
with university 0% - 20% (0 - 2000) and so on. With some Wonders - 75% - 125%...



- borders - borders between two civs in modern times should not change in peace time.
First civilization that expand to a tile owns it forever, but cities still can make cultural flip.
Land outside cities radious can be traded to other civs.



- attack in peace time - I want to attack any unit on my teritory (with open borders) or on nobody teritory
but not to kill, just reduce HP to minimum (withdraw). This will or will not triger war, depending other civ decision.
I hate settlers going through my teritory to settle on last availiable spot on my coast, between two my cities...

 

[rysmiel]

Military

1. Micro-combat
Allow us the possibility to fight each battle at a time.

Please, no. I do not want, while building a gobal empire, to have to stop and mess about with a completely different sort of game.

2. Army warfare
Creating armies (as in CIV3) with various types of units (melee, mounted, infantry, archers etc) would give you a great advantage against just a stack of units with all of these types

I'm mildly positive to neutral on this depending on how it is implemented.

4. More specialized units
More types of mounted units, infantry, tanks, planes etc. each having a special purpose would enhance the gamers’ tactical skill requirements.

While I favour more specilaised units to some extent, "tactical skill" is not what I want to see matter in Civ.

I’d like to see the offence-defense strength separation back. In reality, some units are excellent in attack and lousy in defense. Should be in CIV 5.

Strongly agreed.

1. We definitely need a more developed economy interface. Corporations were a good thing, but way too simple. Today’s country supremacy is based much more on economic and not military power. This should be the case with CIV 5. Of course, being rich, without an army would mean nothing.

Oh, it should; bring back bribing units. The more avenues of winning without conquest, the more interesting the game will be.

1. Country stability
Like in Rhye’s and Fall mod – neglecting country stability might result in civil war or even defeat. Economy and diplomacy should play a vital role here.

I am strongly opposed to this at a macro-level; bring back unhappiness that means something, civil disorder at a city-by-city level, and implelment the macro-scale stability as an emergent property of city-level stability.

 

[johny smith]

Well I usually do not post ideas since I am usually wrapped up in modding, but here is some things that I think could be used from the older Civilization versions.

1. The era specific leaderheads. I miss how Civ 3 had the styles per era for each leader. I would also like to see the art made so perhaps your leader is customizable and can change it through the game based on the time.

2. From Civ 2 I remember if I am correct the Senate could make peace treaties against your wishes. I really want something to bring back that style. A 6000 year old dictator is not really reasonable to me. I mean that is penalty for a democracy other views I would think.

3. New map please with a globe not a flat map and multiple maps for whatever purpose. Perhaps actual 3d map so you can go underwater or underground and maybe something to go up. The possible other maps to continue on into space and other planets.

4. Make it easier for people to just drag and drop new modded content into a folder that can be added to the main game, and preserve a mods folder. Also release a civ editor that is easier for people not so familiar with modding.

5. Quantified resources and trade routes that function in actually carry goods without micromanagement. Should have a control how much detail you want as well. So you can go from really simple like present or every detail of particular trade route. Automatic I think is just too plain simple.

6. Navigable rivers to give more meaning of how important they were as in river boats. Possible canal improvements, large bridges, and tunnels.

7. Better tech tree please it is really illogical(historians and/or anthropologist needed),and go back to before having permanent cities. So you begin with tribes beginning to form cities. Possibly unique tech paths for different civilizations would be nice as well.

8. Once you start as a civilization have choices over time to changing what your civilization is. For example Rus to Russia to Soviet Union and etc. And unique abilities based on what selection you choose.

9. Global Warming is real, and nuclear fallout is different. Have some victories to saving the planet perhaps something more on achieving a healthy environment.

10. Battle needs to not take 1000 years, and have more detail. If you do not like the details well should be an option to turn off an on. When off the computer plays for you.

11. More unit types in detail. I would rather have a much bigger combat setup versus just rock scissors and paper mechanics. That does not mean overcomplicated but some more please. If it comes down to making unique art for civilization compared to a new combat category I would rather have the combat category.

12. Make it easier to add religions and corporations. Add more factors to religions besides just happiness. I would like denominations as well, but the important thing is not the denominations theirselves is to give more detail to them. And as well have religion influence control over you. For example the pope demands you to do something.

13. Guilds and corporations should be in. Something that shows various economic groups or monopolies. A little more about like special interest groups.

14. Some form of higher supernations and/or alliances. Like EU or NATO. Perhaps better vassal updates would help as well to achieve as well improve vassals.

15. Generally more factions within you must temper in your civilization. Like the Civ 2 idea except more in tune with the Revolution mod by jdog. Stability influencing it as well other factions that harm and benefit your civilization for example trading guilds, church, and etc.

16. Please I hate the current wonder movies. I really thought Civ 2 had the best of them so far if updated to better graphics. I miss some things like Great Lighthouse from Civ3. It gave you ships extra range in the water, and there were 3 types of water terrain as well in Civ3. Maybe even bring back the Civ2 consul .

17. Bring back the palace from Civ3, but this time let your selections mean something as in certain benefits.

18. Better graphics in general, but when looking into a city in the middle ages I expect to see a trashy unsanitary city. Show how it would look generally please based on your health for example in this case. And just because a city unhappy do not give me worthless info like the city is just too crowded. I would like more about how your city looks at a given time. Not a fly by and then you are in the next era.

19. Actually make cities as they are today spread over a distance not confined in a small square. Real cites grow. Buildings should be attached to the map not the city I think. So actually have to maintain your city over distance not just a square. A little mini Simcity maybe, but of course how many more details controlled by the player.

20. Units should require a certain amount resources to be built, and some amount to be maintained. Units should be upgradeable not only as in what type of unit, but what type of gear it has. For example a better gun for a rifle man.

21. Have some industrial buildings that produce resources. Sort of like Railroad Tycoon. Coal and Iron make Steel for example. And again maybe maintaining the trade routes theirselves. Like railroads and trains. Different types of trains can move more supplies. Just something to represent the improvements in transportation.

22. Slavery and rights of your people. Actually show slaves. Not just you hurry people because of slavery. Some more detail into this besides you hurry a slave. Sid may not want to address the issue like it was ignore in Colonization, but I think it is just as insulting to leave it out.

Anyway I could ramble ideas all day. I probably should just be quiet lol. These will never happen anyway. Just some things that I always wanted improved.

 

[rysmiel]

W
2. From Civ 2 I remember if I am correct the Senate could make peace treaties against your wishes. I really want something to bring back that style. A 6000 year old dictator is not really reasonable to me. I mean that is penalty for a democracy other views I would think.

But you're not playing the leader, you are playing the civilisation.

5. Quantified resources and trade routes that function in actually carry goods without micromanagement.

I'm fine by this except the last two words.

7. Better tech tree please it is really illogical(historians and/or anthropologist needed),

The tech tree should be ablanced to make he game good; historical accuracy is very much secondary to that priority.

Possibly unique tech paths for different civilizations would be nice as well.

No, they would be horrible, because they would force you to behave a certain way regardless of your circumstances.

For example Rus to Russia to Soviet Union and etc. And unique abilities based on what selection you choose.

I oppose this too. No unique or civilisation-specific anything; flexible adaptive civilisations should be different enough based on their surroundings and how they interact with each other.

10. Battle needs to not take 1000 years, and have more detail.

No; Civ IV has too much detail in battles already.

18. Better graphics in general,

I want cleaner, simpler, more stylised graphics. That tell me what I need to know about a unit or city or improvement and don't mess about with aesthetics beyond that.

19. Actually make cities as they are today spread over a distance not confined in a small square. Real cites grow. Buildings should be attached to the map not the city I think. So actually have to maintain your city over distance not just a square.

I would be happy to see a mechanism for cities to grow past one square, but I have yet to see a suggestion for one that actually feels workable.

 

[civilized_man]

I have just finished my first real epic game in Civ4. Been a fan since the original game. A true fanatic since Civ2.

I'd like the franchise to go back to the roots. There is too much detail in this game already, yet people keep asking for more and more. Culture, Religion, Espionage, blah...

There are far too many units now. This isn't the Total War series. Combat should remain stylized, as everything else is.

The only thing they should work on for Civ5, because they apparently haven't much over the years, if Artificial INTELLIGENCE. It's almost impossible to deal with computer opponents, 'cause most of them are always mad at you for being better than them. Tiny nations keep nagging you about joining their pointless wars against superpowers and if you keep denying them long enough, they might attack you. Most leaders won't trade with you, even if it's in their best interest too. And the strategic finesse of the AI is laughable.

Instead of making Civ geekier with every installment, focus on the basics and program an AI that can actually play you.

 

[rysmiel]

I have just finished my first real epic game in Civ4. Been a fan since the original game. A true fanatic since Civ2.

I'd like the franchise to go back to the roots. There is too much detail in this game already, yet people keep asking for more and more. Culture, Religion, Espionage, blah...

Yes, we do, and many of us think it's not nearly big enough yet. Maybe you're more of the market for a PC port of CivRev than for something building on Civ 3/4 ?

 

[Camikaze]

I think that the test for pretty much every new idea that we want added to the game is whether or not it is enjoyable or not, or whether it adds to the enjoyability of the game. Yes, we want more detail, but only so much as tedium is avoided. That does not mean micromanagement has to be avoided, just that tedious micromanagement has to be avoided. Ideas have to be streamlined, and there must be enough possible aspects to an idea for it to be enjoyable. For instance, you don't want to have to individually move every single one of your units, you want an option to move them as a group. And you want to be able to do a larger variety of things with those units, without straining your patience or ability to play. These are concerns that should be at the core of every new idea, and the game should only be made bigger if these are met.

 

[johny smith]

Well what I can say. As Civilization has got updated I think the game has lost many features in the process. I think the reason was to streamline some of the features, and just easier for them to do really. The game needs to be inclusive of the previous games.

I think other games created by Sid when he was with MicroProse should be looked at. Basically I would like see railroads and colonization ideas used in a Civ5( or some other game name even). Many closely related ideas from them I think could be used. I don't think playing a civilization that is static through the entire game is the best idea. I think showing how your civilization changes with time is a better idea.

I would like see 3 primary concepts.

1. Your civilization does not always get smarter. It is always growing currently. I would like see some regression. Something to show the effect of the dark ages. I think that is the missing key to me in a tech tree. Unique I thought it certain things that usually are labeled as unique units or unique buildings. For example what do the Mayans think was a technological advancement.

2. Would like to see more work to hold your empire together. Espionage for example on your own empire. Factions within. Not just it keeps going and going....

3. All other options about complexity would be solved if it could be scalable. I mean scalable replacing the idea of just giving you a penalty to make it harder. Basically complexity being the part that is harder. So the more complicated it becomes the more points you get for achieving it.

Enjoyable I think is not having to spend a lot of time on clicking millions of things as well. But if you keep it dumbed down then replay value goes away at the same time to many players I believe. I am thinking mainly a simple game for people who do not want more, and game that have extra options for people that are looking for more. It should be all achievable I think in options.

I am probably just too demanding, but if the next game is like this game again I probably will not bother anymore. Does not seem like that many improvements really to me in Civ4, but some new things. If it just adds very small insignificant changes well I played that enough by now.

 

[wilro85]

Starting with Civ4 as the base features:

Nuclear warfare:
1) There needs to be a way to disable/destroy an enemy SDI once it is built. Could be a spy mission, could be taking an SDI command center by force, its all good.

2) In addition to missiles it should be possible to build bombs that can be loaded onto bombers and stealth bombers.

3) Return the idea of the suitcase nuke as a spy mission.

Espionage:
1) More terrorist missions! (Assassinate leader, biological warfare, slow research, etc)

2) More active role in counter terrorism. Perhaps better "funding" with a slider for offense vs defensive.

Unit Customization:
1) In addition to default units, allow civs to build customized units. I.E. a country can spend a great deal more *whatever* on building a ship to build the world's most powerful battleship. This can translate into whatever you want giving either a cheap unit zerg strategy or singular "god" units. Possible customizations:
Longer range
Faster speed
Harder to detect
Harder to intercept
More firepower
Better at espionage
Larger radius of destruction (think 5 kton vs 50 Mton nukes)

Combat:
1) Use a "bombard" option similar to what was available in Call to Power. There is no reason that a battleship should have to get right up in a destroyer's face to kill it. A battleship could kill a destroyer before the destroyer could even see it, just as a missile cruiser could do the same to a battleship and an aircraft carrier is the queen of the sea.

2) Capturing the city of a more technological civilization should advance the research progress of the victor civilization (not the whole tech, but some points should be given).

3) Capturing a naval port with ships still docked should give control of the captured vessels (or at least some of them). Other ships might try to escape to sea.

4) Make capturing the capital city worth something again. In Civ2 there was a chance it would trigger a civil war, maybe have some random events associated with it.

Terrian:
1) Allow for Canals (instant transport so ships can't be overrun while on land (it doesn't take 2 years to cross the panama canal)

2) Bridges or tunnels (think Chunnel from England to France)

Civics:
1) Cities (especially colonies on other continents) need to be more willing to revolt forcefully. I'd like to see civil wars happen at times.

2) Slavery. I liked how this was done in Call to Power. Do something like that.

 

[rysmiel]

Starting with Civ4 as the base features:

Nuclear warfare:
1) There needs to be a way to disable/destroy an enemy SDI once it is built. Could be a spy mission, could be taking an SDI command center by force, its all good.

2) In addition to missiles it should be possible to build bombs that can be loaded onto bombers and stealth bombers.

3) Return the idea of the suitcase nuke as a spy mission.

Espionage:
1) More terrorist missions! (Assassinate leader, biological warfare, slow research, etc)

2) More active role in counter terrorism. Perhaps better "funding" with a slider for offense vs defensive.

Agreed with all of these.

Unit Customization:
1) In addition to default units, allow civs to build customized units. I.E. a country can spend a great deal more *whatever* on building a ship to build the world's most powerful battleship. This can translate into whatever you want giving either a cheap unit zerg strategy or singular "god" units. Possible customizations:
Longer range
Faster speed
Harder to detect
Harder to intercept
More firepower
Better at espionage
Larger radius of destruction (think 5 kton vs 50 Mton nukes)

Strongly disagree here; this range would IMO be much better happened by just having more units to begin with.

Combat:
1) Use a "bombard" option similar to what was available in Call to Power. There is no reason that a battleship should have to get right up in a destroyer's face to kill it. A battleship could kill a destroyer before the destroyer could even see it, just as a missile cruiser could do the same to a battleship and an aircraft carrier is the queen of the sea.

2) Capturing the city of a more technological civilization should advance the research progress of the victor civilization (not the whole tech, but some points should be given).

3) Capturing a naval port with ships still docked should give control of the captured vessels (or at least some of them). Other ships might try to escape to sea.

4) Make capturing the capital city worth something again. In Civ2 there was a chance it would trigger a civil war, maybe have some random events associated with it.

Terrian:
1) Allow for Canals (instant transport so ships can't be overrun while on land (it doesn't take 2 years to cross the panama canal)

2) Bridges or tunnels (think Chunnel from England to France)

Civics:
1) Cities (especially colonies on other continents) need to be more willing to revolt forcefully. I'd like to see civil wars happen at times.

2) Slavery. I liked how this was done in Call to Power. Do something like that.

[/quote]

I agree strongly with every single one of these, too.

 

[Soda7777777]

Unit Customization:
1) In addition to default units, allow civs to build customized units. I.E. a country can spend a great deal more *whatever* on building a ship to build the world's most powerful battleship. This can translate into whatever you want giving either a cheap unit zerg strategy or singular "god" units. Possible customizations:
Longer range
Faster speed
Harder to detect
Harder to intercept
More firepower
Better at espionage
Larger radius of destruction (think 5 kton vs 50 Mton nukes)

I don't agree with this, mostly because it's turning the game into "Spore", and "Spore" was a horrible game. I think they should just add more units.

 

[Camikaze]

I would agree with unit customisation to a degree (maybe to a limit of ±10%, in exchange for -10 ----> +20% production cost). But you don't want to have to have a large focus on unit design, and a inability to counter enemies if they use it. It would have to be very streamlined and user-friendly, also, in order to function well.

 

[morss_4]

I have never understood why Civ has not implemented an army system similar to CtP or the Paradox games like EU3. The amount of tedious micromanagement that could be removed in this fashion is sizeable, and it is more realistic besides.

EDIT: Unit customization sounds like a good idea, until you realize the AI is a dunce. Gal Civ II has unit customization, and during my experience with the game the AI was terrible at it.

 

[rysmiel]

I have never understood why Civ has not implemented an army system similar to CtP or the Paradox games like EU3. The amount of tedious micromanagement that could be removed in this fashion is sizeable, and it is more realistic besides.

Possibly because the designers recognise that some players find the micromanagement a lot of the fun ?

 

[morss_4]

Possibly because the designers recognise that some players find the micromanagement a lot of the fun ?

I'm not convinced the micromanagement in the Civ IV battle system adds anything fun to the game.

 

[Atranox]

I never played any of the older civ games, so I can't really comment on some older features that I would like to see re-implemented. However, I've been playing Civ4 since the day it came out, and there's quite a few changes that I would love to see in Civ5. I know that some of these have already been suggested.

1) A hexagon grid over the current square type.

2) More unique units. I don't feel that the game ought to be saturated with them, but each civ in my opinion could use a few unique units instead of just one. Anything that adds more variety to the civs without forcing them down a certain path or style of play is a good thing in my opinion. Unique units is a great way to do that.

3) In my opinion, civics ought to play somewhat of a larger role, especially in regards to relations with the AI. Currently, religion is seemingly the primary factor in your relations. While this does tend to evolve a bit in the game a bit as civs begin to adopt free religion, it never feels like your civic choices have a major impact on your diplomatic relations. As we've seen (especially in recent history), civics play a major role in international relations. In civ terms, Free Market civs ought to be a bit at odds with civs using State Property. Civs using Universal Suffrage should be much less likely to get along with one employing a Police State. And so on and so forth. Right now the civics are merely something that you switch depending upon your current situation. Going to war? Switch to Police State, Vassalage, and Theocracy. At peace? Switch back to Free Religion, Representation, and Free Speech. Obviously the system works and works well..but it can certainly use some tweaking, especially in regards to your relations.

4) I think resources could perhaps be made a bit more valuable...especially in terms of trade value. Resource trading is one of the driving forces of the global economy, realistically. In the game, you really just pick a few civs that you're friendly with, click their excess resources, and give them your excess without much thought. I think the system could be improved a bit.

5) SODs need to be discouraged a bit more. In general, I would like to see the combat system improved as well. The chess or board game styles that have been suggested before wouldn't work well at all IMO, and I don't think implementing a game within a game is a good idea. But still, requiring some minor tactics other than simply clicking on a stack of units with your stack would be a huge plus.

6) Improved graphics...of course with low res textures available for those without great gaming PCs.

7) Improved AI. Obviously this one is a given, but I figured I would mention it anyways. The AI is perhaps the most important factor in the game. It certainly isn't terrible, but it does seem very incompetent and predictable at times.

8) The research tree seems to come to somewhat of an abrupt end. Incorporating a few more modern techs and even some very near-future ones would be nice. We definitely don't need mechs walking around or anything ridiculously futuristic, but I hate how quickly the "future tech" line seems to come at times.

 

[Soda7777777]

I never played any of the older civ games, so I can't really comment on some older features that I would like to see re-implemented. However, I've been playing Civ4 since the day it came out, and there's quite a few changes that I would love to see in Civ5. I know that some of these have already been suggested.

1) A hexagon grid over the current square type.

2) More unique units. I don't feel that the game ought to be saturated with them, but each civ in my opinion could use a few unique units instead of just one. Anything that adds more variety to the civs without forcing them down a certain path or style of play is a good thing in my opinion. Unique units is a great way to do that.

3) In my opinion, civics ought to play somewhat of a larger role, especially in regards to relations with the AI. Currently, religion is seemingly the primary factor in your relations. While this does tend to evolve a bit in the game a bit as civs begin to adopt free religion, it never feels like your civic choices have a major impact on your diplomatic relations. As we've seen (especially in recent history), civics play a major role in international relations. In civ terms, Free Market civs ought to be a bit at odds with civs using State Property. Civs using Universal Suffrage should be much less likely to get along with one employing a Police State. And so on and so forth. Right now the civics are merely something that you switch depending upon your current situation. Going to war? Switch to Police State, Vassalage, and Theocracy. At peace? Switch back to Free Religion, Representation, and Free Speech. Obviously the system works and works well..but it can certainly use some tweaking, especially in regards to your relations.

4) I think resources could perhaps be made a bit more valuable...especially in terms of trade value. Resource trading is one of the driving forces of the global economy, realistically. In the game, you really just pick a few civs that you're friendly with, click their excess resources, and give them your excess without much thought. I think the system could be improved a bit.

5) SODs need to be discouraged a bit more. In general, I would like to see the combat system improved as well. The chess or board game styles that have been suggested before wouldn't work well at all IMO, and I don't think implementing a game within a game is a good idea. But still, requiring some minor tactics other than simply clicking on a stack of units with your stack would be a huge plus.

6) Improved graphics...of course with low res textures available for those without great gaming PCs.

7) Improved AI. Obviously this one is a given, but I figured I would mention it anyways. The AI is perhaps the most important factor in the game. It certainly isn't terrible, but it does seem very incompetent and predictable at times.

8) The research tree seems to come to somewhat of an abrupt end. Incorporating a few more modern techs and even some very near-future ones would be nice. We definitely don't need mechs walking around or anything ridiculously futuristic, but I hate how quickly the "future tech" line seems to come at times.

I agree with most of this except the limitations on the modern tech tree. I think there should be a lot of highly modern techs and have more things in it to make it more fun and not boring/ The late game gets pretty boring even with BtS.

 

[Vael]

I have never understood why Civ has not implemented an army system similar to CtP or the Paradox games like EU3. The amount of tedious micromanagement that could be removed in this fashion is sizeable, and it is more realistic besides.

Civ has sold better than any CtP or Paradox game. Why should Sid be in any hurry to make Civ more like them? Not to say that Civ might not be more fun that way, but to me it seems clear as to why they haven't done such a thing.

 

[morss_4]

Civ has sold better than any CtP or Paradox game. Why should Sid be in any hurry to make Civ more like them? Not to say that Civ might not be more fun that way, but to me it seems clear as to why they haven't done such a thing.

Ah yes, because clearly games that sold less couldn't possibly have good ideas.

 

[Soda7777777]

Civ has sold better than any CtP or Paradox game. Why should Sid be in any hurry to make Civ more like them? Not to say that Civ might not be more fun that way, but to me it seems clear as to why they haven't done such a thing.

Hey dude don't knock Majesty. That was a great game.