Gamemaster77
PC > Mac
You know, I will start a new thread about this.
Civilization 5
- Thread starter Swedishguy
- Start date
That's why each civ should have their own currency that will be proportional to another civ's gold supply. A ratio of currency exchange to support taxes, military, infrastruture, upkeep.... etc...
Öjevind Lång;8373632 said:
The basic premise of civ is that it allows you to recreate history, that is, to use the tools endowed historically in order to forge your own path. Now, what I was saying was an example of how that is warped in the game, and how it would be difficult to fix. But still, the aim of the developers should be to find a compromise between realism and playability. A balance that incorporates both a recreation of history and an enjoyment of the game. At the moment I would say that that balance tends to allow for basic realism through the inclusion of multifarious elements, but limited extrapolation of those elements. That seems to get a good balance. For instance, you have production, you have commerce and you have food. Sure, you could have more realistic representations of these things, but the very inclusion of them suggests that the developers have worked to strike a balance between realism and gameplay.
So basically what I'm getting at is that realism is important, but only as important as allowing for playability and enjoyment of the game. You don't want to be stuck with labour market microeconomic policy just as much as you don't want to be stuck with very one-dimensional gameplay and complexity levels.
That could get very complicated. Attempting to mimic the market economy in full may not be the best way for Firaxis to attract customers.
Why not have the Euro vs. Americo or the Britsh pound sterling vs. the American dollar. If Wimsey's economica model is being implemented, why not currency exchange?
I'm not saying mimic the market economy but give a choice of the Ruple, RMB and Yen for those respective civs.
The_Reckoning
Prince
Explain to me how naming different currencies for each civ is complicated if all of them have an exchange rate of 1:1?
All modern currencies. How would it be implemented for when the forex system wasn't nearly as developed, and what would influence the price of each of the currencies?
Gamemaster77
PC > Mac
Off the current topic. To make the game more relistic without upsetting gameplay leaders should change periodicaly through the game and other stuff should too.
Maybe civilizations can evolve from gold to forged currency, then to bank notes, then credit cards, onto debit cards and what have you. As for Foreign exchange, silver was a method of payment as well as gold. GNP, GDP and a whole bunch of other statistics are already in Civ so maybe these factors will influence the exchange rate.
I replied, but then my internet cut out and I lost the reply. So I'll keep it brief.
Debit and credit cards?
GDP is represented, but there is no gold-production exchange value, and implementing one would come up with a whole heap of problems.
There are so many factors involved in exchange rates that without ruining gameplay and creating a whole artificial financial market, it would be horribly unrealistic.
Debit and credit cards?
GDP is represented, but there is no gold-production exchange value, and implementing one would come up with a whole heap of problems.
There are so many factors involved in exchange rates that without ruining gameplay and creating a whole artificial financial market, it would be horribly unrealistic.
Öjevind Lång
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,371
Like others who have posted here, I think different currencies would be very complicated and not much fun.
Different currencies would be another factor of gameplay since war mongering would be limited in the later years of the game. Why not have your own civ's currency be the most valued of all other currencies as a goal in civ? Currency added to peaceful diplomacy, environmentalism and luxury would fit perfectly into the many ways to win a game in Civ.
Adding a currency win to the game may actually be fun.
Adding a currency win to the game may actually be fun.
The most important thing is an improved AI. I really hope this is the main issue addressed in civ5, the AI is arguably the most crucial and fundamental thing in these games, and they never really do much to improve it. Right from civ1 to civ4 the AI has been terrible and this game is dominantly a single player game.
The AI is actually amongst the worst i've seen in any strategy game. I could never get over how stupid the AI was in civ and in the end it really ruins alot of the game. Because as said before, the AI is absolutely fundamental and crucial to the overall fun factor of the game. If you have a really stupid AI all the time, what good is the game? In the end it will ruin the game. It's boring being unable to fight a challenging or even half intelligable AI. Yes I know it can't be made like a human, but it can be improved ALOT. the AI in civ4 was almost just as bad as the AI is in civ3
I always find with these games that I have loads of fun and the factor of the stupid AI always ends up ruining and diminishing that. It effects everything, including the ability to compete with the entire building up of your civilization.
The AI is actually amongst the worst i've seen in any strategy game. I could never get over how stupid the AI was in civ and in the end it really ruins alot of the game. Because as said before, the AI is absolutely fundamental and crucial to the overall fun factor of the game. If you have a really stupid AI all the time, what good is the game? In the end it will ruin the game. It's boring being unable to fight a challenging or even half intelligable AI. Yes I know it can't be made like a human, but it can be improved ALOT. the AI in civ4 was almost just as bad as the AI is in civ3
I always find with these games that I have loads of fun and the factor of the stupid AI always ends up ruining and diminishing that. It effects everything, including the ability to compete with the entire building up of your civilization.
But 'value' of a currency would be another factor to add in. In reality, an appreciation of a currency may not inevitably be a good thing. Overall value would have to be determined by some other factor.
Vandal Warlord
Nazgûl
Thats an interesting concept that has come up every so often on civfanatics. However, it would take quite some time to develope that, and get it into the game.
i think i no what your talking about but just to be sure... i think that if your in war and in battle, u should be able to be in the attack or defence of the battle and be the general and control your men. so u dont have to rely on luck. b/c its really luck when u fight, just b/c it saids u have a 85% chance of winnin, doesnt mean your going to win.
CTH
Prince
I would like to see some more strategic possibilities when you go to war. Not real time battles, CIV is not a RTS but perhaps formations, attack with mixed armies at once, use of terrain (not only the tile you are on should count but also the tiles next to it, like if you are inbetween two mountians you should be able to hold of a large armie with a smaller one much easier, because they wont be able to attack with their full strenght). The war in civ is way to much luck and numbers.
Other things could be that resources could drain, and that you need a larger supply of oil to build tanks in 20 cities instead of 10. I am not sure that it really will make the game more fun though...
Trading produced goods might be something for the modern era. A economical victory option would be cool too.
More "illigal" activites (like the privateer), perhaps support gurillas or rebels in a oponents country, if the rebells win the will defeat that player and become a vassal to you (or at least a strong allied)
Just some thoughts, I havent read all posts in this thread so everything I have said might have been said already
Other things could be that resources could drain, and that you need a larger supply of oil to build tanks in 20 cities instead of 10. I am not sure that it really will make the game more fun though...
Trading produced goods might be something for the modern era. A economical victory option would be cool too.
More "illigal" activites (like the privateer), perhaps support gurillas or rebels in a oponents country, if the rebells win the will defeat that player and become a vassal to you (or at least a strong allied)
Just some thoughts, I havent read all posts in this thread so everything I have said might have been said already
rkjones316
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2009
- Messages
- 2
I think you could introduce financial services as an export, generated if you have X amount of banks and X amount of GNP. you automatically get it once you build wall street, and it would be worth 2 gold. Also introduce natural gas as a resource, that would strengthen russia and reflect better their growing influence over modern power generation.
Similar threads
- Poll
