Civilization 6: Ideas

[_ViKinG_]

I'm curious to know.. are people done with Civ 5? I feel like it, It's still very well alive but I think it's the common idea is that with Beyond Earth and Starships that the life on Civ 5 is now done, with perhaps a surprise patch in few years (akin to cIV)

I still play Civ 5 much. And Beyond earth and Starships is a none game for me, im not interested in those games at all. If civ 6 comes soon i will maybe loose some interest. but for me i dont see BE as a civ game

 

[Redaxe]

I'd really like to see a system that allows you to spend Great Generals to earn unique promotions or military abilities.
I covered this on an earlier thread but the concept is like you can use a General to choose a particular tenet that can help your military strategy. Basically I feel like you can get too many Generals and there aren't always enough options to use them all. That said I do like using a General to steal territory from a CityState particularly a Natural Wonder, luxury or other strategic resource...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=532800&highlight=redaxe

 

[zaint]

One thing i would like to see is no hardcoded restrictions.

For example, the max number of civs or map size tiles etc. If someone has a really powerfull computer they should be able to play on even bigger maps with more ai's running around.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

One thing i would like to see is no hardcoded restrictions.

For example, the max number of civs or map size tiles etc. If someone has a really powerfull computer they should be able to play on even bigger maps with more ai's running around.

They really need to focus on versatility, for example in modding new policies, there's so many times where instead of EarnYieldForKills you are restricted to EarnCultureFromKills or something like that.

I also want dynamic leaderscreens (changing by era and maybe by government even) as well as a fun way of multi-era music, for leader, I kind of want them to seperate each song (if it was the same as Civ 5) into 5 layers and play each layer on top of each for each era the civilization is in. so for Renaisance Civs they would play like 4 layers at once.

 

[daft]

What new civilizations you expect?
Belgium, Kongo, Mexico, Vietnam, Israel, Olmecs, Nigeria, Hungary or others? What do you believe?

Canada! eh?, Australia, since there's no Great Britain, but only England, then there's a good chance I will finally see Scotland and it's highlanders included. From the remaining European past/present nations: Hungary, Holy Roman Empire, Ukraine (Kyevan Rus') and Italy have a shot.
Besides that from what I gather Israel has a great chance, as well as one or two African empires, Kongo and/or Ashanti, why not bring back Mali from Civ4?
Also Vietnam or Khmer(s), and Tibet from Asia. From the Americas Cherokee and Mexico, perhaps Sioux.
Wish they'd bring back Vikings but not sure how they'd work it with the Danes already in, unless of course grouping some together, to avoid paradoxes and overlapping when playing Earth Maps.
Of course hoping for these and more, the more tribes and uniqueness in the game, the more fun and exciting it is to play (among other things).

Ps. Having more tribes in the game only makes sense, there already are a couple of unique oxymoron-type units included in Civ5 which clearly do not belong to the nation they'd been assigned to.
1. Norwegian Ski Infantry -Denmark- hello?! Shouldn't Norwegian Units represent their own country (Norge).
2. Comanche Riders - Shoshone-WTF?! Comanche were/are a separate tribe, a quite famous one too.

 

[dasaard200]

I would like to see the hard-wired ability to use mods in MP .

 

[dasaard200]

THE next, best improvement for the Game : the hard-wired ability to play MODS in MP !!

 

[daft]

since you brought up graphics i really want the cities to stop disappearing. i have a quad core processor and dual graphics and 8gb ram and having cs building vanish from mid to late game and not come back even with save and reload is starting to annoy me. its mainly CS it sticks with; if i or another civ found a city from renaissance on, sometimes i dont see it until i load the game next time, when civs cities do come back.

rivers i am less concerned graphically, although having some navigable river channel graphic in civ 6 would be nice (along with canals which should be as i put earlier, sort of 'wonders' that have to be built by GE).

but roads in civ 5 are just tracks( which later i always hide by building rails over...not that the rails look great when they go in some directions either). they dont get paved at all even as time goes on that i see. in civ rev at least they go to look like the modern roads late game, but they just look same all the time in civ 5.

i still think coasts should have some areas which you cannot embark/disembark from/to. cliffs or reefs and sandbanks. that would make invasions across seas or narrow channels of water more dangerous and bring navies more into play (along with allowing ppl to try and build forts and citadels to guard possible invasion beaches.

I completely agree about the coasts, an invading force, by the demands of nature, should be forced to look for beaches/low lands to land their force/army with, thus enabling defenders to concentrate on certain parts of their coastline for defence from possible invading forces. This is in part what kept England/Britain clear of any invasion forces for centuries (Normandy excluded).

 

[daft]

Different leaders for the same Civ with unique bonuses, maybe have a "Unique Leader Bonus aka ULB". For example in England: Elizabeth I, Churchill or Thatcher? Or Japan: Oda Nobunaga, Tokugawa Ieyusu or Hirotada, Toyatomi Hideyoshi, or Minamoto no Yoritomo?

Yes, yes. I've been mentioning this several times, need several leaders for each civ, each with a different personality (traits). Kind of was done in Civ4, but they need to expand on it.

 

[daft]

Didn't read.

what kind of comment is this? Provide some ideas or suggestions or don't even bother typing, a ok?

Moderator Action: Please do not dredge up 8-month old posts to criticize another member.

 

[daft]

its a trolling post, why to respond
diplomacy is better than ever in civ5 and the art is less cartoonish as it was already said

actually axe warriors are represented with the Warrior unit (hint: he has an axe on its icon)
and civ4's untis are historical nonsense.. axemen beating swordsmen? suicidal catapults? city raider tanks?

Actually axemen beating/defeating swordmen is not a crazy notion at all. You clearly lack knowledge about medieval warfare.

 

[daft]

Just throwing in some more ideas:

Cities:
Creating a settler cost 1 citizen and require the city to have X amount of stored food (stored food can be traded between cities and civs)
Cities take some turns to settle, and start out with really low defense
City growth rate doesn't slow down with higher population

Military & workers:
Military units and workers created from citizens
Military costs and workers costs food to maintain, equal to citizens
Earlygame units can be build in a set number of turns regardless of production, while lategame military units take a minimum number of turns to make, but also rely on production and may take much longer if the city has low production output

Military units and workers can be converted back to regular citizens
When a city is taken in conquest, all defensive building are destroyed (I'm actually not sure if this is already a feature)

Technology and science:
Techs can have specific requirements: sailing require a city at the coast, iron working require source of iron near a city
Science no longer based on population size

Culture:
Rather than unlocking social policies, culture is the base for tourism
Tourism provide money, and other civs will take a contentness hit for starting a war with you if you have a lot of visitors from that civ

Contentness:
Replaces happiness. Low contentness cause rebellion and less military effectiveness, rather than slowed growth
After discovering currency you have the ability to tax the people of your empire, higher tax give more money, but less contentness

Spawned rebels reduce city population, can take control over entire cities, rebels can either be killed by the military or you can make a deal with them to make them stop
Contentness add to golden age counter like happiness used to

Another idea is arming the people, which cost some money per pop, and increase city defense, but also make rebels more dangerous. Then if you want to disarm the people, you could move military units into cities to search and disarm by force (killing some citizens and damaging the military unit, reducing contentness), or use money on a no-gun campaign, which only work when the people are fairly content, removing all their guns after some time
People from other civs may emigrate to other civs with a higher contentness

Resources:
Strategic resources more important for cities: example, factories could boost production/economic output +50% each, making coal supply very important. Iron allows building a steel mill, +20 production etc... Bring on the resource wars.
Cities can produce consumer goods as a luxury resource that only lasts temporarily

Very wise indeed, brava to you dear sir!

 

[daft]

Oopsis, lol. Forgot to add Sumeria, Hittites, Switzerland and Nubia in the previous post, excusez moi.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Four Civ 6 General Ideas threads merged.

 

[jackelgull]

There should be a benefit to both tall and wide empires.
Here's an idea I'm particularly fond of- as empires expand, they became less stable as their citizens diversify due to regional differences. The Austrian empire was particularly unstable due to its many minorities. So there should be a stability system in Civ6 that rewards smaller empires, but wider empires should have the benefit of greater resources and wealth.

The stability idea is that as an empire expands, it gains instability, let's say, -1 stability per city. If stability drops to a certain threshold, let's say 0 to -30, it has an increasing chance of collapsing into many city states, with your empire reduced to its capital. You start off with 5 stability at the beginning and stability can be increased by matching civics with era ( medieval age- monarchy), ad a combination of other factors (More domestic trade routes for example) and there might be other stability penalties.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

There should be a benefit to both tall and wide empires.

Why?
Why are the categories "tall" and "wide" even coherent ? I say those words only mean something within a set of constraining systems that apply based on the reach and height of your cities. Change the systems, change the empire classes.

 

[RyanTheGreat]

The only way I see them implementing a spherical map is through a sphere made of triangles. I know it seems like a step back with only three sides per tile, but maybe units could combine to form armies that occupy more than one tilecan take up multiple tiles. When cities grow to a certain size they can gain an additional tile for the "core" of the city. The biggest cities would occupy 5-6 triangles while small villages would occupy 1-2 tiles. This way bigger cities require you to take multiple parts of the city. Spherical maps seem like a must for the next game. The earth is a shpere not a cylinder or a rectangle. Just my 2 cents

 

[Sedwick]

The only way I see them implementing a spherical map is through a sphere made of triangles.

All polygons can be composed of triangles. You could have hexagonal tiles made of six triangles with a common vertex at the center and the map navigation and general appearance wouldn't change.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Another general Civ 6 idea thread merged into the main one.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

It is not -that- huge of a redesign to take a turn-based game and turn it into a turn-based command-control game. Everybody enters their orders in a well-defined order, then everything happens in a well-defined order. There could be multiple passes like this per turn, in any arrangement, maybe a fixed three phases each turn, or maybe a kind of "no action" declare that advances the turn when universal. There could be a component for unit actions and then afterward everybody chooses their city actions and empire assignments (techs, culture, etc.), or empire actions with instant bonuses could happen first.
Point is the game can stay turn-based while adapting many points of change to address balancing issues and the whole multiplayer is so goddanged long thing.

This could, at minimum, fix ranged units. Bombardment is out of control by definition, but first strikes and other melee rules for them are not satisfactory either. If there are some rules that resolve a team of archers attacking some units and those units fighting back, on one pass of a turn through everyplayer's hands, a balanced outcome may be achievable.
And as a bonus, online multiplayer architecture gets easier automatically, as the "actions" (choices) are naturally synchronized and involve changing no information available to anyone else as they are entered.

RyanTheGreat, triangle tiles are terrible. They are only adjacent to three other tiles. Unless you propose to allow vertices for twelve adjacent triangles?
How about a Cairo tesselation with adjacency permitted across the right angled vertices?