Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by Pepo, Oct 6, 2013.
really miss random events. One of the few things that was better in Civ4
MAKE BETTER AI !!!!! MAKE BETTER AI !!!!!
Give me the same game like CIV 5 , just MAKE BETTER AI !!!!!!!!!!
Haven't gone through the whole thread but I'd agree on a lot of points:
-More damaging barbs/tougher early game AI. Maybe even to a point where some city states are overly belligerent early
-Less reliance on science. I think the way to do this is to bring back blind research from AC, and put more techs. The current tree has 4 rows to it - as someone else mentioned, if it truly branched deep, make it so that you can skip entire sections if you don't need them.
Could also include stuff like researching an extra tech to give you access to a unique promotion for a unit, or a unique bonus for a building
-Tougher city states, including more dynamic attitudes. There's no reason a city state should be hostile with me off the bat - every city state should be neutral. Some will be irrational - their attitudes will be more likely to change on a dime. Otherwise, if you complete quests, give city states money, they become more friendly. If you walk through their territory, then they become more hostile. Combine it with city states having more of a fixed set that it handles (ie. if I am overly friendly with a city state, it will be less friendly with others, but make it harder to get allied with a city state)
-Random events. They were fun, albeit annoying sometimes
-More uniques. I think we all like UU/UB. Make each UU or UB less overpowering, but have each of them be more situational.
-More bonuses/differences. I really liked in civ 4 how different resources gave different bonuses for wonders - I want more of it.
-Keep my workers busy for longer. I don't want lots of busy work with them, like forcing them to repair tiles repeatedly, but give me more improvements that I can build, give me more reasons to build a farm on a tile early and then build something else later. I really liked back in civ 3(?) where once you got to supermarkets, you could build an improvement over the farm. Even if you take the civ 5 improvements, but instead of civil service giving you a flat bonus to farms, let civil service allow you to build a water mill on a farm with fresh water giving you the extra food. That will also force you to work for your bonuses, and not get them directly by tech.
Personally I would like to see each civ having more then one leader, and in multiplayer you will see the civ but not the leader, so you could see someone playing Japan but it's not Nobunaga it's say Hideyoshi or America it's Abraham Lincoln etc, each leader has their own special passive. It'll be a nice change to have to guess what victory your enemy is trying to go for until you see the Civ in game.
I also hope the war system will be revamped along with units, I would love to see if you could rename units, the units that are renamed will show the name say (Alpha B-2) then the unit name (Hoplite) and you can put them into little regiments so you can know which unit pairs with which unit. And it'd be entertaining to see (Lol, poop in your city)(Siege Tower) has captured Paris!!!
Then after war you can create a war monument improvement/building which will offset the unhappiness caused by losing units. Then great war monument for great people who may have been killed in war.
How about a science boost if you can kill a more advanced unit than you already possess.
Suppose you are a little behind the AI in tech and they have better units than you, for each one that you kill you get a certain number of beakers towards that unit's technology.
Excuse me if my English isn't well.
Playing Civ 5 I had just one big problem - lack of adequate possibilities in the global policy. For example, Greece have declared war on Milan. What can I do? Declare war on Greece? But I can't declare war every day on Greece, on GB, on China etc. And here is my thoughts. Every country produce hundreds sorts of goods and many of them are exported to another countries. So if Greece have declared war on Milan I can set trade embargo on Greece. There was trade embargo in the world history - on Cuba, on Iraq etc.
That's already in World Congress.
Casus Belli. Also, if Trade Routes exist, I hope rivers are placed on tiles instead of bordering them, thus allowing rivers to be used for trade routes and navies.
Yes, but when WC will start this war already ends and Milan now isn't exists. It's too long to wait for WC. It would be better if I could set my embargo on this country. The game would be more interesting.
Buildings in Civ6 should be finite meaning one marketplace should not be big enough to serve an entire city. A marketplace should for example only be able to serve 6 people and once your city grows larger than 6 people then that city should have to build another marketplace to accommodate the additional population.
I honestly don't see why many of the buildings could not have this approach done to them.
Civ5 is done in such a way that it does nothing at all very well. The combat mechanic is complained about. The city building is not really city building you just sort of make whichever new building is available.
Also, maybe some buildings could have different effects for different eras. For example libraries 4,000 years ago were used differently than libraries are used today. Libraries started as archives for business transactions and for keeping track of inventory. Libraries could start effecting trade and as the eras advance it could eventually move to how it is used now in the game.
The civ economy functions ok in the first few ages as wealth and productivity always came from the ruling class. It doesnt work in the modern era. Having to build markets for every 6 population.... Well the equivalent to an ancient market is your modern shopping mall, governments don't build those anymore the private sector does...
Even in ancient era cities very rarely would the government build a marketplace. People would just set up shacks in a convenient area to sell their wares.
The Greeks & Romans invested in public works like forums but that was only done in Civs like Rome and Greece where politicians had to represent their people.
Realistically a marketplace should automatically establish once a city reaches a certain population and connects valuable resources. Point being, there's never been anything special about a market, people have always survived by producing and selling/trading something in demand to then be able to acquire the things they need. A market is just a place where trade happens, no different from a slum in any 3rd world city of today.
I agree about libraries, I don't they should exist until a Literature tech. If anything it should be replaced with a scribe who would work at the palace to produce + 3 science/turn.
This could either be a Writing tech building or just a specialist that is unlocked at the Palace by Writing.
In the ancient & early classical era there should be almost no option to rush technology because survival and conquest were the only 2 focuses ancient civilizations had. It wasn't until civilizations developed legal and political structures to maintain stability that allowed the accumulation of wealth that enabled the beginning of an educated class of aristocrats that would advance a civilization.
The major thing I would like to see is an improvement in AI diplomacy.
I particularly want to see like a "balance of power" mentality in diplomacy, eg. if one civilization is beginning to pull away from the rest of the pack due to the sheer size of its empire and regular conquests, then its neighbours would try to correct that imbalance by allying against that civilization, in order to preserve a form of a "balance of power".
I've had heaps of games where some state on the other side of the map goes on to conquer a number of its neighbours fairly early on in the game and eventually gets too far ahead for anyone to reasonably catch up to, while its neighbours sit there declaring war on one another only to be eventually bulldozed from behind.
I like an idea I read here about the formation of alliance groups or pacts, or basically defensive pacts between a number of nations. This would make war incredibly interesting as an outbreak would be like an explosion as it cascades through the alliances invoking others to war.
This could be partially resolved if they made defense pacts easier to negotiate; I haven't played a single game of Civ 5 yet where an AI has agreed to a defense pact with me. Have no idea why..
More variation between civilizations is also preferred, however I can see how it could potentially destabilize the game by making some civilizations overpowered in some eras, etc.
lots of my ideas have been mentioned here
that said, i would like to see more terrain and resource types
The rational behind the idea of buildings only utilizing a certain number of population is to create build priorities to add some iota of actually having to think back in the game. As it stands now the game is losing any semblance of strategy. Add to that the city I live in has several marketplaces and several malls so it is not unrealistic to have multiple buildings of the same type.
Honestly how hard is it to plant 3 or 4 cities and then build the most wonders? It's not hard.
If I had my way each building produced would require one population to operate.
How about the ability to play an entire game in one (or more) eras? For instance, I know some players like warfair with the older units. If you could change the beginning and/or ending dates, it would be interesting.
Game speed :Ancient ,History, Marathon, Epic, Standard, Quick
Era : ' Disable era ' option . ( example, I don't like anything beyond Renaissance )
Map : More maps.
Map size : ' Giant ' option.
1 Unique units/building more.
More Civilizations .
Better Barbarians with much more unique units and healing. ( depending on where they are .. desert, woods, water, hill, plains, jungle, etc etc )
Ingame Editor which comes with the game.
1- If Civ VI is just a improved Civ V, I would be happy
2- Better AI and diplomacy (including Casus Beli system)
3- Capacity to create new civilizations without mods
4- Ethnical accuracy. At least with the skin color.
5- Don't follow exactly our history course (without the Roman Empire and Christianism, maybe we would not had the european Middle Age; we could never have discovered gunpowder; and whithout Hindenburg's acident, the zeppelins would be much more common - including as military units). Give us more liberty to try new Histories. All right, only for this we will need a expansion...
If they limit the number of units to a stack then make that number high enough to be able to take the city you are attacking. It does do much good to limit the number to 4 units/stack if the city you are trying to take is held by 6 units. You can take it unless you are considerable more advance in weapons than your opponent. Since you cant send one or 2 reinforcements through enemy territory and have them be in good enough health or survive you end up with twice as many stacks because you have to send another stack. Then you end up with more than you need which basically defeats the purpose of eliminating the stack of doom in the first place.
The problem of weak UA can be solved be giving the civilization with weaker UAs 2 instead of one/give each leader there own set of abilities so that if the is UA is weak then they can partial make up for it with the leaders ability bonuses.
Here are some of my ideas for a direction that I would like to see the game take.
Cities in Civ 6 are much more inward-focussed as the game progresses. Most mid-game buildings and almost all late-game buildings require a citizen to work them to get their full use (what we know as specialists in Civ 5). As the game goes on, the number of citizens working tiles outside the city walls goes down drastically. To compensate for this, we get villages. Villages work like mini-cities, complete with a population, but they can't build most buildings and are more focused on working tiles to get resources and food for the big cities. Villages are also much easier to capture, fixing the issue of cities being the only focus point of combat in Civ 5; now you actually have to defend the border if you don't want your land stolen out from under you.
The world is now a much more open space. I think 1UPT was a good decision for the future of the series, but maps in Civ 5 are way too cramped. It's very easy to run out of space for your units, especially in a war, and units that are supposed to excel in open spaces (chariots, horsemen, tanks) have very limited usability with all the hills, forests, jungles, and rivers all over the place. Tiles should be smaller and tiles with flat terrain should be more abundant. Essentially, you have much more nothing in between the areas where you have something.
The game now keeps track of your citizens and allows you to move them from one city to another. This is done via menu, much like espionage in Civ 5. Now you can evacuate citizens to keep them out of danger, or send them off to newly-founded or captured cities to begin working the new territory.
Happiness now works on two levels: local and global. A city only maintains maximum productivity while it has positive local happiness, which decreases with population and can be increased through various means. Global happiness is the net sum of the local happiness of every city and other sources of global happiness, and effects civilization-wide functions such as military strength and ideological contentment.
HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL: A new system is introduced called Great Civilization Points (or Greatness Points, or Empire Points, or Sid Points, or whatever). At the end of each turn, your excess happiness is converted to GCP, the same way you get Golden Age Points now. GCP is how your civilization improves itself. Every city you found costs GCP. Every new citizen costs GCP. Expanding becomes more strategic; if I build this city, not only will it cost me the GCP I've saved up, but it will decrease my overall happiness, meaning that I'll be getting GCP slower. But GCP isn't only used to expand and grow, it's also used to glorify your civilization through Golden Ages and Wonders. That's right, Wonders. Wonders are no longer built like buildings. You cannot get your favorite Wonder snipped out from under you with three turns left. Instead, you can "purchase" the blueprints of any available Wonder by spending GCP. That Wonder is now yours to build at your leisure. Nobody else has access to it. Great Engineers can also be expended to snag blueprints.
I agree with so much posted here so I'll just add something new.
Add a supply layer to the map (like the hex ownership one) with the following rules:
A hex on the supply layer under a city always belongs to the owner of the city
Any unit that can trace a continuous path of supply hexes back to a friendly city will have a logistic supply chain.
Any unit with a logistic supply chain that moves into another hex will claim that supply hex (which means capturing neutral civ owned without DoW)
Friendly civ hexes count towards calculating logistic supply chains
Any unit that does NOT have a logistic supply chain will be unable to heal (and maybe a small combat penalty)
Some units such as warriors, archers, scouts, lancers (maybe), paratroopers, all ships etc will not be penalized if they are out of a logistic supply chain to simulate foraging (for early infantry) or self support (for paratroops, ships). Ships would always be able to claim a supply hex to extend supply over oceans for invasions, or interdict supply lines.
This would make encircling armies a devastatingly effective tactic, just like in real life, and would provide an effective defensive strategy - cut their supply lines. It would also make naval combat absolutely brutal
I would have modded it in V but I don't know how to add the layer to the map, and I assume it isn't easy. Or even possible. And that's without trying to teach the V AI how to use the mechanic
Separate names with a comma.