1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civilization 6: Ideas

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by Pepo, Oct 6, 2013.

  1. _EL_

    _EL_ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2014
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Brazil
    Well I can understand that too. Playstyle is a good part of the ingame experience (and I try it a lot).But sometimes we could have more. And civ 6 could use that in my opinion. Since it is a suggestion, sure there will be good and bad things said. I still think that going deeper on the civs is better than adding new ones. And yes, nothing wrong with obliterating English Navy lol. Nothing has to be shoved in ppls throats. We can use criativity sure, but I think that if a sequel has to be made, let it be greater, not just the same thing with better graphics. Something new could be tried out and that's what I am talking about.
    But that was just one of the things. Civ V is far from bad. There are a lot of things yet to try here but I still feel that after a while only colours differ one civ from the other. Off course this does not happen in every game :)
     
  2. rekrut

    rekrut Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1
    Hi All,

    I have just read through this thread and decided to add to the Civ6 wishlist.

    I do love the concept of ethnicity and the map being fully populated upfront. On top of that, however, my dream would be to start with a civilization without any pre-defined traits, with the exception of a name of the nation, a colour motiff and ethnicity. All the national traits (special ability, special untis) would appear during the gameplay and would be a result of the actions taken throughout...


    Idea 1. Start of game and ethnicity:
    There should be an initial phase before the actual gameplay of today kicks in.
    I would appreciate if the game started with a certain part of the map visible to the player (a single hex + 3 hex radius) and the player would chose the initial start hex. This would be the "camp" (like today's barbarian camps) and not a city yet. You do not start with a settler.
    The same could happen to all other tribes, i.e. every AI-controllod tribe starts in a camp. Imagine there would be plenty of them (e.g. roughly every 6 or 8 hexes there is a camp) and each of them would have an ethnicity (with the camps close to each other being grouped into the same ethnicity, such as Slavic or Germanic or Chinese). Then depending on the quality of the location and some other factors, these camps would develop into:
    - cities (initially as city states, without the option to build settlers, however the best of the best city states could start building settlers and start new cities, i.e. they would become actual AI opponent civilizations as we know them today)
    - barbarian camps (aggressive, producing only military units, as they are today)
    - nomadic tribes that would just pack their camp and go somewhere else to find a better spot and start a new camp or just continue nomadism
    - not devlop, i.e. stay being a neutral or friendly camp

    The human players would need to grow the initial camp into a city (becoming a city state) and then after some time be able to build own settlers. However as the surrounding area is full of other camps, cities (CS) or even already first civilizations, city building would be only one of many means of expansion. It could also be conquest or diplomacy or culture. By the means of these, human players and AI civilizations would in fact start creating unions of tribes that eventually could grow into a NATION, that would be self-conscious (collecting the friendly tribal camps and the nomads into a nation).

    People from the tribes around could migrate to the cities as well, sometimes adding to ethnical diversity (and causing ethnic issues in the future).

    If you let them, they grow to city states or even civilizations, if not, they are the human mass that contribute to your civilization.

    Idea 2. Technologies and civ special abilities:
    The technology tree needs to be revised. As already posted, today it is quite boring, i.e. sooner or later you need to develop all technologies. You need navigation even if you do not have access to sea. I believe there should be slightly fewer technologies, but each of them should have their own sub-branches (these are more the applications of the technology rather than technologies themselves, I would call them "methods"). You develop technologies, but at the same time you can work on one method at a time, i.e. deep-dive some technologies. There should be plenty of the "methods" and not enough time to develop even 20% of them. You chose only the ones that you need (e.g. initially driven by the land characteristics). The more you dig into a certain technology, the bigger the chance that your civilization would get a boost of a special ability.
    This would result in civilizations being really diverse. Any non-basic unit can become a special unit and any non-basic building (i.e. upgraded through mastering advanced "methods") could become a special building, not known by any other civilization on the planet.

    I believe this would add to gameplay diversity without adding to game design complexity.

    I could imagine a civilization that starts in a coast to master whaling, sailing, rowing, advanced fishing, special types of trade ships and special marine units, while another civilization that would never arrive to sea coast focus more on mining precious metals and some special units with bonuses in mountains.

    If you build a lot of farms, you get farming unique abilities. If you are a warmonger, you get military unique abilities.

    Once you're done with the game, you can look back and appreciate your civilization, that has been fully shaped by you.

    Idea 3. Future:
    I would add a very basic gameplay for the exploration of the moon (yes) for additional magical resources. This would involve space ship defense, etc. and would allow to build futuristic units and building on Earth. But I am not hooked on this. I would simply appreciate more focus on future.
    In fact I hate CIV for not allowing to explore even the modern era. The final eras (if the game does not finish before) are the time to focus on optimizing for victory conditions and not on regular gameplay, obviously.

    Sorry for making the first post in the forum so long. I know these ideas are around, however I wanted to give them my personal view.
     
  3. Civbra

    Civbra Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    126
    hey there !
    forgive me if I write something wrong ... still studying english (I'm brazilian )

    I have seen several comments and posted in another group a few things I'd like to see in Civ 6 on Civ 5 now are very bad . I will not make a great post even pq several of the ideas that many others have already commented ( I see that my ideas are not so far from the wishes of others and I also see that many want to evolve how q Civ game , failing to be a simplistic game and pass to be true as has already been the best strategy game of all time ) .

    Well one of the things I saw and what support is a " pre-game " where villages and tribes develop and then become a civilization . Ridiculous all started at the same time and most who do not blow a city in 1 turn lose points .... I believe this proposal and mechanics already talked about for after 3 cities formed al begin the real game ... but without many penalties for those who were in a state less so to speak.

    Someone somewhere commented on this post here change the mechanics of production. Congratulations wrote it in another post most was not as good as what I read of this person . Instead of workers and settlers (which in my opinion comes a time q Suck care for them and I think it makes the most qa poe on automatic ) , the city has a number of inhabitants . worth somewhat of production and al directs you to what you want to build . allowing you to build more than one thing at a time. Eg if production starts with 100 - 30 for the prox river farm, another 40 for a tent and finally 30 for the library , or know it . Like to see the tiles around the city with modifications and not a amontuado farms and mines .

    Another thing that I am disappointed with Civ 5 and just that one tile City tamnho 40 ( was more advanced ) is the same for horses , planting qquer thing .... very ridiculous proportion . I know it will cost a lot of work to develop and saw comments wanting this round and also a much larger three-dimensional world .... I got to see comments imagining a part of the game where you only have access to the map, and then as in google earth opens a macro management further .

    many other things like diplomacy (conquering a city and after 200 rounds other civ still be so hostile), culture, trade and especially the branch of technology and social and political ideology not like. more technology can search more than one at the same time. Leave socias policies more in line with government policies (eg adopt teocentrista type of government is not like freedom of expression as we see in civ V)
    improve the mechanics of the game ... as I said the tiles are ridiculous ... an archer can attack two hex. is absurd! a city defends itself even with a mountain in the middle (please be able to work in mountain CIV 6)

    Oh one more thing before I finish - more leaders and more units and buildings and unique leader can change over time - pq today after hours playing civ ... I do not see any difference in starting with Greek or Babylonian which is very sad this.

    Nor will I get into honors religion and espionage to me in civ 5 they do not exist right ... too bad the mechanics who formulated for such.

    al and guys what do you think? commenting please let us exchange ideas!
     
  4. phaethon16

    phaethon16 King

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Messages:
    719
    I think that the most interesting ideas that you propose are to create an era before the game really starts, where you're focused on becoming more than just a tribe, and the idea that cities gradually improve the surrounding tiles, rather than having workers. For the no workers idea, I think that some improvements could theoretically work that way, such as farms, mines, and other tile improvements like that. That might actually be more realistic. On the other hand, things like roads, forts, and possible improvements like the canal should be built by workers because that's how those things are historically built. Rome was able to incorporate the far flung regions of its empire so well because it had a mobile workforce. So, I think the idea of having cities build some improvements could actually work and be really interesting, but we should still have workers for roads and such. Also, maybe if workers were only for roads, roads and their like should be more important.

    As for your idea to have a pre-civilization era, I don't that would work so well, because it would have the possibility to create a huge imbalance in development. If some civs didn't manage to make it to the civilization stage at the same time as others, that would create a huge imbalance as to how they would progress. As it is, some civs somehow manage to fall behind massively, not building cities, not discovering tech, and having weak cultures and militaries. If some got started later, this gap would only widen. I like the idea, because it would add a sense of realism to the game, but I'm not sure how it would work in actuality.
     
  5. andreafin

    andreafin Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    uk
    you mean like the terra map from civ 4? the only occupants of the new world were barbarian cities. the only difference they had from being civs themselves was no central organisation or rule; they werent city states, because they never had disputes with other barbarian cities, they were all barbarian anarchists!. on one hand it annoyed me that fairly developed cities you couldnt negotiate with, because they never became a nation; on the other hand you could get there first with advanced units and conquer them with ready made cities, reducing cost and time needed to generate that many settler and workers (you ALWAYS captured workers). you definitely wanted to get there before anyone else did.
     
  6. andreafin

    andreafin Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    uk
    i would like to be able to assign a ship to escort my naval trade route units. its annoying to have barbarian ships appear without warning and pillage one, and have to hunt down the pirates and then the place spawning them. also the game im playing now (going for culture win) i seem to be only civ actively hunting down and destroying barbs. it might be because i have the largest military in the world. maybe a world congress or UN mandate could be awarded in these situations or voted on; i wouldnt minded making enough destroyers to escort as many trade routes as possible, whether mine or other civs. tho if i were at war with one it might be a bit tempting to pillage as part of war declarations...
     
  7. andreafin

    andreafin Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    uk
    being able to mediate between warring parties better. yes you can currently bribe one side or another to end war but i need to explain exactly the situation gave me that idea.

    this current game im first in all demographics. korea took out china early on and controls most of north america. i control the bulk of south america, with japan and persia. since korea went to war with japan early on and got a few of the cities they also have small presence, and i made defensive pacts with japan and persia after bribing south korea to make peace with japan. im also friendly with the other civs in alaska area (persia colonised there and i think inca are there) which has made situation stable in the americas. in asia france is being the russians and we have differing ideologies. they puppeted all of assyria (who was the global outcast at the time) but ashurbanipal still had a general and some units floating around, for centuries gradually losing numbers. i finally took pity on them and founded a city on small island in the pacific and gave it to them. they were immediately DoW by japan, south korea and various others...now none of them wanted to make peace. i cant make them a vassal. i do want to make defensive pacts but not while everyone takes turns being at war.

    yet when trying to make peace nobody wanted to. very frustrating. if i could call for a UN mandate (i AM the baddest around after all) to mediate, or peacekeeping forces to defend the one small assyrian city, it would be great. i wound up giving them a machine gun unit and a destroyer to defend the city from south korean frigates, and had to gift them a work boat to rebuild their fishing fleet since they have the only farmable land of the two hexes (the other is mountain) and had fish next to them. despite being friendly with everyone and the biggest military nobody wants to make peace.
    however, as soon as i got into the info age my 'friends with everyone else' (except france who became guarded and assyria who being an ungrateful sod was obnoxiously guarded despite my pity and magnanimity in rebirthing his nation) suddenly became one after another 'afraid' and begging me to be merciful. i dont understand why this is; i never threaten and i use my spies in france to warn other civs of french actions against them (france is order and im freedom). but if im so scary, surely instead of bribing i could lean on all other civs to lay off assyria. its not true vassalage because im not telling him what to do; but i cant form a defensive pact at least while he is at war. nor can i make a CS declaration of protection despite that being pretty much what he is now. threats of force (backed with force) might not frighten france. maybe korea also has so many cities they think they can play in my league, but japan and persia no way. anyone who is afraid should basically pay attention if i say to them (maybe its a demand i want) make peace with (whoever) NOW. if civ 5 had vassals i doubt assyria would ask or submit to that anyways. but i own cities closest apart from nara and i have alliance with japan, and they should listen to me more than some far away state with an agenda, since i could make their war with korea look like a playground fight
     
  8. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,150
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    I've suggested allowing for UN resolutions to stop wars, between city states, or from a major civ attacking a city state :p

    The problem with forcing wars to stop between majorCivs is that it breaks the flow of the game. Sometimes, the winning side just has to win to grow and challenge the human player or I can envisage a situation where this mechanic is abused and all potential runaways is kept from running away
     
  9. andreafin

    andreafin Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    uk
    which reminds me i REALLY want to be able to ignore (veto!) un or world congress stuff i dont like. such as trade embargoes with CS or banned luxury resources or even veto world leader resolutions. you need to be one of the 5 top civs when world congress or un is founded to be permanent security council member able to veto. obviously if i got the biggest military by a long way i can get away with it maybe with a trade embargo slapped on me. but it could also mean if i THINK i am far more powerful than i am another state might table a resolution to stop me and ignore the need for resolutions if i veto and form alliances 'of the willing'. thats cue for a REAL world war perhaps. maybe the game could track this pattern and designate the ensuing conflict(s) as the xth world war?
     
  10. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,150
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
  11. andreafin

    andreafin Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    uk
    thanks its got some good ideas !
     
  12. Civbra

    Civbra Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    126

    About the idea of an era at the beginning of the game, I know it was right to develop vacant and that it requires a lot, but a lot of work ... it was just something I'd like to see (maybe the developers surprise us) anyway. Now as to what was said about the workers just that what he meant - I think by trying to simplify not write. Workers would make roads, bridges etc.. I have in mind until you know, aside part of the job and the city workers to do wonders. (I do not like to have a thousand wonders in a city. Saw a post where the guy said to buy a great engineer the project eg the pyramids. Leaving only give that civilization would build the pyramids and cost much more would put ... more benefits than 2 workers and 25% improvement tile)
     
  13. Ikael

    Ikael King

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2005
    Messages:
    873
    I already posted my uber-longass set of ideas for Civ 6 in another tread, but if I would have to resume which type of advancements I would like to see on future civilization games:


    -A kind of a "corruption" type of mechanism that decreases the culture and science output of cities the further they are located from your capital, but leave production and gold output unscatched. Love this idea

    - Include an anti-runaway civ type of mechanism that would make the end game more interesting. Breaking off large empires trought revolution and independence movements once nationalism arrives would be my personal bet

    - A science system a la Master of Orion 2: research the technology, but then get to pick the specific application for it

    - Make your culture a combination of 5 aspects of your civilization able to be evolved independently: religion, language, lifestyle, art and ideas. You would be then able to spread one or another to foreign civilizations, preserve your culture's purity or merge it with other ones

    - World wonder "themes". Combine two world wonders for having your city earn a specific bonus (aka, a "title"). Ex: Eiffel Tower + Louvre museum = City of lights: +5 happiness on the city. Specialization trought wonder positioning sounds quite cool

    - Make happiness a local resource again, please

    - One unit per tile, but with a twist. Make it able for allies to share tiles with your units. Watch both diplomacy and warfare increase their complexity tenfold


    - A diplomatic system that includes the public image of your civilization as an asset to exploit in order to justify (or dennounce) wars a la cassus belli
     
  14. Badben

    Badben Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2014
    Messages:
    3
    I want to see a completely revamped research system. what I think might be cool is if you never actually directly research the next tech you want, but instead discover new tech by doing things in game. for example starting the game near water means you will begin researching sailing immediately, and then if you build many work boats or use your navy often you will discover new naval techs like optics. or if you have many hills nearby you will naturally discover mining, and the more mines you build the faster you will learn iron working and so on, build lots of armies and fight a lot and you'll get more military techs. and when you build libraries and universities, discovering techs happens more often. I think that would be cool.

    another thing I think would be great is to introduce a system by which you have more issues with your own population. as it stands you are only concerned about their happiness, I think they should make it more difficult to control your own populace, and your populace should demand specific things like build a library or research a certain tech, or attack a certain player.

    finally and probably my biggest wish is a better AI, there's no such thing as negotiating in this game, the AI will always demand a specific price which never changes. maybe make the AI a little more random or something. something else that could tie into this which I think would be cool is if luxury items have a value that changes depending on how prevalent it is.
     
  15. andreafin

    andreafin Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    uk
    thats an interesting one, the direction of research by what you build or can build due to location. it would allow cities to specialise again; one would concentrate on building your military, the ones on coast developing advanced navies, the one in the plains researching agriculture and farming, the ones near the woods the lumber business. resources could fold into that also; if there were ones like gold, it could cause that city using it to develop cultural things like gold smiths and jewelers, which spread your culture and bring in wealth in exports...and make that city more desired as target of conquest.
    a quick way to do it would be grey out options until you had a city in correct place, such as you cant research anything naval until you have a city on a coast (or on a river which is navigable to the sea!).
    maybe some basic techs at first would need to be exempt (universally available). and going back to naval development as an example, there was a contest with a prize offered to make a portable but accurate clock that can work at sea with wave action etc not affecting it offered by the british government in order to improve the ability to navigate safely. so there should be some civil policy thing u can select to allow you to offer a prize to develop a tech you cant ordinarily have access to yet, until another civ develops it first perhaps, with limits so you cant develop xcom or something this way in ancient times. also there should be a chance nobody wins the prize anyway, tho for 100% realism maybe there could be fraudsters who try to claim the prizes XD
     
  16. JeszKar

    JeszKar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010
    Messages:
    74
    I happy to see I'm not the only one who like to write long idea posts. :)
    I'm not really understand your last idea. Some of the CIV already declare war against you for whatever reason, what would this change?
    But anyway, the diplomatic part of the game really need some serious improvements.
     
  17. seancolorado

    seancolorado Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,109
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    I like this idea a lot
     
  18. andreafin

    andreafin Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    uk
    thinking more on that idea of the research system, you would have nations build up where cities depend on each other and losing one becomes more of a blow than now. if you lose the cities on the plains supplying most of the food to the others you will have starving citizens, anarchy and halted production, shrinking cities maybe
     
  19. Skipity

    Skipity Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    99
    If it's still 1 unit per tile and an AI that has no idea how to win I'll keep on playing BtS.
     
  20. searcheagle

    searcheagle Emperor

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,139
    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    I think that it would be good to have all resources transported. This would increase game play related to resources.
    I like it. I want to make the naval portion of the game more important. What do you mean shipped to another port?

    I'd like gunships that can roam through oceans and cities.

    I like this. I think it would make the
     

Share This Page