Eagle Pursuit's Civ VII wishlist

Eagle Pursuit

Scir-Gerefa
Moderator
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
16,497
Since the Civ VI Anthology has been announced, I would like to post a list of things I would like to see in Civ VII. I’ve been saving these ideas up for a while.


*Trade Routes need a rethink. They’ve been the way they are, basically, for 1.5 iterations. It’s time for a change-up. I don’t have any suggestions, but surely it could be made less cumbersome and/or more interesting.


*Agendas. Whether AI or human, a player should get periodic freebies when they behave according to their agenda. For instance, Genghis Khan would get a permanent +1 combat strength for cavalry units for every 15 cavalry units acquired. Trajan would get a lump sum of Gold every time his empire accumulates another 35 land tiles. Values are negotiable, of course.


*Units. They feel so basic, especially how they work together. I’d like to see units be able to coordinate better. Particularly, I think ranged units could be weakened if they were given more abilities to support melee units. They could have a “Suppressive Fire” command that would make the target more vulnerable to a melee attack on the same turn. And if a ranged unit ends its turn with full movement, it should be able to fire upon (1) enemy unit that enters within range on that enemy unit’s turn. Additionally, melee units should have an “Ambush” ability, which decreases reciprocal damage when attacking an adjacent, unfortified unit in rough terrain, if the melee unit had full movement at the end of its previous turn. Scout class units should have an “Infiltrate” command to enter closed borders for a limited number of turns, with a cooldown. Abilities like these could be used to create Unique Units, like giving “Ambush” to a Scout class unit.


*Corps and Armies. I would like to combine not just units of the same type, but units of different classes, for different stats to the resulting unit. For instance, a Cav unit combined with a Melee unit would result in Mounted Infantry, a Melee class Corps that has +1 Movement and is immune to zone of control. Combine a Ranged unit and a Melee unit to create Grenadiers, a Ranged Corps with improved defensive strength.


*Military Engineers. These guys should get a promotion when they are created a la Apostles that gives them a special improvement they can create like bridgeheads, citadels (superforts with ranged attacks), mulberries (that allow land units to embark and disembark without using all their movement points). I would also like them to have the Sapper ability to destroy city and encampment defenses (over the course of a certain number of turns if not prevented by capture).


*Aircraft Carriers. I’m not a fan of these things just being mobile airfields. Forget putting air units on them. Use the Corps/Armies function (as improved by the above suggestion) to combine air units to a carrier, granting the carrier the ability to attack land or naval units (when combined with Fighter-Bombers(see below)) or protect an area from land-based air units and other carriers (when combined with Fighters). Functionally, their attacks would operate by the push of a button like regular ranged units.


*Air Units. Introduce a third type, Fighter-Bomber. Bombers should be used strictly to destroy infrastructure and would be weak to Fighters. Fighters should only sortie against other aircraft. Fighter-Bombers (possibly created by Corps/Army combining the two) would be specialized for attacking land and naval units and be weak to Fighters.


*Terrain. I love how Humankind has created multiple elevations on their maps, and I would like to see Civ do likewise.


*Districts. These were a very nice addition to the series in Civ VI. I would like to see more creativity in adjacency bonuses. For example, putting an Industrial Zone next to an Encampment would give a production boost specifically to land units and also a science boost for techs that unlock land units. Put it next to a Harbor for a production boost to naval units, science boost to naval unit techs, and increased Gold from Trade Routes in that city. Put it next to a City Center to increase Food as people flock to the city for employment. Next to an Aerodrome, you get the idea. Put a Theater Square next to a Commercial Hub to get Tourism from outgoing and incoming international Trade Routes in that city.


*Buildings. More alternatives, please. I would like more instances like the Art/Archaeology Museums, the Stables/Barracks, and the Coal/Oil/Nuclear Power Plants, where it provides interesting choices.


*Barbarian and Monopoly game modes. I love these. Make these standard base game features in Civ VII, and make Civ Abilities, Leader Abilities, Unique Improvements, Social Policies, and whatever that play off them. There is just so much potential here.


Build-your-own-Civ Feature: Modding is all well and good, but it is a skill that is out of reach for much of the playerbase. Everyone has an obscure little culture or fifty they’d like to see in the game. I want a Builder that allows the player to create their own custom civ using pre-made modular ability components. Throw in a dozen or so generic, static leaderheads and other art to choose from. The player can then write in their civ’s name, adjective, etc. They pick a design and color an emblem. They can also input a city list and pick an agenda. The best thing about this is there is a new role for modders. Besides still being able to make full civs for people to download, they can also create new ability components for the Civ Builder, new leaderheads, new emblem art, improvement models, building models, etc. ADDENDUM: If this proves popular, it would be great content for DLC. I know some other games I play sell DLC with character creator options and people do buy them.
 
Last edited:

Bactrian

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
63
*Trade Routes need a rethink. They’ve been the way they are, basically, for 1.5 iterations. It’s time for a change-up. I don’t have any suggestions, but surely it could be made less cumbersome and/or more interesting.

I would love, love, love even a basic simulation of trade in Civ VII. Nothing super detailed, nothing that would reward esoteric min-maxing, no supply-chain-management-game stuff, but enough to account for the fact that wealth is often created by the exchange of goods and not just their production. I envision a system that needs to be managed by the player but not directly controlled. Meaning, trade happens automatically at all times, it's up to the player to take advantage of it to the best of their ability by trying to direct it in certain ways or gain advantages over other civs.

You could also build such a system to allow some cities/regions to support others with food. Think of Egypt sending grain to Rome and the necessity for the empire to protect those important trade routes. I think that might open up great opportunities for emergent gameplay and storytelling.
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
4,788
Location
north of Steilacoom, WA
Since the Civ VI Anthology has been announced, I would like to post a list of things I would like to see in Civ VII. I’ve been saving these ideas up for a while.

*Trade Routes need a rethink. They’ve been the way they are, basically, for 1.5 iterations. It’s time for a change-up. I don’t have any suggestions, but surely it could be made less cumbersome and/or more interesting.

I'm going to have to spread out my comments on these, because they are all good and all deserve some serious discussion, but doing it all at once will run on for pages!

The biggest single Requirement for a change in Trade in Civ VII is simple:

Have ONE Trade System.

Right now, Civ VI has two systems: a diplomatic Trade System in which you trade with other Civs for Resources, with no limits on distance or number of trade routes, and a 'regular Trade System which is limited in number of routes and distance and trades only for generic Production, Food, and diplomatic pressure. These two need to become One, dealing with everybody and all the resources and bonuses in a single coherent System.

That system, at a minimum, needs to include the following:

1. Trade with Barbarians, City States, and other Civs in much the same way: trading resources from 'barbarian' or non-Civ actors has been part of history since before history: Neolithic 'cities' were trading pottery, Obsidian and Copper Resources, luxury goods (decorative seashells, 'shiny stones') long before the nominal 4000 BE Start of Game, and most of the trade was with Non-City actors.

2. The distance a trade route runs needs to be dependent on Technology: sea routes and river-borne routes are longer, can carry more, and make more profit. Bulk Goods like Food cannot be carried over land at all until Railroads or Powered Vehicles in the Industrial and Modern Eras. Trading Posts or other 'extenders' should be possible to establish by either diplomatic or military means, and potential 'seeds' for growing Settlements or even Cities

3. Trade should include Internal Trade and Trade in non-specific Resources - the possibility, as mentioned, of Trading Food or other 'resources' among your own cities, or getting a major diplomatic boost by selling/trading Food to another Civ - or a Barbarian/City State or other Non-Civ actor. Internal Trade should not just be for building of primitive roads, it should provide major boosts to cities in Production, Food, and other 'currencies' in the game.

4. Trade Routes should be avenues for more than just Trade. Technology, Religion, what Civ VI calls Civic and Social Policies all spread along Trade Routes with both positive and extremely negative consequences both ways. Plagues all too often spread as well - if there is ever going to be a Plague System in a regular Civ game again, the spread of contagion along Trade Routes has to be part of it.

5. Numbers of Trade Routes need to be limited in some way, but not as limited as in Civ VI: there were great trading powers early in history, and there were more than 1 - 2 of them, and they weren't all Portugal. Humankind ties all trade to resources - number of possible Trade Routes is simply the number of Resources you have to trade, or that someone has to trade with you. This is a possible basis for a limit on Trade Routes, but by no means the only one: number of Trade Routes could, as in Civ VI, also be limited (but much more liberal than in Civ VI) by numbers of Trade related Buildings like Markets, Caravanserais, Harbors, etc. Investing in 'Trade Infrastructure' should Mean Something, and should be a requirement for being a Great Trading Nation. Establishing a Trade Route for specific Goods ('Tribute') might even be a diplomatic requirement to end a war - Trade has always had Diplomatic consequences and influences and Diplomacy and attitudes between nations have always been influenced by Trade.

6. Related to Trade, Resources need a complete rethink. The artificial division of resources into Luxury, Bonus and Strategic needs to go: the usage of a resource should depend on the Technology and requirements of the Civ: the in-game circumstances, not some arbitrary definition set by the game designers. You should, therefore, be able to trade any Resource: or not trade specific resources because, for example, it is obvious that trading Iron to the Barbarian Howling Nutters tribe will allow them to make swords or submachineguns and that is Not A Good Thing for you. Along with that, there should be a possibility that your government-mandated embargo will be circumvented by Smugglers and short of a major investment in resources - like, say, building a Great Wall to regulate any Trade contacts between You and Them - you cannot completely stop the smuggling - but you can tax any Foreign Goods that still show up in your markets.

And if that seems like Too Much Complexity note that most of it is Invisible to the gamer - you indicate on a list of available resources what you will and will not Trade (and possibly amounts) and then leave it alone until the Trade Partner comes around with a counter-proposal, much as now in Civ VI. IF 'smuggling' (or piracy, or Howling Nutters acting like Road Agents) interferes with Trade, you have a number of actions - like now - to mitigate them, some of which may cost more than the trade is worth, but may have diplomatic effects that make it worthwhile: Trade, Diplomatic, Internal Political, and other 'systems' in the game should be related and have effects on each other: the lack of that in too any places is a major failing in Civ VI, IMHO.
 

Eagle Pursuit

Scir-Gerefa
Moderator
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
16,497
I'm going to have to spread out my comments on these, because they are all good and all deserve some serious discussion, but doing it all at once will run on for pages!

The biggest single Requirement for a change in Trade in Civ VII is simple:

Have ONE Trade System.

Right now, Civ VI has two systems: a diplomatic Trade System in which you trade with other Civs for Resources, with no limits on distance or number of trade routes, and a 'regular Trade System which is limited in number of routes and distance and trades only for generic Production, Food, and diplomatic pressure. These two need to become One, dealing with everybody and all the resources and bonuses in a single coherent System.

That system, at a minimum, needs to include the following:

1. Trade with Barbarians, City States, and other Civs in much the same way: trading resources from 'barbarian' or non-Civ actors has been part of history since before history: Neolithic 'cities' were trading pottery, Obsidian and Copper Resources, luxury goods (decorative seashells, 'shiny stones') long before the nominal 4000 BE Start of Game, and most of the trade was with Non-City actors.

2. The distance a trade route runs needs to be dependent on Technology: sea routes and river-borne routes are longer, can carry more, and make more profit. Bulk Goods like Food cannot be carried over land at all until Railroads or Powered Vehicles in the Industrial and Modern Eras. Trading Posts or other 'extenders' should be possible to establish by either diplomatic or military means, and potential 'seeds' for growing Settlements or even Cities

3. Trade should include Internal Trade and Trade in non-specific Resources - the possibility, as mentioned, of Trading Food or other 'resources' among your own cities, or getting a major diplomatic boost by selling/trading Food to another Civ - or a Barbarian/City State or other Non-Civ actor. Internal Trade should not just be for building of primitive roads, it should provide major boosts to cities in Production, Food, and other 'currencies' in the game.

4. Trade Routes should be avenues for more than just Trade. Technology, Religion, what Civ VI calls Civic and Social Policies all spread along Trade Routes with both positive and extremely negative consequences both ways. Plagues all too often spread as well - if there is ever going to be a Plague System in a regular Civ game again, the spread of contagion along Trade Routes has to be part of it.

5. Numbers of Trade Routes need to be limited in some way, but not as limited as in Civ VI: there were great trading powers early in history, and there were more than 1 - 2 of them, and they weren't all Portugal. Humankind ties all trade to resources - number of possible Trade Routes is simply the number of Resources you have to trade, or that someone has to trade with you. This is a possible basis for a limit on Trade Routes, but by no means the only one: number of Trade Routes could, as in Civ VI, also be limited (but much more liberal than in Civ VI) by numbers of Trade related Buildings like Markets, Caravanserais, Harbors, etc. Investing in 'Trade Infrastructure' should Mean Something, and should be a requirement for being a Great Trading Nation. Establishing a Trade Route for specific Goods ('Tribute') might even be a diplomatic requirement to end a war - Trade has always had Diplomatic consequences and influences and Diplomacy and attitudes between nations have always been influenced by Trade.

6. Related to Trade, Resources need a complete rethink. The artificial division of resources into Luxury, Bonus and Strategic needs to go: the usage of a resource should depend on the Technology and requirements of the Civ: the in-game circumstances, not some arbitrary definition set by the game designers. You should, therefore, be able to trade any Resource: or not trade specific resources because, for example, it is obvious that trading Iron to the Barbarian Howling Nutters tribe will allow them to make swords or submachineguns and that is Not A Good Thing for you. Along with that, there should be a possibility that your government-mandated embargo will be circumvented by Smugglers and short of a major investment in resources - like, say, building a Great Wall to regulate any Trade contacts between You and Them - you cannot completely stop the smuggling - but you can tax any Foreign Goods that still show up in your markets.

And if that seems like Too Much Complexity note that most of it is Invisible to the gamer - you indicate on a list of available resources what you will and will not Trade (and possibly amounts) and then leave it alone until the Trade Partner comes around with a counter-proposal, much as now in Civ VI. IF 'smuggling' (or piracy, or Howling Nutters acting like Road Agents) interferes with Trade, you have a number of actions - like now - to mitigate them, some of which may cost more than the trade is worth, but may have diplomatic effects that make it worthwhile: Trade, Diplomatic, Internal Political, and other 'systems' in the game should be related and have effects on each other: the lack of that in too any places is a major failing in Civ VI, IMHO.

My big want for Trade Routes is that it should take resource scarcity into account. A route from a city with Cocoa and Niter should make more gold when sent to a civ that lacks a source of those.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PiR

oSiyeza

Prince
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
588
Location
Spain
If they not redesign ages, governors, religion, diplomacy, eurekas, WC; allow for real wars, add competitive domination AIs, remove emphasis on bonus, add vassals, include negative effects, scrap the repair system... I will not even care on any stuff they may add or improve.
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
4,788
Location
north of Steilacoom, WA
My big want for Trade Routes is that it should take resource scarcity into account. A route from a city with Cocoa and Niter should make more gold when sent to a civ that lacks a source of those.

One of the advantages of a Real Computer Game as opposed to the attempt to computerize a Board Game we've been stuck with for Lo these many years, is that the Computer can simulate the 'invisible hand' of the marketplace - even an ancient and international marketplace - without bothering the player with all the calculations.

So, yes, the prices for goods of all kinds should reflect their scarcity - and also how useful they are given the current level of Technology and the in-game situation. Gunpowder or its component, Niter, might be a Nice To Have item of no particular importance, until a war starts and you need countless tons of the stuff. And, once you push out of the Industrial Era, gunpowder becomes a Non-Military resource because Smokeless Powder is the mainstay of weapons and it uses entirely different components (cotton gets really, really important as one of those components, though) BUT 'niter' becomes a component for artificial Fertilizer and so a top dollar (or Thaler, or Tetradrachem) item for your farms - until Fritz Haber's process is discovered and all that can be manufactured a will.

There should be a constant 'churn' of prices changing and the importance of various goods and resources changing as the game progresses or regresses. Luckily for us, all that can be programmed and simply appear as the End Result price mark on the International Commodities Exchange or whatever mechanism the game design team decides to use.

As another Footnote to any Trade discussion, as the game progresses the importance of 'raw' Resources should become less and less. Even as early as the Classical Age, manufactured goods were far more lucrative as trade goods than raw materials. Gold was valuable, but gold jewelry was much more valuable and even late in the Ancient Era (prior to 1500 BCE) decorated Pottery was a major trade item - a manufactured 'resource'.
To return to Niter/Saltpeter as an example, there are in fact very few natural 'deposits' of the stuff in the world: most of it was manufactured in Nitraries from the 16th century on, so that the Civ VI Strategic resource should, in fact, have simply been a Building or Improvement not requiring any on-map resources at all - the raw materials for the Niraries were human, plant and animal waste of almost any kind, allowed to cook in its own decomposition: Attractiveness Level -10,000,000 per tile, but pretty self-contained.
 

Haig

Deity
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
2,843
Location
Finland
Eagle Pursuit & Boris good ideas.

My number one wish is for stacks to return, in a form where there is a limit to what and how many units it can include. With techs like mobilization growing the cap. I think it would help the ai.

I would like religion to move away from movable units into something more invisible, or working like trade routes where you choose a target.

I would like city population to show ethnic cultures (Paris: 78% french, 12% Russian, 10% Aztec etc.).
This would have gameplay effects.

I want each goverment type to have a positive and negative effect and city-states have a goverment too. Unique policy cards usable only for certain govs too.

Graphically, I would love for each era, unit and tech to have their own "art picture", how it is in Civ 5 and Humankind.

New resource called Power or Influence or something that could be used in many ways, like influencing citystates, forcing demands etc.

I am available for use in Frankenstein Team, if Firaxis spies are watching.. :thumbsup:
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2017
Messages
660
Location
Minneapolis, MN
*Terrain. I love how Humankind has created multiple elevations on their maps, and I would like to see Civ do likewise.

I would like to see large and small rivers. Also Terrain should tie into Area of effect. This gets into the rework of trade as well

*Districts. These were a very nice addition to the series in Civ VI.

I want a palace district. A building in the capital is not enough! It would fun to be able to decorate with items made from each type of luxury I have.
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
4,788
Location
north of Steilacoom, WA
I would like to see large and small rivers. Also Terrain should tie into Area of effect. This gets into the rework of trade as well .

Navigable and Non-Navigable Rivers would be my choice - with the length of Navigable Rivers subject to change as ships got too big, canals and other infrastructure 'tamed' the rivers, etc. Those lovely waterfalls from Humankind could be adopted with a Purpose: they'd show where the river became Un-navigable. Smaller rivers that wouldn't hold a boat would still be available to supply water, aqueducts, watermills, but navigable rivers would be all-important for early Trade Routes, supplying bulk items like Food to cities, etc.

I want a palace district. A building in the capital is not enough! It would fun to be able to decorate with items made from each type of luxury I have.

I remember fondly the Throne Room from Civ 2: building up a dank little cave into a major Palace later in the game.

My District re-examination now has 5 - 6 slots for Buildings in each District, and the City Center requiring an Administrative Structure in every city. The Capital would have a Palace at start, which takes up 2 slots, and you can add a Central Plaza of 2 more slots in front of it. Monuments can go in the Central Plaza, and, ideally, the Palace could be Upgraded as you go through the game into a Royal or Imperial Palace, different architectural styles, and eventually possibly become a Capital Building or be supplemented by a Parliament/Congressional Hall in a neighboring District, connected to the Palace by a Processional Way.

- It's all related to the idea of being able to Personalize Cities and add Aesthetic as well as strictly functional aspects to each city.
 

XX36789

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 3, 2020
Messages
74
return puppeting cities and the advanced city state diplomacy (ie; allies cant attack your allied city states) and gifting units to city states from civ v
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
4,788
Location
north of Steilacoom, WA
return puppeting cities and the advanced city state diplomacy (ie; allies cant attack your allied city states) and gifting units to city states from civ v

Vassals, We Want Vassals - or Puppets, or Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries, or whatever they want to call them . . .

And a good Mercenary System in the game. We should be able to hire individual units from City States or Civs as well as Barbarians, and hire out our troops (turning Units into Gold, so to speak) and this might even be a place to get some Non Government Actors into the game very early - Mercenary 'Companies' date back to the Classical Era, when Xenophon's 10,000 Hoplites hired out to the Persians or Jason of Thessaly basically hired out himself and his entire army to the highest bidder.
 

racha

Prince
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
335
Location
Over there --->
My biggest wish for Civ 7 is that they very quickly deal with the graphical asset limit in Civ 6 and don't repeat the problem in 7. If they fix it, I'll wait and see if they repeat the problem in 7 before buying, if they don't, I can't see me giving Firaxis any more of my money.
 

PiR

Emperor
Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
1,612
Excellent ideas here!

I specially like the ones about trade. Although many things about trade were automated in Civ IV, and my understanding was that contributed to a slowness of the late game (which is much more bearable in unmodded Civ VI).
I also need to be able to have some choices like if I want to support an ally in war. Strategics should matter even more I think.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
717
Location
Adelaide, Australia
The issue with trade taking into account resource scarcity is that lower level players won't understand what is going on. I remember playing civ III and wondering why the AI wouldn't accept a gems for silver trade straight up, like why do they want me to attach gold to it.
I actually think it might be time to take trade off the map again, that is to do away with the trade route units. Ever since (before) they were announced I had visions of like "raiding and trading", but raiding trade routes doesn't form the cornerstone of anyones strategy, like we aren't targeting trade units when we go to war with other civs, therefore what is the purpose of having trade units on the map ?
I'd like for luxury resources to be renamed economic resources. You gain increasing gold for more copies you directly control of a resource (1/2/3/4 copies is 1/3/6/10 gold per turn). If you form a free trade agreement with another civ, both civs gold from economic resources is doubled.

I like the idea of doing something different with ranged units. I think it'd make a lot of sense for cannon/artillery units to be military support units that can be captured and turned against you. It doesn't make so much sense (from a realism perspective) with ancient era "ranged units" however....
 
Top Bottom