Exploration, Culture, and the will to live

JBG

Prince
Joined
Mar 14, 2004
Messages
533
Location
Cambridge, UK
I am a long-time Civ player, and am the authour of a number of Civ II scenarios. I own Civ II, Conflicts in Civilisation, Fantastic Worlds, Civ III, and C3C.
Here are the ways I think the greatest game series of all time could be improved:

:wavey: More realistic exploration (native guides, &c) - larger maps. In the Victorian world, much of the African continent was still unexplored - it was called the Dark Continent. In Civ III, by map trading, &c, the entire world can be known by as early as the Renaissance Era.

:ar15: Rise Of Nations-style attrition damage - when one of your units is in enemy territory, it suffers Civ II helicopter style damage every turn. One could have supply wagons, &c to counter this and reduce the effects of attrition damage for any nearby units.

:banana: The reintroduction of trade units - caravans, &c played a major part in Middle Age and Ancient exploration of the Old World.

:egypt: More realistic culture - in the current incarnation of the game, there is little you can do to influence the cultural expansion of your empire, other than building things in cities - you should be able to have other forms of culture, such as Great Works (novels, art, &c - NOT as wonders), random events and TV/Radio stations. Great Works could be randomly generated events, that could give a bonus in a city for a length of time - like a localised Golden Age.

:ninja: By the same token, you could receive bonuses CTP-style for the first ship to circumnavigate the globe, the first person to research specific technologies, the first people to build and improvement, and the first person to field a particular unit. In such a game, there would be far more incentive to do things - a much better sense of achievement

:king: Changing leaders - governments changing due to uprisings, coups d'etat, elections, deaths of kings/queens, &c. Therefore, as well as an overall style (exansionist, seafaring, &c), a civilisation could change what it does and how it does it according to the style of its leader (Queen Victoria, Hitler, Tony Blair, Margaret Thatcher, Napoleon, Nero, George Washington, &c, &c could each have different traits). One could have one's spies try to assassinate a leader to force a change of government.

:nuke: More realistic air untis - one could opt at the start of a game to have air units use the missions system or move Civ II-style. Also, one could set in the editor which units could do what - therefore, one could combine mission-bound fighters with more flexible helicopters and airships.

:aargh: MUCH less Americanisation. Money is in $, Apollo Programme, Manhattan Project, Wall Street, the Pentagon, &c are ALL American - why not have The Houses of Parliament/Westminster Palace; the Tower of London, the Leaning Tower of Pisa, the Walls of Constantinople, the Angkor Wat, &c, rather than all this idealistic, pro-American propaganda?

:hammer: A far more fluid and user-friendly editor system - more inclusion of the Civ II FW elements (such as in-editor sound- and graphic- editing, as well, perhaps, as in-editor description and civilopedia editing. This would eliminate the need to wade through countless directory files and would also reduce the ways in which one could disrupt the game :mischief:

Just my two coppper coins of the realm.
 
I agree with most of what you're saying....however considering Firaxis is an American company it's not unreasonable to see why they would put more American-centric stuff into the game. Hey, it's what we know.

That being said, I'd like to see stuff from other areas of the world. If nothing else, Civ has taught me a few things about history and some of the accomplishments we have made over the millenia...
 
I would like also to add the millenium dome and the 2004(that's miracle rather than a wonder ... that we pulled that of I mean)
Seriously now I agree with your comments. as to your proposals I suggest you take a closer look at this forum since many of these topics have been debated and you could offer some interesting ideas to the original threads...
 
money is not in $ its in gold pieces
 
JBG said:
:aargh: MUCH less Americanisation. Money is in $, Apollo Programme, Manhattan Project, Wall Street, the Pentagon, &c are ALL American - why not have The Houses of Parliament/Westminster Palace; the Tower of London, the Leaning Tower of Pisa, the Walls of Constantinople, the Angkor Wat, &c, rather than all this idealistic, pro-American propaganda?

Firaxis is an American company...

But money is in gold peices, America did build the first nukes and had the first man on the moon. Most of the wonders in the game are not, in fact, American. Are you saying that you don't want any American wonders or attributes in the game? Remember, again, Firaxis is an American company.
 
warpstorm said:
Firaxis is an American company...

But money is in gold peices, America did build the first nukes and had the first man on the moon. Most of the wonders in the game are not, in fact, American. Are you saying that you don't want any American wonders or attributes in the game? Remember, again, Firaxis is an American company.

My point is that instead of calling them generic names such as 'nuclear project' or 'space race', they call them the names that are inherently American, such as the ones I've listed above.

Eg: Apollo Programme could be Space Programme, Manhattan could be Nuclear Project, the Pentagon could be 'ministry of defence', &c. By giving these wonders the American names they send a message of assumed superiority to the world, which, not being an American, I find rather hard to stomach.
 
What should the Hanging Gardens or the other ancient wonders be called? It seems in Civ that they always try to name a wonder after some country's achievement rather than with a general term so its not just the Americans.
 
Wait. So you're fine with every wonder in the game being named/modeled after another country, but in the Modern Age when it shifts to this side of the ocean you have a problem with it??

Civ is a game, not a propoganda tool. 90% of my games don't even hit the Modern Age anyways.
 
pyramids-->large stone monument
hanging gardens-->exotic foriegn plant place
Sun Tzu's art of war-->National Military traditions
JS Bach's Cathedral-->large place of religous gathering
The internet-->intercontinental high speed communication

while politically correct some are funny (exotic foriegn plant place), some sound okay (large stone monument) it doesn't have the same feel it doesn't feel like civ. and if these were implimented you would have the problem of what picturers to put. and then you have to eliminate the civliopedia entries, which kills the educational asspect of the game
 
ybbor said:
pyramids-->large stone monument
hanging gardens-->exotic foriegn plant place
Sun Tzu's art of war-->National Military traditions
JS Bach's Cathedral-->large place of religous gathering
The internet-->intercontinental high speed communication

while politically correct some are funny (exotic foriegn plant place), some sound okay (large stone monument) it doesn't have the same feel it doesn't feel like civ. and if these were implimented you would have the problem of what picturers to put. and then you have to eliminate the civliopedia entries, which kills the educational asspect of the game


Aspect has only one 's' :smug:

Point taken.

That aside, do you (any of you) have any thoughts about the other ideas?
 
no, I think you are right in this point, but not exactly.
We don't want less americanization. That's ok, But I want to see less centralization on european/western culture. meaning more wonders from other culture groups. And I hat to have J. Bachs Cathedral or Leonardos Workshop or Kopernikus ... I hate that many wonders are taken from persons. I mean, instead of J. Bachs you could take the notre dame or 'Angkor Wat'. I mean, there never existed J. Bachs cathedral! You could use Bach for many other things, but NOT for a building.

mfG mitsho
 
Back
Top Bottom