Few Thoughts

[Colonel]

First off its quite minor but bring back the Airbase, and add a port facility improvement. Also need to introduce a "wall" improvement, and get rid of the Great Wall wonder. My simple thought on this is that China was not the only people to build walls across great distances. The Romans built Hadrian's wall and there are a few other instances in history. Also with the wall ensure there was a way to create gate type part of the wall, and with that any part of the wall that was not a gate would be impassible even to your own or allied units. Thats it for improvements.

Next up, It would be nice to have a more elaborate diplomacy system. Non-Aggression Pact, Trade Agreement, Defense Pact, Then multiple empire diplomacy, Alliances, where you would get to pick the terms of the alliance, for instance only allowing tradeing, or full on military alliances and NATO or Warsaw Pact type things.

Next, Provide a way to buy mercenaries instead of building units, it would provide smaller civs with strong economies to fight overly large civs, of course make the mercs able to be bought by enemy civs.

Lastly Internal politics. To begin with obviously you are the ruler with no oversight. But for civs with more democratic civics create a legislative branch, which will present you with choices like create social programs and such, one way will cost you money, the other option cost popularity. Also with this you would need approval for war and changing the tax rate depending of course on which civics you have.

 

[Camikaze]

First off its quite minor but bring back the Airbase, and add a port facility improvement.

This I partially agree with. The only problem is the same as it is with forts. You can't build other improvements on that particular tile. And it seems that carriers and cities suffice as it is. As for ports, this would be a good idea, so as to increase trade,me thinks. You could have a series of possible port upgrades, each increasing trade route income.

Also need to introduce a "wall" improvement, and get rid of the Great Wall wonder. My simple thought on this is that China was not the only people to build walls across great distances. The Romans built Hadrian's wall and there are a few other instances in history. Also with the wall ensure there was a way to create gate type part of the wall, and with that any part of the wall that was not a gate would be impassible even to your own or allied units. Thats it for improvements.

Well, walls of that scale weren't all that common, I think. So, it's kind of like how there is only the Three Gorges Dam, not others as well. It is on such a monumental scale, that it is included as a wonder. And building a wall improvement like this would make movement a lot more complicated, and wouldn't really provide much benefit, or at least not for the trouble it would cause. And besides, cities have walls.

Next up, It would be nice to have a more elaborate diplomacy system. Non-Aggression Pact, Trade Agreement, Defense Pact, Then multiple empire diplomacy, Alliances, where you would get to pick the terms of the alliance, for instance only allowing tradeing, or full on military alliances and NATO or Warsaw Pact type things.

I agree.

Next, Provide a way to buy mercenaries instead of building units, it would provide smaller civs with strong economies to fight overly large civs, of course make the mercs able to be bought by enemy civs.

I don't know about mercenaries as such, but I think you should be able to buy units off other civs. The problem is that mercenaries would have to come from somewhere, and so other civs units could act in this manner.

Lastly Internal politics. To begin with obviously you are the ruler with no oversight. But for civs with more democratic civics create a legislative branch, which will present you with choices like create social programs and such, one way will cost you money, the other option cost popularity. Also with this you would need approval for war and changing the tax rate depending of course on which civics you have.

To do this, you would have to greatly increase the benefits of the more democratic civics. But other than that, I agree. I would like some sort of mini-government simulation. It would have to be programmed exceptionally well, however, to stop this:

 

[Naokaukodem]

As for ports, this would be a good idea, so as to increase trade,me thinks. You could have a series of possible port upgrades, each increasing trade route income.

I think that ports are really a problem in Civ4. It's rare that in my games, i have enough ports to compete with the other continent in modern era. This is due to the scale of the game, allowing you too few cities to place, and that's too much contraigant to think about modern ocean wars since the beginning of the game (cities placing). Additionnally, port cities are most of the time weak in production. I wish there's an improvement giving +1 hammer in each ocean/sea square in every city like in Civ2.

 

[Colonel]

When I said ports I meant an improvement that would act like a fort or airbase it would effectively be a staging point for your naval forces. For instance you could build a port on a single tile island to create naval base out in the ocean that could repair, resupply(see below) promote(see below), etc.

Few more thoughts first introduce a supply type system. Ships would only be able to be at sea for X number of turns before needing to return to a port improvement, city, colony, or possibly an ally civ city. As far as land units you should need to create supply lines during war time, supply lines can start from any fort, airbase, port, city, colony, possibly ally civ. Now this would force you to develop defenses for these supply lines, also you should need to use a transport vessel if attacking islands or continents on which you have no control to create a supply line across the ocean. Along those lines once aircraft are discovered you can use that as a means to resupply troops in the field by means of a resupply helicopter have it be an actual unit. With the actual supply lines have a moving unit of sorts that you don't control that will be the target for the enemy so its not just arbitrary break the line stop it, so unprotected lines would have a chance to survive and new supply unit would be generated after the first is lost but at a cost each time. Last bit with supply certain units would not require resupply; settlers, workers, corporation units, missionaries, scouts, explorers, etc.

Next on my list strategy, tactical an otherwise. This is more of a general thought not an actual idea as I have no idea how to implement. There needs to be a way to use strategy such as night attacks, outflanking, etc. Perhaps have an option pop up when you attack about whether or not to attack at night or surround, etc. Your options would be based upon the number of units you have vs. your enemy does, also based on the terrain your attacking from vs. that which they are defending on, lastly based on if you or the enemy has any troops in the surrounding tiles.

Last minor thing but change promotions to only be possible in cities with barracks\castle or maybe only cities with Military facilities (west point like) . Or within a fort for land units, airbase for air units and port for naval units.

 

[Camikaze]

Some increased strategy in the navy would be nice, I guess, but I don't know how you would implement such battle plans as night attacks.

As for ports, I think it would be better if they were buildings, rather than improvements. These buildings could be upgraded over time, with technological advances, and would be necessary to host more than one ship. The better the port, the more ships it could host. And, as for the suggestion that naval units must be in a port every x turns, I think this is a good idea, hand-in-hand with the ports suggestion, so long as the number of turns isn't too small. In war, you would need to resupply more often, me thinks.

 

[Naokaukodem]

I think the naval is ok in civ4, except for what i pointed out in the previous post. You would need to build a port with workers, and attach them to a city, even if it is your capital in the center of a continent. No need to resupply (that would be a pain and too much micronagement).

 

[exhile]

Not all countries have airbases overseas nor do all countries have oversea ports to repair, resupply or promote. France, Japan & India have no oversea ports or airbases. Suicide bombers do not attack at night nor do terroists require long supply lines to make their armies effective.
A jack-hammer is not needed to swat a fly.

Mercenaries on the otherhand is similar to how a spy would be able to buy off an enemy unit with a good supply of gold of course.

Walls have been built by many civilizations whether they be great, midevil or to split a city to distingiush East & West. What city today has a wall that exists to protect itself? Walls aren't required in the industrial or modern age.

 

[Camikaze]

Countries don't all have overseas ports, but countries that won't to go out to sea have friends that have ports. That is why you aren't going to see a North Korean ship sailing around the world. They would have no ports to stop in.

 

[exhile]

Countries don't all have overseas ports, but countries that won't to go out to sea have friends that have ports. That is why you aren't going to see a North Korean ship sailing around the world. They would have no ports to stop in.

North Korea isn't a country that has many naval ships that sail very far anyways. Whereas South Korea has numerous container vessels like Hyndai & Daewoo that stop at ports all over the world.

Overseas airbases should be left out as it is in Civ 4 and Civ 3 unless the air movement & air combat is going to change in Civ 5.

 

[rysmiel]

This I partially agree with. The only problem is the same as it is with forts. You can't build other improvements on that particular tile.

The solution, then, should be to allow you to build other improvements on the same tile as well, no ?

I don't know about mercenaries as such, but I think you should be able to buy units off other civs. The problem is that mercenaries would have to come from somewhere, and so other civs units could act in this manner.

Buying from other civs should be possible; bribing barbarians to act as mercenaries too, I think.

 

[Camikaze]

North Korea isn't a country that has many naval ships that sail very far anyways.

Because they can't. If they built such ships, they would have nowhere to go, due to the lack of ports open to them. For instance, the American navy often cruises into Sydney harbour. But you are never going to see a NK ship there.

Whereas South Korea has numerous container vessels like Hyndai & Daewoo that stop at ports all over the world.

Which shows that the inability of have ports is a severe detriment to your country, which should be reflected in the game.

The solution, then, should be to allow you to build other improvements on the same tile as well, no ?

I considered that, but it would just mean that you built a fort on every tile.

Buying from other civs should be possible; bribing barbarians to act as mercenaries too, I think.

Well, yes, but not with the game as it is. With an expansion in the number of techs, and hence civ specialisation, and with an increase in the number of civs on a map, this makes sense. But, as it is, having mercenaries on a map with only, like, 8 civs, isn't very practical. I think. I mean, it could be, perhaps, but there wouldn't be as much use for it.

 

[rysmiel]

I considered that, but it would just mean that you built a fort on every tile.

This could be easily avoided by balancing how expensive and available workers are such that you won't be able to afford the time and energy to do that until you're past a point where you'd have any need to.

 

[Camikaze]

This could be easily avoided by balancing how expensive and available workers are such that you won't be able to afford the time and energy to do that until you're past a point where you'd have any need to.

I don't think doing this would be good, because it would have implications for many other things, as well, and would make development in the early game really hard.

Perhaps, you could have a new unit- Military Engineer- who is specifically used to build forts. Maybe there could be a limit of 4 at a time for a civ, and they would reasonably expensive to build, could only be built in cities with barracks, and it would take them, say, 10 turns to build each fort.

 

[exhile]

Because they can't. If they built such ships, they would have nowhere to go, due to the lack of ports open to them. For instance, the American navy often cruises into Sydney harbour. But you are never going to see a NK ship there.

If North Korea were to built such ships, ports in China, France, Russia & Cuba would be open to them. However, naval vessels from the permanent members of the UNSC such as China, France, Russia & the UK rarely make port calls to any foreign nation. Only the US conducts these port calls. The R05 HMS Invincible or the R91 Charle DeGaullle rarely visit Sydney Harbour or ports in Hawaii, San Diego or New York.

Which shows that the inability of have ports is a severe detriment to your country, which should be reflected in the game.

The US will suffer a severe blow once they realize that a large navy is a detriment to their country. Compared to the rest of the navies around the world, the US is way too numerous and too large for its purpose. The citizens of the United States will one day see their most proud navy vanquish just as the Soviet Union did. This reflection should not be in the game.

 

[Camikaze]

I would like to point of the Russo-Japanese War as an example. Britain would not allow Russia the use of its numerous ports and the Suez Canal in its trip to Japan. So, Russia had to go the long way, using French ports. Obviously, this lack of ports was a disadvantage to the Russians. And this should be shown in the game.

 

[Shackel]

Your "Internal Politics" idea sounds like multiple random events.

You know, the ones that are basically "Spend money or people get angry".

 

[Camikaze]

Your "Internal Politics" idea sounds like multiple random events.

You know, the ones that are basically "Spend money or people get angry".

I think any internal politics system would have to be reasonably sophisticated and well constructed to work, but once this is achieved, it would be really good. And I thought the idea suggested more controllable events than random events. Of course, there would have to be a certain level of randomness in there.

 

[rysmiel]

I don't think doing this would be good, because it would have implications for many other things, as well, and would make development in the early game really hard.

Not if you make forts much more expensive but not, say, roads.

Perhaps, you could have a new unit- Military Engineer- who is specifically used to build forts. Maybe there could be a limit of 4 at a time for a civ, and they would reasonably expensive to build, could only be built in cities with barracks, and it would take them, say, 10 turns to build each fort.

ick, no. There are few mechanics in civ 4 I hate more than "a civilisation can only have n of these units."

 

[Camikaze]

Not if you make forts much more expensive but not, say, roads.

I 'spose that would be the easier option.

ick, no. There are few mechanics in civ 4 I hate more than "a civilisation can only have n of these units."

There would have to some way, with this new unit, to limit the number a civ has, to stop them from fort spamming in a war. So, it is either limit them, or make them prohibitively expensive. But the latter would stop the production of just one, maybe.

 

[rysmiel]

There would have to some way, with this new unit, to limit the number a civ has, to stop them from fort spamming in a war.

Only if you view fort spamming as a problem. Is it, if everyone can do it ? Or just a change in the overall strategic shape of the game ?

So, it is either limit them, or make them prohibitively expensive. But the latter would stop the production of just one, maybe.

I suspect balancing it so you can afford a few but not huge numbers would be doable.