Future Update - Speculation Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
i doubt the next DLC/ xpac or whatever will have it, but i am always hoping they remove the race to religion, and make it so more Civs have access to it. I never enjoy that race, especially at higher difficulties. Even more frustrating playing a religious focused civ and not getting one.

Also dislike the religion race. Feels very arbitrary and gamey.
 
I have realized my own real problem with Australia and Canada, and why do I dislike them being in game, is not even with modernity per se but rather the fact they are so culturally similar to other civs already present in the game. We have England, America, Australia and Canada - four Anglosaxon civilizations which emerged as powers in the industrial or postindustrial era.
Four English - speaking civs but only one civ for India, China, Arabia, Persia, Hispanic world, Germany (disunited before 1870) etc. That's so disproportional (10% of all civs!) And... Boring. At least Mexico would be something much more culturally unique and flavourful, as it is much more different from Spanish culture than Canada is from English, not to mention it existed for much longer time. Bolivar's state was very short lived but it is interesting embodiment of Spanish South America and its unique culture, that's why that proposal is constantly alive. Argentina would start feeling out of place for me, but I'd still prefer it over Australia and Canada as it simply is something more exotic and unique to me (I'd even argue more culturally influential, due to its literature, tango etc).
England, America and Canada or Australia would be acceptable, or Spain, Mexico and Argentina or Gran Colombia, just please no four sister civs in one game :p

And I don't give a damn about perfectionist TSL distribution balance. Earth has been extremely unequal in population density and historical significance, accept that, especially as it doesn't affect gameplay beyond one very specific map type and size.
People have so increased emotions about eurocentrism, that they are forgetting about Anglo-Saxon centrism. :);)
 
Also dislike the religion race. Feels very arbitrary and gamey.

perhaps firaxis could add spots that have benefits but dont compete for a religious victory. Often i dont spread my religion around much. Just want the sweet tithe, production and science bonusses for myself + paragon. I do like religious wars in a civ game (not the religious units layer but casus belli and diplomatical inpact). But the race towards who earns a prophet spot before they are taken feels wrong.
 
Also dislike the religion race. Feels very arbitrary and gamey.
and to me, what makes it even worse is the fact that unless i am playing a certain civ in just the right area or go super heavy early HS spam, i wont be getting enough faith to start making religious units in a decent number until Med or even Ren era.(and reform) So after that frantic blitz to the prophet, you are kinda sitting around in the religious game waiting for several eras to really progress while you build up. The pacing feels off to me.

perhaps firaxis could add spots that have benefits but dont compete for a religious victory. Often i dont spread my religion around much. Just want the sweet tithe, production and science bonusses for myself + paragon. I do like religious wars in a civ game (not the religious units layer but casus belli and diplomatical inpact). But the race towards who earns a prophet spot before they are taken feels wrong.
i dont do much spreading to other civs either. Lots of micro and fighting pathfinding bugs. Fighting the RR pathfinding bug in my own lands is annoying enough.** I wish there were more/better bonuses to spread in other civs. Not sure there is much that can be done to make the religious game less annoying micro wise.


**For those that do not know what i am talking about, the game will tell you that you can move to x spot, and looking at the movement points a unit has left, it should be ok. Sadly the game disagrees when you move your troop and they either dont go as far as they should or take some wierd last moment detour. Boot up and play that WW1 scenario and you will see it fairly quickly as you play.
 
Also dislike the religion race. Feels very arbitrary and gamey.

Gamey perhaps, but I don’t think it’s fair to say arbitrary. You get a religion by investing in religious infrastructure in the early game. You avoid a religion by ignoring it.

The religious game can certainly be improved... in fact this would be my number one pick for a third expansion to focus on. They should improve the mechanics that already exist before thinking about piling a new system onto this already feature-packed game.

Perhaps as part of that they could introduce a way to pivot late to a religious game... perhaps by “reforming” someone else’s religion. I would also like to see more options for passive spread and defense — Religion feels too much like a proxy for Domination at the moment. A set of religious policy cards in government would be the right approach, I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: j51
Perhaps as part of that they could introduce a way to pivot late to a religious game... perhaps by “reforming” someone else’s religion. I would also like to see more options for passive spread and defense — Religion feels too much like a proxy for Domination at the moment. A set of religious policy cards in government would be the right approach, I think.

All of this please Firaxis :)
 
Bolivar's state was very short lived but it is interesting embodiment of Spanish South America and its unique culture, that's why that proposal is constantly alive.

They can call it of Colombia (instead of Gran Colombia) so it will not look like we are seeing a state that lasted approximately a decade.
 
Perhaps as part of that they could introduce a way to pivot late to a religious game... perhaps by “reforming” someone else’s religion. I would also like to see more options for passive spread and defense — Religion feels too much like a proxy for Domination at the moment. A set of religious policy cards in government would be the right approach, I think.
Yes! I'd be all for something like being able to earn more great prophets. Once the set number of religions was founded, you could use a prophet to reform a religion that had become dominant in your lands, whether or not you founded it. The reformed religion would get a new name and some combination of old and new beliefs.

Ideally, this new system would also come with (1) more and better options for religious beliefs and (2) a way to request a civ to spread their religion to you (in case you didn't found one).
 
Check this post on the Paradox forums where a Hearts of Iron dev writes a road map of what he intends to do in the future, including the disclaimer: "Just to be super clear, this is not any form of exhaustive or final list and unless we have already done it we can't promise anythings. Priorities change etc. The point of this is to give you an idea of things we would like to do. The order of things is also not in any kind of priority order, or order we would do them."

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...dev-diary-1-9-1-patch-roadmap-update.1370573/

So it seems that just saying "we would like to do this in the future, but no assurances" is enough to keep fans appeased. Man, who would have thought that so much information could be shared with no negative consequences! :crazyeye:
 
Moar info would be very nice. nothin today so prob nothing this week. Maybe next Tuesday since then its after the new Xcom game has been released. Boo I really want to hear some news soon!
 
Yes! I'd be all for something like being able to earn more great prophets. Once the set number of religions was founded, you could use a prophet to reform a religion that had become dominant in your lands, whether or not you founded it. The reformed religion would get a new name and some combination of old and new beliefs.

Ideally, this new system would also come with (1) more and better options for religious beliefs and (2) a way to request a civ to spread their religion to you (in case you didn't found one).
Sounds neat. giving civs who did not found a religion a way to make their own impact in the religion game, and maybe an alternate way for them to win a religious victory would improve that part of the game by a fair amount.
 
I was also contemplating what a Baray district might be like. As reservoirs, a Dam replacement makes way too much sense to me. Seeing as how Dams aren't incredibly frequent districts to build (at least compared to some others) bonuses tied to them could be quite potent. I'd be interested in seeing civs with more bonuses to the water related districts.
A combination of more housing and amenities that the Dam would normally give plus some extra faith would suit the playstyle of the Khmer well.

Now I'm thinking of what a unique Canal would even be...
The only thing I could think of would be the Canal Grande if Venice got in. Not sure any abilities other than maybe more gold when traders past through and you can build them without another city center tile or water tile on each side.

Can land units enter a Canal tile? If not that can be another ability due to the many bridges built along it.
 
I wish Venice instead got replacement of both Center and Harbor in one district they would have to found on Coast for coolness effect just to flex on everyone else.
 
I'd like to see features removed or abstracted, gameplay consolidated and rebalanced and single-player experience improved - what are the chances of any of that happening :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: j51
I'd like to see features removed or abstracted, gameplay consolidated and rebalanced and single-player experience improved - what are the chances of any of that happening :D

I mean you can unlock pretty much all feature removals in Ancient Era so chances are good for the first point
 
I'd love to see something to do with obsolete strategic resources you've accumulated. Maybe some kind of city projects that require a certain number of resources to build.
 
I don't even understand what that means ... you crazy kids of today!
Tiles have features like woods or rainforest.
But it seems you were implying removing game mechanics like loyalty or great works etc.
 
Check this post on the Paradox forums where a Hearts of Iron dev writes a road map of what he intends to do in the future, including the disclaimer: "Just to be super clear, this is not any form of exhaustive or final list and unless we have already done it we can't promise anythings. Priorities change etc. The point of this is to give you an idea of things we would like to do. The order of things is also not in any kind of priority order, or order we would do them."

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...dev-diary-1-9-1-patch-roadmap-update.1370573/

So it seems that just saying "we would like to do this in the future, but no assurances" is enough to keep fans appeased. Man, who would have thought that so much information could be shared with no negative consequences! :crazyeye:

Some people at 2K and Firaxis are probably developing hives and all types of allergies reading this. The gall of those people at Paradox. Absolutely medieval of them!
 
Some people at 2K and Firaxis are probably developing hives and all types of allergies reading this. The gall of those people at Paradox. Absolutely medieval of them!

A few years ago there was a game in development by Paradox, West vs East, similar to HoI but in the cold war period. They had dev diaries for those as well.

The game eventually got cancelled. I'm sure Paradox learned some lessons from that, but thankfully stopping dev diaries wasn't one of them. :)

I don't recall there having been any meaningful consequences to it in regards to the relationship between the company and fans. They just moved on and so did we.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom