Ideas for Civilization 4

[MarkC1]

The majority of these are really great ideas

Unfortunately, from what I've heard on the forums, it seems to me that the programmers did a half-assed job on it and that they only added a few more things.

These ideas are great but if the programmers can't even do a good job on a half-assed expansion pack, I doubt they will ever get any of these ideas implemented correctly.

 

[West German]

I think there should be an element of surprise, like on the first turn you get a 10-20% bonus when attacking.

 

[warpstorm]

Originally posted by Globetrotter
- Numidian Mercenary upgrades to Pikemen (?) or am i wrong? It means that you upgrade a unit to become weaker?
- Immortals upgrade to medieval guerilla of same strenght. Is there any cost attached to this upgrade?
- Conquistador upgrades to explorer??? Jeez, that will surely make them loose a lot...

None of these upgrades happen in the game.

 

[warpstorm]

Originally posted by MarkC1
Unfortunately, from what I've heard on the forums, it seems to me that the programmers did a half-assed job on it and that they only added a few more things.

These ideas are great but if the programmers can't even do a good job on a half-assed expansion pack, I doubt they will ever get any of these ideas implemented correctly.

Why do you think this? This expansion was not supposed to add a lot of new features to the core gameplay. It was to add MP to the core gameplay. You can argue that they didn't do a great job on that if you wish, but their job was not to add stuff to the core gameplay.

I've found that many of the things I've suggested have been implemented into the game. The one thing they told me early on was, if you can do it in the editor they aren't going to change it because they like the way the game works now.

BTW, insulting the people who will do the job isn't the best way to get your ideas implemented. In fact, I have it on good authority that insulting posters get put on 'Ignore' lists immediately. That pretty much insures that your message (and any future messages) won't be heard. (The one exception is Coracle/Zouave, for some reason they like him).

 

[Suki]

Originally posted by wtiberon
Anyway so if you are going to play a specific civ then you should play with there strengths and weaknesses...If every civ begins the same then there is really no point in using different civs except for name alone...

but I can't justify in anyway starting at the end of the stone age with the civs compleetly differentiated as they are. maybe with an accelerated start. then have the game try to place the civ you pick in an area apropriate for that civ. at least give the english a costal capital, the vikings northern ocean, the Zulu some jungle, the mongols some mouantians... this way there's at least some reasoning befind it. this way the english shipwrights don't get this wonderful idea for a new ship "the man o war" even thoe no englishman has ever seen the ocean.

 

[MarkC1]

So the Play the World expansion was supposed to be only for MP? $30.00 for MP? Something that was included for free in most other games... Yeah, you have to respect those programmers for that

 

[warpstorm]

No, it was supposed to be 8 new civs, many editor upgrades to support modding, UI streamlining, some new units, artwork for Dinos, Japan and WW2, 2 new terrain tile sets, new victory (and loss) conditions, and MP for $30. Nobody is forcing you to buy it.

But none of these additions really change the core Civ3 rules. It still plays like Civ3, just better.

I personally think they did a good job. I wouldn't permanently remove it from my system if someone offered me $50. It would have taken me months to do as good a job on the 8 new civs alone. I can buy their work for less than one hour's pay. In addition, I've played quite a few MP games that were quite enjoyable.

BTW, I'm sure that the programmers built what Infogrames payed them to build. Firaxis doesn't have total freedom on Civ since Infogrames bought the total IP rights from Hasbro (who bought it from Microprose).

 

[wtiberon]

I agree warpstorm we all have to realize that this is buisness not art...Programmers are under the thumb (warpstorm would probably agree) of many many bosses...They have to carefully craft a game that is fun, affordable, satisfies the thousands of hardcore fans that are constantly at their throats, and do all this on a time constraint...This thread is meant to give ideas not to bash the programmers or even the distributors

 

[MarkC1]

Oh, boo hoo. That's what they get paid for. We all get paid to do a job and the least they could do for my hard-earned 30$ is make it work correctly.

 

[warpstorm]

Why wait for Civ4? In the last chat JMo hinted that if PTW sold enough copies, Infogrames would probably fund another expansion. More modest ideas could probably be put in that XP (although that should probably be different thread).

 

[dguichar]

1st. Improvement of a civ is not about having more units or more techs or more of whatever... it's about how all of these will lead it to a better gameplay and overall fun.

2nd. It's not also about having deeper systems for every game feature... instead, it's about how to making this without turning the game extremely complex at micro-management or macro-management.

3rd. It's not about not letting the AI to get a different set of rules than that of human player, but how this rules affect the entire flux of the game.

At last it's about how to make a good modelling on how any civilization advances through the ages and endures the forces of time.

Here are my suggestions on these:

1st. Economic system:
a) Set the level of state and private participation in economy. How much will be taken by the state and how much by the people in such a percentage bar.
b) Differentiate state, mixed and private buildings. The first ones are the ones that the leader choose to construct, the second ones are the ones that the state is asked to construct by the people and the third ones are the ones that the people choose to construct. It's not about letting the governor manage your city... it's about how the people will influence the flux of the economy.
c) Differentiate between raw materials and manufactured goods, just like in colonization (for those who haven't played it... see the note 1). And make the manufactured goods to have a greater price in the world market... I'm from 3rd world country (Chile) and we sell raw materials to the 1st world countries to buy the manufactured goods back at a very higher price.
d) Differentiate laborers, again just like in colonization (see the note 2)... This way you could produce many things in each city. Some laborers are constructors (they make buildings), others are farmers (they cultivate the fields) and maybe some others will work selling the elaborated goods in the market. Of course at the beginning of the game you will only have a limited number of professions which increase as you discover new techs. This of course means that you may choose to devote some of your people to do the researche of them.
Maybe you could consider this as a deeper specialists system... well, sort of. But note that specialists have a very very low impact on economy
e) As someone proposed it there may be national currencies and variable price system. If a good is in shortfall the price will increase dramaticaly and the opposite if its in abundance the price will lower. To implement this each country must have reserves of raw materials or manufactured goods as they are stored in the apropiate building. Private stored goods are sold by the appropiate laborer and the state just gets the corresponding tax. State stored goods can be used freely by which ever the leader decides or directly trade them with another leader... creating a sort of high market only accesible to the goverment.

2. Political system.
a) Correctly define the different influences each type of government has in economy. If you're under despotism, oligarchy or monarchy there will be almost none private buildings and almost everything will be controlled by the state. If you are a republic or a constitutional monarchy (i.e. the state powers are separated: executive, legislative and juditial) you may choose to have a planned economy (and become a socialist republic) or to have a free market economy (and become a capitalistic republic) or somewhere in between.
b) Also as you become a republic you can choose the suffrage system from restricted to elite, restricted to representatives or universal. The more people that can vote, the will have a higher influence in the country's decisions by not letting the leader to spend the taxes in whatever he or she decides... but also in the percentage of private buildings you can have.
c) Revolutions should be called up by the people, not by the country's leader. Also a more powerful nation could influence the people of its neighbors onto some different government. Remember how USSR institued socialist governments in eastern europe or there had been many dicatorships in Latin America influenced by USA.

3. Military.
a) As the laborers are specialized. Soldiers may be professionals... either private or state paid.
b) Soldiers in peace may buy it's food from the stores, but if they are at war that food must be provided buy they supporters (again, either private or state) or by hunting in the wilderness. A soldier will better survive in wood areas than in deserts. But if they are closer to enemy cities they may just sack the fields.
c) As someone else proposed bring the Alpha Centauri's unit making (note 3) and adequate it to the Civilization way. I've started to sketching it out... when it's ready i'll post it.
d) Include the number of soldiers per unit, as someone proposed, just to add a neat touch in the battles: not just one to one.

4. Leaders.
Expand the leader concept to every different labor type... and give them special abilities in their areas.

Notes

1. You put a set of workers to extract raw materials from the fields around a city and a different set of workers to convert those raw materiales into manufacturated goods: tobacco into cigars, furs into coats, sugar into rum, cotton into clothes, iron ore into tools, tools into muskets, etc.
2. You could have any colonist working anywhere; but to get higher productivity you must place lumberjacks into cutting wood,
cotton planters to cultivate the fields and expert weaponsmiths to build muskets.
3. You choose which way they move: foot, foil, needle air, etc. therefore defining move points and way of transport; the weapons or equipment they carry: laser guns, terraforming, infiltration, etc.; the armor type: silksteel, photon wall, etc.; and the special abilities: high morale, anti-aereal attack, cloaking, etc.

 

[warpstorm]

Originally posted by dguichar
1st. Improvement of a civ is not about having more units or more techs or more of whatever... it's about how all of these will lead it to a better gameplay and overall fun.

2nd. It's not also about having deeper systems for every game feature... instead, it's about how to making this without turning the game extremely complex at micro-management or macro-management.

3rd. It's not about not letting the AI to get a different set of rules than that of human player, but how this rules affect the entire flux of the game.

At last it's about how to make a good modelling on how any civilization advances through the ages and endures the forces of time.

These are extremely good principles that should be considered for every improvement.

 

[MarkC1]

anti-tank and flak (flack?) guns to protect cities that would be seperate units. Similar to the Artillery units.


Also, some mines and mine-sweeper units to detect them.

 

[MarkC1]

Oh, and limiting the amount of units that can be supported by a resource.

For example, if you have one oil resource you can only build 50 or so units that use fuel (tanks, planes, ships, etc). I really hate the idea of an entire nation being able to be supported by one oil field. The same for the other vital resources.

Having treaties to bind countries to certain things such as Nuclear Weapons limitation, Free Trade, etc.

Also keeping track of the Unemployment rate would be a cool feature.

 

[wtiberon]

Originally posted by MarkC1
Oh, and limiting the amount of units that can be supported by a resource.

For example, if you have one oil resource you can only build 50 or so units that use fuel (tanks, planes, ships, etc). I really hate the idea of an entire nation being able to be supported by one oil field. The same for the other vital resources.

Or by having more than one resource of Oil it could be cheaper to produce units...For example the U.S. could in theory support its massive army on the few oil fields it possess, however it is less expensive to use foriegn oil than domestic... Also luxory items should be more civ specific...What I mean is if India has spices it would be considered Indian spices and could be traded for French spices...Also cash crops should be added like sugar, tabacco or even Opium. Perhaps after awile (like saltpeter) these would become so plentiful that owning them would produce no bonus...

 

[wtiberon]

Originally posted by dguichar

3. Military.
b) Soldiers in peace may buy it's food from the stores, but if they are at war that food must be provided buy they supporters (again, either private or state) or by hunting in the wilderness. A soldier will better survive in wood areas than in deserts. But if they are closer to enemy cities they may just sack the fields.

If you intend to maintain a professional army then you would be liable for all room and board. I served in the Army with the 1/75th Ranger Regiment and we got 3 meals a day and a barracks to sleep in and this has been the tradition of a professional army since time and memorial. You could chose to have a professional army or a Conscript army...with a conscript you would have no maintenance cost in time of peace (as dguichar suggested) however when a war errupted they would not be as well trained as a professional army would...

 

[Leuf]

1) As has been suggested, the civs begin the game neutrally. Building a wonder allows the addition of one trait. Each wonder would only allow 1-2 specific traits, eg the pyramids allows your choice of industrious or religious traits. A small wonder could be added that would allow 1 trait, so no one gets completely screwed.

As far as the special units go, it still doesn't make sense to me that say the Persians would develop a special unit that requires iron if they had no iron, but I don't see any good way to make them undefined at the start without removing the very early special units, which I wouldn't dream of.

2) The army concept needs to be rethought. I can think of two ways to go.

a) Ditch the armies altogether. Leaders become a combatant unit, which still can be used to rush a project. They have a high attack/defense, scaled for the era, perhaps 6/4 ancient up to 35/20 modern. They only live for a maximum of 20 turns. You then have the choice of either cashing them in right away, or using them to cause havoc and risk the wrath of the RNG, then cash them in just before they are about to expire. Also, perhaps milatiristic civs get a bonus on their leaders of +2/2

b) Leave the armies basically as is, but change the way units fortify. First, units fortify in a specific direction, and only get the fortification bonus if attacked from that direction, or the adjacent directions, and if attacked from behing they are penalized. So for example if you fortified facing north, you +25% if attacked from the northeast, north, and northwest, and -25% if attacked from the south - all others are neutral.

Second, adjacent fortified units can band together once a prerequisite tech is researched. The exact way they band together needs a lot of thought. One possibility would be their defenses are added together, with the adjacent unit's multiplied by some factor, say 2/3 or 3/4. In this way it would be very difficult to break through a line of defenders without either bombarding them to heck, or .. tada.. punching through with an army. Again this banding only works in the direction they are fortified. So once the line is broken then it's open season.

Done well this could greatly reduce the stacks of doom.

The same approach could be done with navies.

3) I'd like the type of starting point to be an option on the choose your world screen (Coastal or Land locked)
I hate starting on the tip of a peninsula but that's where it puts you much of the time. Also I'd like to be able to do Quick start directly from in game, so when I don't like the looks of the map you dont have to go through multiple screens to get a new one.

4) I'm not going to whine too much about the AI. In general it keeps from making a fool of itself. However it really needs more than one strategy. Yes, you get your butt kicked when you first make the transition from civ2 to civ3, but it doesn't take too long to figure out what the AI does. Check where your units are and attack the least defended city, regardless of whether there are 20 cannons and 10 cavalry sitting next to it - with napkins neatly tucked in their collars. This works ok when you are on the same continent, but once you've got it to yourself the AI is really tiresome to play against.

What I would love to see is the AI in a dll and the interface released in an sdk. This is not easy to do, but its doable if decided at the outset of the design. This way the AI itself is not exposed (though releasing the source would be nice too), just the interface. The fact is that AI does not sell games, so let the people try to do better if they think they can.


-Leuf

Edit: Forgot one.

5) What happened to getting tech when you capture a city? It was a little bit too in favor of the attacker in civ2, but there ought to be some chance of it, say 1/16th (and maybe 1/10th for scientific civs) like leaders.

Also when a unit defeats a unit that you dont have the tech for, there is a chance it gets promoted to that unit. You can then either use that unit, or bring it back to a city that has a library/univeristy/research lab depending on the unit, and if you can keep it there for X turns you acquire the tech for it.

 

[Laser guided]

Bring back the Statue of Liberty. Only this time you construct it as a gfit for another Civ. If they accept it they cannot go to war with you unless you attack them first, plant a spy, enter into an embargo against them.

 

[AceDragon]

More air units both in industrial and modern.

SAM units

Modern Naval Vessels should be equipped with anti-aircraft and missile guns, whereas industrial age vessels may have some form of AA guns but not as effective.

I don't like the way subs work in civ as compared to real life... 3 to 4 squares away should be able to press the 'fire torpedo' button not sail up to a vessel and go after them by entering their square. Also new air missions 'patrol for subs' These planes were very effective at stopping the uboat threat in WWII. Later versions toward the end of the war also had plane mounted torpedos which would be awesome

 

[Laser guided]

Ummm... how about breaking the Middle Ages in two. It still seems too condensed. Sailing ships don't get their due as they should in Civ; ironclads cut their reign much too short. Sailing ships need their own era.

Maybe redo the Modern era, it has too few techs!

Increase the costs of a settler unit to needing 3 pop instead of 2. Would greatly increase the importance of granaries and fertile lands.

Think this idea has been said but -- Multiple city production i.e. building city-improvement and military unit simultaneously. Building Wonders would require 100% of city production.

The Fragmentation idea for corruption that is going around on the threads or a Supreme Court small wonder to increase effectiveness of courthouses on corruption or just halves corruption in all cities.

Philosophy -- double of the culture and science output for one turn of all a Civs cities connected to the Capital via road or harbor.