1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

If there was third Civ5 expansion which features would you like the most?

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by Krajzen, Apr 10, 2014.

?

Which of these features would you like to see in official/unofficial Civ5 expansion?

  1. Improved combat AI

    37 vote(s)
    43.5%
  2. Improved diplomacy

    49 vote(s)
    57.6%
  3. Extended World Congress

    42 vote(s)
    49.4%
  4. Extended Espionage

    36 vote(s)
    42.4%
  5. Improved middle game - Enlightment Era and so on

    36 vote(s)
    42.4%
  6. More Interesting Scientific Victory

    43 vote(s)
    50.6%
  7. Bringing warmongering and agressive AI back to game

    23 vote(s)
    27.1%
  8. Colonisation and Exploration

    42 vote(s)
    49.4%
  9. New Scenarios

    21 vote(s)
    24.7%
  10. Balanced Tall vs Wide and early social policies

    44 vote(s)
    51.8%
  11. Original Nations rebalanced and made more interesting

    32 vote(s)
    37.6%
  12. Extended combat system and military units

    20 vote(s)
    23.5%
  13. Extended internal management in the empire

    22 vote(s)
    25.9%
  14. Revolutions and Civil Wars

    39 vote(s)
    45.9%
  15. Basic Systems (science, gold) remade

    12 vote(s)
    14.1%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Oregano

    Oregano Freelance illustrator

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    95
    Dynasties! :D

    Added to that, governor units that can rebel ("Fear will keep the local [colonies] in line.") More politics/diplomacy. Better trade system.

    More streamlined / ingame customizable civs. Start with a ton of civs, and bloodbath it to the finish line. More organic growth of technologies/philosophies and religions.

    They've gone pretty wide, I'd like now to see them go deep with the design.

    [Edit] And don't tell me I can't raze a capitol to the ground! I'll salt your fields for that!
     
  2. spockjsimp

    spockjsimp Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 8, 2014
    Messages:
    3
     
  3. spockjsimp

    spockjsimp Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 8, 2014
    Messages:
    3
     
  4. Krajzen

    Krajzen Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,924
    Location:
    Poland
    Impossible with Immortal Leaders system. Also this would be really unfair - 80% of leaders in Civ5 are men and 20% are women, which means women civs would have great advantage.
     
  5. Oregano

    Oregano Freelance illustrator

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    95
    I'm for separating the leader from the player. Leaders should have life times -- doesn't have to be realistic, per se, say something like 100 turn life span -- but eventually they'll should be replaced by death, elections, dismissal, appointment or assassination.

    This would also allow for a more organic political system - things change over time, new people bring new ideas, and cultures adapt and grow. My thought is to create a governor/king/leader unit that would have randomly generated political views/scores (kind of the way the leader system is now). The closer that score is to yours, the more loyal they'll be. Too far out, and they'll start causing problems, instigating elections, rebellions, and what not. Or they could be assassinated or bought off by another empire and provide espionage.

    Marriages between leaders would provide additional bonuses as well - more leaders for one. But also land, trade, and units depending on the city the leader is from. Also, peace, if it's two empires at war.

    This could be all sorts of soap operaish fun! :D
     
  6. Krajzen

    Krajzen Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,924
    Location:
    Poland
    Good luck with doing this with 6000 years oh mankind history fitting in less than 1500 turns.

    For 90% of game it would be like one leader per turn. As I said, good luck.

    <trying to find any novelty in this, besides big fancy words>

    Too sophisticated for Civ game. I mean, you would have to handle with so many exceptions they would be more of them than general rules. Elections in prehistorical/ancient society? Hell, kings at all before classical era? So the entire system would activate somewhere in medieval era. Oh, and de facto 'monarchy' is only in Tradition social tree :D Ok, so other policy trees have Governors/whatever. But Governors/whatever cannot enter marriages so another problems with balance and stuff. Espionage is activated in renaissance era. In industrial you have ideologies. Next problem with Autocracy (and to lesser extent with Order). So basically you have a system which makes sense in medieval and renaissance era, not to mention it is unrealistic on another field - many of societies in Civ didn't have kings. Eurocentrism! And collides with social policy system as much as it can :D


    FUNNY AS HELL :D Yeah one leader per turn! Micromanaging depending on the city the leader is from, marriages between leaders, next diplomatic rules with weird AI, everything depending on loyalty, randomly generated political views, exceptions and rules, colliding with social policies and stuff :D

    The simpler the game is, the better. This is not Europa Universalis (which introduces stuff like that but instead doesn't have many obvious features of Civilization - you can't have everything in one game).
     
  7. Oregano

    Oregano Freelance illustrator

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    95
    I think you read a tad more into what I was posting than what I actually wrote.

    1500 turns would be 15 leaders, give or take if we used the lifespan idea.

    Sort of went off the deep end here. I didn't say anything about elections in prehistoric society.

    I used the term "governor" for lack of a better one. "Leader" would probably be more apt, or something else. OR, it could change with the era/social policy. No biggie. No problem with balance.

    Yes. And?

    I fail to see how having a leader unit in any era would cause problems with the ideologies or social policies? There have been leaders since day one, so? I'm not sure what the issue here is other than you don't like the idea?

    There's no Eurocentrism here. Call the leader what you like; Czar, Emperor, Chieftan, President, Imam, doesn't matter -- they're still a leader.

    Hysterical. If that's what I suggested. Which it's not. :|

    Who said anything about micromanagement? I've found that when people don't like a new concept in these forums, they tend to throw the term "micromanagement" around a lot.
    I agree that simpler is often better, but it too often it ends up being severely dumbed down without a lot of depth to it. Which in turn leads to very predictable, and very boring games. I personally prefer something with a bit more flavor.

    You don't like the idea. Cool. I'm not a modder, you are, so it's not going to happen anyway. However, I do think EU has some interesting ideas that would be fun to bring over to Civ to see how they'd work, instead of dismissing them out of hand.
     
  8. EQandcivfanatic

    EQandcivfanatic Zailing Captain Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2002
    Messages:
    11,578
    Location:
    On the Zee
    Future era ala Civilization: Call to Power. I want my underwater and space cities, global warming mechanics, and space battles. I'd also murder someone to be able to play an expanded space race at all, I'd love to be able to spend gold or other points to be the first to Mars, start asteroid mining, colonize the Moon, etc.
     

Share This Page