Kiss

[Jon Shafer]

Keep It Simple Stupid.

Soren won't include massive and complex new systems in Civ 4. Things will be similar to Civ 3 and there will be a few changes that fit within how the current engine already functions.

Keep that in mind when you're doing your brainstorming. Don't go overboard when it comes to new features, like religion, civics, combat, etc.

The most useful suggestions for Firaxis (and the ones that are most likely to be implimented) are ones that fit within the realm of possibility.

 

[Pounder]

Knights In Satan's Service.

I agree.

 

[WildFire]

Keep It Simple Stupid.

Your motto too?

 

[Myzenium]

Well said, Trip.

Do you think this would make a good sticky thread?

 

[Pariah]

Kinghts in Satan's Service

What about the ocassional appearance of unique units similar to the great leaders, but who have a detrimental effect on the nation that accidentally spawns them?

It might be fun seeing a powerful rival empire descend into strife and economic ruin under the influence of some undeserving lunatic demagogue!

Examples: Tamarlane, John Plantagenet, Ranavalona, Caligula...

Here's an old thread with details of people's least favourite historical leaders.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=68793

- Sorry, I realise I'm departing from the original topic of the thread. But don't discussions usually meander?

 

[warpstorm]

Can you explain the fun of this for the average (not hard core) player?

 

[Pariah]

It would just add more variety and historical interest. It might you help break the dominance of a superior enemy. Plus, the emergence of an anti-saviour in one's owns civ would be a new challenge, like a pollution crisis or a city breaking away.

 

[warpstorm]

I've found that, in general, the more casual players aren't fond of random negatives in their games (although they are all for random positives). This, of course, does not apply to most people on this forum.

 

[Jon Shafer]

Agreed with WS.

(Not sure how many times I've said this, but I'll repeat it again anyways )

The used to be "Dark Ages" in Civ 3, which reduced shields and gold. It was determined to be "unfun," and was instead replaced with what we now know as Golden Ages, which you don't find anyone complaining about.

 

[IceBeast]

Like most of my opinions, I say they should make it an optional turn on. Much like in C3C that you can turn on Science leaders and such, turn on the ability to have detrimental leaders or dark age. This way hardcore players can enable them while normal players can leave em off.

 

[Jon Shafer]

My guess is that the scripting in Civ 4 would probably open up that possibility.

 

[The Last Conformist]

It would be nice, tho, if Dark Ages were available thru the editor ...