Let's make Civ 5

That is why I suggested that there should be a slider in the options for the severity of events.

If you are a crybaby then you can set the severity to 0.
If you are hardcore then you can set the severity to 10.

This would be independent of the standard game level choices.

Simple enough.
 
New event:

A doomsday computer virus infects all the world's military computers. All ICBMS and SLBMs from every civ are launched at random targets across the globe. :goodjob:

You have inspired a Y2K event that I must now program. Look for it in my mod. :D
 
Dude, I agree.

I am entirely opposed to this notion on gameplay grounds (unless we get a space layer and asteroid mining and it happens if you mess up bringing an asteroid into orbit); just trying to figure out where exhile's realism line is.

Your realism is flawed if you think asteroid mining is going to happen anytime soon. Get back to real life away from this message board for once since it seems you post way too much for a regular user.
 
Your realism is flawed if you think asteroid mining is going to happen anytime soon.

This feels like we're talking past each other. Let me try again. I care about gameplay. I care about realism only to the extent that serves gameplay. If it's unrealistic but cool and fun and balanced, I want it in the game. I think asteroid mining in a space layer of the game would be cool and fun and balanced. That's where my line is.

You posted

A nuclear war has not happened but is a possibility in Civ. A cold war between India and the Zulu-Egyptian alliance is possible just like the soviet union and the united states.

Which I read as you being OK with something happening in the game that hasn't happened in real life, and in the same post:

When an asteroid has not wiped out a city in recorded history, why include that event?

Not being OK with an event that, while it has not happened in human history, has happened in prehistory.

I'm just asking where your line is on acceptable values of realism in the game, because it's not clear to me from this post, and it seems a useful thing to know for further discussion to be constructive.

Get back to real life away from this message board for once since it seems you post way too much for a regular user.

480-odd posts in just over a year ? I type faster than I talk, and there are boards I've posted five times as much as in that timespan, and that's almost all breaks at work, you can be sure I have too much going on for this to be more than a small fraction of my time. I'm posting here because I care about Civ, so I really don't appreciate the hostility.
 
In all fairness, nuclear weapons have been used in war (see 1945). That's why I'm fine with having them in the game and usable.

If a smaller version has been done, then you can "exaggerate" it in game. If nothing even remotely close has happened in reality, then you can't. I think that is the rule he is using, not the one you have described.
 
If a smaller version has been done, then you can "exaggerate" it in game. If nothing even remotely close has happened in reality, then you can't. I think that is the rule he is using, not the one you have described.

It would seem to me that the Tunguska explosion is evidence enough for asteroid strikes in historical times not being unrealistic.
 
It would seem to me that the Tunguska explosion is evidence enough for asteroid strikes in historical times not being unrealistic.

Yes, but we still have no evidence as to what actually caused it, so it may not have been an asteroid strike.
 
Yes, but we still have no evidence as to what actually caused it, so it may not have been an asteroid strike.

I consider the evidence for it being, well, technically a fragment of comet rather than an asteroid, adequately conclusive, myself.
 
It would seem to me that the Tunguska explosion is evidence enough for asteroid strikes in historical times not being unrealistic.

I think you are confusing the arguments. I'm just trying to explain what I think he is saying.

I don't want meteor strikes wiping out cities because the playtesters hated a similar event. People don't like the "and now you lose a city for no good reason, and there is nothing you can do!" effect. They just don't.
 
0. Bring back the palace. why would you ever remove the most rewarding part of the game?
0.5 Bring back the city screen. that close-up view on the map on civ iv is really unsatisfying, and little more sophisticated than the city-view screen in civ 1
1. Building hopper: for the love of god, pretty please let me pre-program building preferences that auto-start just like the workers do in civ 4. Imagine: when you start a city, you can hit the auto-build button, and select "custom", where you'd have several custom build cues, or hoppers. such as "Coastal" option might do 1.Spearman 2: worker 3: market 4:granary 5: lighthouse 6:trireme, and so on to 42: dry dock 43: hydroponic seaweed farm, etc. etc. whatever. The amount of time i've wasted re-choosng the same order of buildings is rediculous. what good is sumulated power without some binary minions to do away with repetitive tasks?
2. In the domestic advisor screen, when you order the cities by a certain variable (such as hammers) after you select a city and make a change, the cities should stay in that order until you exit the mode altogether.
3. "build (x) in all cities now" mode - a switch you can pull to mobilize for war fast, or switch all your cities to building factories once they can, or markets because you need money, etc. etc.
4. "Build in all cities asap" - a switch you can pull to do same as #3, but only as soon as cities finish what they were previously working on
5. "Build-to-goal using all cities" or "build to goal using the following selected cities" eithor of which would do the math for you, and spread out the work of building, for example "8 tanks, 2 transports, a battleship, and 2 mech infantries using all non-wonder-building cities". the work woul dbe broken up to get you to that goal as fast as possible, with the least amount of waiting an extra 8 turns for that last city to finish. this algorythm should also factor in expected growth, expected wonders about to be built, etc., and adapt when a city gets conquered, etc.
6. capital city customization - streets, etc., using something with a level of sophistication approximately equal to the city-building mode of Caesar II (1992) shouldn't be too tough for a computer from 2009. could be kind of a palace reward type deal.
7. Give us the freedom of complete map customization that doesn't effect score, before a game starts. In general, just trust us to create our preferred game experience.
8. awesome future techs. the civ2 expansion sets took us to a rediculous array of other worlds, units that were uber-advanced and mysteries that rivaled middle earth and alien alike. can we see some of that again?
9. have a button that shows the city-area pattern of all known cities (the 5x5 grid with corners removed) of all cities, and marked out not-yet-cities. that way, you can see where to put your next city without doing knight-moves over and over in your head. another toggle could indicate un-used squares.
10. with later technologies, squares beyond just the standard city-stamp (the 5x5 pattern w/ corners removed) should be avaiable to cities farther and farter away, depending on improvements, city improvements, and technologies.
11. allow the dismissal of a whole city into settlers for a penalty, to move conquered cities that aren't where you want them, etc. etc.

any thoughts?
 
1. Building hopper: for the love of god, pretty please let me pre-program building preferences that auto-start just like the workers do in civ 4. Imagine: when you start a city, you can hit the auto-build button, and select "custom", where you'd have several custom build cues, or hoppers. such as "Coastal" option might do 1.Spearman 2: worker 3: market 4:granary 5: lighthouse 6:trireme, and so on to 42: dry dock 43: hydroponic seaweed farm, etc. etc. whatever. The amount of time i've wasted re-choosng the same order of buildings is rediculous. what good is sumulated power without some binary minions to do away with repetitive tasks?

Why would you ever want a production queue of more than 3 units/buildings, let alone 43? That's insanity.

3. "build (x) in all cities now" mode - a switch you can pull to mobilize for war fast, or switch all your cities to building factories once they can, or markets because you need money, etc. etc.
4. "Build in all cities asap" - a switch you can pull to do same as #3, but only as soon as cities finish what they were previously working on

What we need is the ability to select multiple cities and change their production. Your idea will become obsolete when the player has built 16 or more cities, and still wants to keep 8 of them doing whatever they're doing during wartime production.

5. "Build-to-goal using all cities" or "build to goal using the following selected cities" eithor of which would do the math for you, and spread out the work of building, for example "8 tanks, 2 transports, a battleship, and 2 mech infantries using all non-wonder-building cities". the work woul dbe broken up to get you to that goal as fast as possible, with the least amount of waiting an extra 8 turns for that last city to finish. this algorythm should also factor in expected growth, expected wonders about to be built, etc., and adapt when a city gets conquered, etc.

So... you want to take all of the strategy out of the game.

7. Give us the freedom of complete map customization that doesn't effect score, before a game starts. In general, just trust us to create our preferred game experience.

Just start a custom game, go to worldbuilder, make the map you want, and then start playing. Or if you don't want to remember what the maps looked like, save several regenerated maps you think are excellent (such maps appear occasionally), go to the main menu, pick custom scenario, choose one of your saved maps at random, and play.

8. awesome future techs. the civ2 expansion sets took us to a rediculous array of other worlds, units that were uber-advanced and mysteries that rivaled middle earth and alien alike. can we see some of that again?

Antilogic won't like that.

9. have a button that shows the city-area pattern of all known cities (the 5x5 grid with corners removed) of all cities, and marked out not-yet-cities. that way, you can see where to put your next city without doing knight-moves over and over in your head. another toggle could indicate un-used squares.

Turn on Show City Radius under the Graphics tab in the Options menu. The thing you're talking about shows up whenever you have a settler selected, the only time it's useful.

10. with later technologies, squares beyond just the standard city-stamp (the 5x5 pattern w/ corners removed) should be avaiable to cities farther and farter away, depending on improvements, city improvements, and technologies.

They had this in CivRev, and it was one of the few things I liked about that game. Yes, I agree that city jurisdiction should expand by building certain things, such as Courthouse, which currently become almost completely useless once Banks are available.

11. allow the dismissal of a whole city into settlers for a penalty, to move conquered cities that aren't where you want them, etc. etc.

First of all, that's completely unrealistic. Have you ever heard of people just picking up a city and moving it somewhere else? Second, that's part of the game. You have to decide whether the city is placed in a strategically beneficial location for you, and if not, raze it. Also, this may be difficult for you to grasp, but sometimes, overlapping city radii is actually more strategic than using each tile only once. Especially in the early game, putting your second city close to your capital reduces maintainence.
 
I don't want meteor strikes wiping out cities because the playtesters hated a similar event. People don't like the "and now you lose a city for no good reason, and there is nothing you can do!" effect. They just don't.

What about gaining or losing a city because of culture? There were some cities I captured that reverted back to their original civ and some cities I lost that I regained later. Realistically, this option ought to be removed because Havana has yet to be influenced by the US even though they are in close proximity.

Please, no meteor strikes wiping out cities but meteor strikes that provide scientific bonuses would be okay.
 
In all fairness, nuclear weapons have been used in war (see 1945). That's why I'm fine with having them in the game and usable.

If a smaller version has been done, then you can "exaggerate" it in game. If nothing even remotely close has happened in reality, then you can't. I think that is the rule he is using, not the one you have described.

Is that why plane crashes in another civ's territory is such a recurring event? I ain't claiming responsibility but I'm guessing Sid would. Earthquakes, hurricanes & tsunami's seem to be occurring as of recent and no civ government seems to claim responsibility for these events.

Somehow I wish I could cause a plane that belonged to another civ to crash or cause an earthquake onto another civ's territory. It would be like the cost of a nuclear weapon with the behavior of a cruise missile. Though, only with the discovery of satellites & rocketry could these "new units" be possible.

That new altitude system of undersea, above sea, on land, on hills, on mountain, in the air and possibly a space grid system is very intriguing.
 
Wow, this is a really long post. I doubt this will get noticed.

Anyway, I would like to see a much later end date. 2050 is just around the corner. It seemed far off in 1990, but not anymore. I'd like to see the game reach into the future more. As good as Gal Civ is, I still think Civ is better because it's based in reality. But it would be cool if you could go sci-fi as a part of the game. I love the mech units that someone made in one of the mods.

I'd like to see some differentiation in religions. In reality the are not all the same. Some mods try to do something, but I'd like to see it in the vanilla game. Perhaps there can be a way to define certain bonuses/minuses for each religion before the game starts.

I agree with others that can't play giant worlds with lots of civs because the game requires too much computer power. I don't want that trend to continue.

I like the global era cap idea. A way to play the entire game in a specific era would be good too. It would feel a bit like playing a custom scenario.

I'd almost like to see less buildings, units and techs. It's sometimes overwhelming to chose and I can't understand all the details of so many things.

War still rules the game. It would be nice to play a smallish country and stay peaceful, but it seems nearly impossible. Some big bully will come gobble you up.

What about a way for new civs to emerge out of older/dying civs? Just an idea, but it's happened many times in the real world. I don't mean barbarian civs, but playable civs. Perhaps if certain ancient civs either conquered certain other civs or had very close relations for a long time you would be given an opportunity to morph into a another/newer civ. You could do this with America for instance. Perhaps it's not available in the beginning of the game, but can become available through come kind of conquest or alliance.

How about the ability to dump a vassal state?

For me, I normally play small worlds at fast speed on chieftain because I don't have lots of time to play and usually automate many features. But I find the game is either too simple or too complicated. It's really simple to play in a sort of autopilot mode, but it's also possible to micromanage everything. Playing the simple way can get dull because I don't really know why I'm building certain things or how to specialize cities or know why one tech is better than another. But I don't really have time to figure out all the intricacies. Perhaps some more pop-up tips/explanations would be an option that I could turn on that might help me learn some of those strategies of why things are good or bad to do.
 
0. Bring back the palace. why would you ever remove the most rewarding part of the game?

Palace or throne room, I'm kind of fond of it, but preferably not have it run out of stuff to do when one is not near finished the game.

1. Building hopper: for the love of god, pretty please let me pre-program building preferences that auto-start just like the workers do in civ 4. Imagine: when you start a city, you can hit the auto-build button, and select "custom", where you'd have several custom build cues, or hoppers. such as "Coastal" option might do 1.Spearman 2: worker 3: market 4:granary 5: lighthouse 6:trireme, and so on to 42: dry dock 43: hydroponic seaweed farm, etc. etc. whatever. The amount of time i've wasted re-choosng the same order of buildings is rediculous. what good is sumulated power without some binary minions to do away with repetitive tasks?

This is an option I would never use, but then I really can't see many times in a game where what I want to build more than one or two in advance is going to stay reliably stable as circumstances change. Most of your logistical notions about managing stuff fall under a similar header for me.

6. capital city customization - streets, etc., using something with a level of sophistication approximately equal to the city-building mode of Caesar II (1992) shouldn't be too tough for a computer from 2009. could be kind of a palace reward type deal.

Maybe as an alternative to the palace, yes, doing the same basic thing in a different context., but I am disinclined to want to fiddle around with it unless it has a real impact on gameplay, and messing around with city layout having a real impact on gameplay feels the wrong scale for Civ.
 
What about gaining or losing a city because of culture? There were some cities I captured that reverted back to their original civ and some cities I lost that I regained later. Realistically, this option ought to be removed because Havana has yet to be influenced by the US even though they are in close proximity.

But if you take that out, you're removing one of the main avenues for peaceful conflict, and that unbalances the game even further in the direction of being a wargame.
 
I would like to see the roads revamped. Something like:

Dirt Road (Available with The Wheel)
- 1/2 Movement Cost

Paved Road (Available with Masonry and The Wheel)
- 1/3 Movement Cost(1/4 with Combustion)
- +1 :traderoute: for connected cities
- +0.10 :gold: maintenance cost

Highway (Available with Engineering)
- 1/4 Movement Cost(1/6 with Combustion)
- +2 :traderoute: for connected cities
- +0.50 :gold: maintenance cost

Railroad (Available with Railroad)
- 1/6 Movement Cost(1/10 with Combustion)
- +3 :traderoute: for connected cities
- +1.00 :gold: maintenance cost
- +1 :health:
- +1 :) with Environmentalism
 
How much have modern expressways contributed to the development of civilizations, compared to railroads?

You know you'd love to see an interstate highway system sprawling throughout your glorious nation.
 
Back
Top Bottom