Let's make Civ 5

[Scilly_guy]

You have a point, and I understand, but in that case a spell checker would be useful, as a tool for learning as much as anything. His English is better than some English people I know, I don't deny it.

 

[RedRalph]

A map that can support 200 civs. (like Earth)

If piossible, brilliant, in reality, erach turn would take a billion years, so sadly its not going to happen

1 turn is one month. all game.

Game that lasts a yeaR? no thanks

A tec tree that has 1000 tecs. (like Hearts of Iron)

Yes

A slider fore adjusting level of micromanagement.

Yes

2 difficulty sliders: 1 fore enemies 1 fore internal difficulty.

yes

adjustable civics like in (Europa Unuversalis2) LOTS OF OPTIONS

Yes, deifinitely

Secret societys.That try to infiltrate & control. (Knights tempar, illuminati, Freemasons.)

Very good idea and one I've not heard before

Other no-gowerment controled entetis (Corporations, religions, grean peaceThey bribe and do Lobbying.

yeah, good idea

Ability to lend money. <=>

Yeah its stupid that you cant do this

Scoring based on hove happy & Free your people are
Playtime till the World is a Paradise.(Everybody is happy)

Actually that could be a great new victory condition. no in the whole planet. Would require an whole new level of diplomacy skills

 

[rysmiel]

Why does everyone want a really complicated game? 1000 techs? Advanced tile system?POWs? Do people actually play video games to have fun and get away from work/relax anymore?

Well, I like a game that stretches my brain in ways my work does not, because if I never get to stretch it I'd go ****oo. I find that relaxing; ymmv.

 

[rysmiel]

Game that lasts a yeaR? no thanks

Actually, I'd love a game complicated enough that it could in theory last that long, on a huge map with lots of civs; not that I normally play like that, but I do rgeularly enjoy games lasting weeks or months.

Actually that could be a great new victory condition. no in the whole planet. Would require an whole new level of diplomacy skills

Utopian victoy condition is an interesting idea; you'd need mechanisms to influence other civs to get that happy without conquering them, though, getting it by conquering all bar one city and then floowding whoever's left there with gifts would be silly.

 

[rysmiel]

1 turn is one month. all game

I think that's a bad idea, because either it needs a major fiddling with the tech advances that people who like realism will object to, or you would spend more than half the game messing around with the first half-dozen techs.

A tec tree that has 1000 tecs. (like Hearts of Iron)

I don't know about a thousand, but a few hundred definitely.

Secret societys.That try to infiltrate & control. (Knights tempar, illuminati, Freemasons.)
Other no-gowerment controled entetis (Corporations, religions, grean peace,)
They bribe and do Lobbying.

Depends on whether they are under your control or not; these as extra options for play, definitely; as things getting in the way, no.

Ability to lend money. <=>

This was in Civ 3, though it could have been made more sophisticated.

Missioneres that convert Barbarians + spread your culture -> Joining.

I like the thought of culture converting barbarians, though I don't think it should need units.

Negative effects of tech & civics, that u nottis later.

Bring back pollution, corruption and unhappiness.

Scoring based on hove happy & Free your people are

Only so long as "happy" and "free" are measured separately.

Lots of events. & happenings like in Hearts of Iron that lets u chose hove u react. (and penalties if u act not according to your civics.)

Only so long as you can turn them off, or control what triggers them; random events are a pain.

 

[blaisie7]

How about territories. Let's take Oregon for example. It belonged to the British, but I believe the Spanish and French also had a claim on it. In the end it became part of the U.S. Those areas that border one or more civilizations should be territories when someone settles them. They should then stay territories for a certain amount of time before they join that particular civilization and while they are territories, neighboring civilizations should be able to settle them also. It would add some interesting diplomatic options to the game. You could negotiate with your neighbors for exclusive rights to settle the territory, give up your claim or go to war over it.

 

[Scilly_guy]

Ah ha but territories are a concept of particular civilisations rather than all civilisations, what is a territory? A collection of cities? A predefined area? Who defines it, the game? But I want to carve my own border not settle/capture/trade predefined areas!

 

[rhinoman]

Ah ha but territories are a concept of particular civilisations rather than all civilisations, what is a territory? A collection of cities? A predefined area? Who defines it, the game? But I want to carve my own border not settle/capture/trade predefined areas!

Territorys and territory claims as far as I can tell is simply a diplomatic addition or alternitive to culture borders. Alot of people are saying that territorys should be claimed by explorers or forts. I think that you should be able to highlight your claims from a seperate little thing in addition to having the ability to highlight your views of recognising other civs claims. Before you desmiss territorys think about your standard earth map on civ. the areas that get most messed up are the american canadian border and siberia. THere are no major citys in the region so nothing stops the areas from being totally unrealilistic with china, mongolia, and to a lesser extent the arabs making a random collection of citys rather than a nice clean border. in america america always ocupys all of canada when it comes to a setteling race which is also unrealistic.

The vision of territorys i have is not you having to ocupy oregon country or else but more of adding land claims t odiplomacy and advancing it from "ugh you give us 20 gold and we kill germans".

 

[rhinoman]

Why does everyone want a really complicated game? 1000 techs? Advanced tile system?POWs? Do people actually play video games to have fun and get away from work/relax anymore?

I almost competly agree with you. I felt like I was an extremest at first for sugesting 4 things mabye 5 if you count pows which im still not completley sure about.

1. Finite resources
2. Semi Advanced Logistics
3. Unit creation taking a drain on population to produce and weapons being manufactured seperatley.
4. Teritory caims.

While i'm still up there im nothing to people sugesting like 200 civs I AM NOT WATING LIKE 20 MORE SECONDS PER TURN SO CIVS LIKE SAN MORINO CAN BE INCLUDED People also sujest things like Freemasons I dont care these things are probaly not worth it for the extra loding time .

 

[Öjevind Lång]

3. Unit creation taking a drain on population to produce and weapons being manufactured seperatley.

I think that's an excellent idea. Troops don't only cost money - they cost population too. Too large an army should impede productivity, and this is best done connected to the population.

 

[stevenbear]

And, what do you think about Sealand? Do you think land claim is a legal issue or should be based on force? or both? How about Israel?

As I said, nation is nation, civilisation is civilisation, and state is state. Would it too complicate for a game?

I think the current game is doing citilisation.

Enlarging army size consumes workforce, reduces noe-weapon produtivity. I like this idea. However, I still insist the effect should show in the financial statements in money terms. That is why I suggest the budgeting system: the army size should be limited by the government budget and the capabe population before robots replace humans. When robots become main front line soldiers, only the budget bounds the army size.

 

[stevenbear]

My another idea is the management levels. Maybe others have discussed it but it seems difficult to search the topic while the suggestion point list is not completed.

Some players like macro management. By spending money, assigning agents, and ordering generals, signing the documents, the empire is built. On the other hand, some players enjoy micro management. They would like to design and build each cities, write down all laws, involve all fightings (and hence all combats, battles, wars). Cesar, The Sims, Mount&Blade,...etc, they are willing to control every singel movement of governor and his/her family members. Eating, hunting, killing, . .. .. .. .ing, sleeping, and last from the very first King to the endless generations.

So, I think it may possible to set the different management levels, arrange roles from different class, gender, and race to play the game, in all dimesions.

The level should be shift easy. For example, using a manage page to show different levels such as top governing, area management, individual management.

Here comes the concept of social class. Upper class role can choose all levels, or you can choose upper class in all levels. Grass root, has no chance to management, it accepts the job from rulers, or the direct reporter. Yet this poor guy still has a chance becoming a hero if completing many important missions (like playing the action games).

The times of couse are different in different levels. It is unecessary to hold the turn base mode, but it should allow it in all levels.

The important events and fiist family news should be recorded as a part of history. Then you can make a great person or even make many great people youselves.

 

[apenpaap]

Actually that could be a great new victory condition. no in the whole planet. Would require an whole new level of diplomacy skills

Not necessarily: You could just raze all cities until only your capital and one other city (of a different player) are left, and then nuke both of them 'till they are at one population, so they;ll have huge numbers of extra .

 

[RedRalph]

Not necessarily: You could just raze all cities until only your capital and one other city (of a different player) are left, and then nuke both of them 'till they are at one population, so they;ll have huge numbers of extra .

you could do that for a diplomatic victory too, but no one actually would

 

[apenpaap]

you could do that for a diplomatic victory too, but no one actually would

I did when I tried to win diplomatical (except nuking my own city of course)

 

[RedRalph]

I did when I tried to win diplomatical (except nuking my own city of course)

Hmmm, well, I dont think thats how most people do it (pretty ironic to call that a diplomatic victory, its pretty much a domination victory where you just stopped one city short)

but this new condition would be a real challenge; it would involve warfare, it would have to as cities would have to be returned to their rightful owners, leaders defying the UN dealt with etc. It would obviously involve lots of building too, and a huge amount of dilomacy, and trade would beocme more important. It would be like a super-victory condition. A utopian victory.

 

[stevenbear]

1. Is it possible to create new race by ..., how to say, hybriding?

2. Is it possible to set black always in tropical area ?

3. Is it possible to adapt Jared Diamond's theory in Guns, Germs, and Steel as the development speed conditon?

4. Is it possible to create new bioligical disasters by technology and export/import new species to other continents?

5. Is it possible to make the civilisations more real by introducing some phenomenon such as Matthew effect, nazi party, culture revolution, Olympia, inflation, assassining political leaders, merge nations via loyal marriage, etc.

6. Is it possible to make each city has its own unique non-wonder building or building style?

7. Is it possible to eliminate all Lich leaders? and replace by many "first family" ?

8. Is it possible to allow players designing weapons, uniform, national symbols, political and army structures?

9. Is it possible to see the development of languages in over 6,000 years?

10. Is it possible to restrict players driect commanding armies by communictaion means and political system?

11. Is it possible to introduce robots as social member in the future era?

12. Is it possible to build some cities on and under the sea?

 

[Chutasynth]

I think some people here haven't read the "developer notes" from the Civ 4 manual. The game is suppose to be fun, so you replace the dark ages with golden ages, and things like that. The real change that Civ 5 needs is from its structure and economic system, and also (for god sake) include a map editor!!

These are my ideas:

- The possibility to sell weapons (units) to undeveloped countries. This will create a profitable military industry, and as happens in the real life, the undeveloped countries doesn't have to wait to research specific techs to have F15.

- Large nations should have larger problems. When you have a certain number of unhappy people we should have a civil disorder (like in previous CIV stopping the production). This people should have specific demands focused in the economic system, real war weariness or lack of freedom. The ways to stop rioters should not be only constructing colosseums, but a response for the rioters' demands or military actions against the population.

- Good special events, like Olympics or World Cups.

- A total new economic and political system. In previous versions we just have raw materials, in Civ 5 we should include manufactered materials (oil - gasoline) and create a new trade system between civs. More government intervention (taxes) should be more fun, but less eficient. Previous civ versions every leader (also in democracy) is totalitarian, so depending of the civics you could create federal states, unitarian states or just be the King. Let's introduce the concept of liberal economies vs. socialist economies.

- Civ 5 should include economic numbers and concepts, like PIB, PIB per capita, human development, poverty levels, immigration and these will indicate the prosperity and score of a nation. (ECONOMIC VICTORY!!)

- With currency you should create your own money and compete in the international markets. We should have a price for OIL and a economic war!! Always the late civ games become BORING!! With these new concepts some buildings like Stock Exchange will have new purposes. Bring back tourism!

- Within the game, customize religion and currency names (if creating states or provices, also customize their names).

- Economic and military blocks (European Union, NATO).

- The cities could have more than 1 market or colosseums (in the future rename to stadiums). The local governments should build their own improvements (if your civics permit it) so you will not worry about construct every improvement.

- Eliminate the city radius concept. With a new economic system, the resources will come from far lands and it will create metropolitan areas or megalopolis.

- Finally, eliminate the grid, or reduce it, so the cities could expand to more tiles, and be more realistic. I want to see an Stalingrad Battle in Civ 5. Also eliminating the grid we should have higher terrain levels (like in Alpha Centauri).

We have to focus in new things, new ideas. To bring 2D or to block growing because of granaries are bad ideas because the computers will be more powerful in the future and we should expand our posibilities not limitate them.

I'm a southamerican fan of every version of CIV. Sorry about my english.

PS: i think that units should cross between the mountains, not through the mountains. So with diferent levels of terrain we can create in the editor peaks or glaciers that will be impassable.

 

[stevenbear]

socialist economies are doom to die. I think it is better to provide the options of intervention levels.

economic victory is a good idea. And it it should satify some indicators, not one.

Currency may be difficult but fun. Gold/silver base system was used a long time. Fait system is young and bring more inflation problem. Banks are allowed to create their own notes until governments or semi government instituions become monopoly. Currency names are good because you may find hundreds names in a nation in some period in free market system. And at last, one dominate all markets. The winner's name can keep changing.

Britain printed fake money to strike France economy in 1800s, by using French experts, and won. Nazi printed fake British Pounds in World War II, but fake one was too perfect to fail. And futher, some financers can rule the world order by contorl the money.US dollar used to be the world currency until Euro challenges it.

Trade Barries is a good idea. And comes with smuggling and black markets. EU, WTO, NATO,etc. But how to play it? Duty? Quota?

Finacial victory may be needed, like Switzerland.

Tourism is a good idea. Let us see how economy, finace, politics, culture, technology and war affact it.

I agree all cities should have their unique buildngs, but how to do it? Industary makes the world look same. If a new city is established after industary era, it has no much history, without wonders, how can it be unique? The name of its university? May be great people? They seldom in new samll cities.

Markets, Schools, hospitals, temples should be more than one, I think it can represent by a mumber. If we ask for a 3D demo, it requires a more powerful computer to run.

City radius should be elimilated in some political systems.

Stalingrad Battle...I think it requires shift to a battle mode. One ture one year--it is too long for a single battle.

 

[Scilly_guy]

and also (for god sake) include a map editor!!

There is a map editor, I believe it is called world builder, once in a game open the game menu (esc) and chose world builder to edit the current map, if you want to start from a blank canvas just erase everything.