MosquitoE
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2005
- Messages
- 78
Yeah, who wants to play a game were there is a chance of failure.
Thats why I like to beat up toddlers. I always succeed.
-
In anticipation of the possible announcement of Civilization 7, we have decided to already create the Civ7 forum. For more info please check the forum here .
Let's make Civ 5
- Thread starter Bevertje
- Start date
Yeah, who wants to play a game were there is a chance of failure.
Thats why I like to beat up toddlers. I always succeed.
Yeah, who wants to play a game were there is a chance of failure.
Thats why I like to beat up toddlers. I always succeed.
I think camarilla has a valid point to some extent.
Religious and corporate stuff should not have an insuperable random element in it, put it that way. Your chances of success should be controllable by how much resources and effort you put into generating them, so it should be at least possible to stack any individual attempt to spread so that you can't fail, if you are willing to throw enough resources at it that your empire is feeling the lack elsewhere.
Junuxx
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2005
- Messages
- 1,154
Throwing more resources at it pretty much comes down to the same thing as sending more missionaries, eh.
trickofthehand
Prince
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2007
- Messages
- 310
complaining about missionaries/execs having a chance to fail spreading religion/corp is ridicolous. what does it take you 3 turns to build a missionary in ancient times and 1 turn in modern times?
in response to original poster though, we might as well start on civ 5 since the developers saw fit to waste their time making a game that any good modder would've been able to replicate.
in response to original poster though, we might as well start on civ 5 since the developers saw fit to waste their time making a game that any good modder would've been able to replicate.
trickofthehand
Prince
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2007
- Messages
- 310
Civ5 needs to adapt the unit creation system of Galactic Civilizations II. I have more fun playing GCII simply because of your ability to completely customize and create your own units. They already stole the random event system from GCII so why not the unit creation system for civ 5.
It depends on how it is implemented.
I'd far rather a system that let you invest a lot in one missionary (a Great Missionary, perhaps ?) that was guaranteed to succeed than one that needs you to pile up four or five regular missionaries and throw them at the city in the same turn, or whatever.
Just so long as that can be switched off, and it comes with a good enough selection of pre-generated units that I never have to bother with it, because I really hate wasting my time on that kind of thing.
There were random events in Civ 1, fwiw.
Öjevind Lång
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,371
You forget that there is a limit of how many missionaries a civ can have: no more than three at the same time.
trickofthehand
Prince
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2007
- Messages
- 310
rysmiel, in GCII there were pre-created units for people like you, I imagine that firaxis would be smart enough to do the same.
bricthegreat
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1
Something I would like to see is the possibility of a city seceding from its home country and forming its own nation. For example, New York City breaks off from America and becomes the Nation of New York or something like that. This would only happen if the city was very unhappy of course.
BakingTheArt
His Evening Coat
I was thinking of maybe when a barbarian captures a city, it forms its own nation, protected by 5 "revolutionary" units. (In ancient times, a man with a cloak and dagger. In modern, and man with a AK 47.)
Onionsoilder
Reaver
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2007
- Messages
- 3,173
That works, but the civilization should start with negative diplomatic modifiers to all other civilizations(unless the civilization is Furious with the one that lost the city)
I-am-a-panda
Rí
I think this guy wants a cirty building game, not a civilization game!
Öjevind Lång
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,371
1. Make spies much more expensive to build, and limit the number you can have at any given time to, for example, five. On the other hand, make it possible for them to gain experience.
2. If a spy successfully poisons the water system of one of your cities, blows up a building or destroys an improvement, include the possibility that the victim discovers who is responsible and make such acts of terrorism a valid cause for war without any diplomatic repercussions.
3. Automatize patrol flights for airships and fighters. Just make it possible to tell them to do recon flights every turn. One could even have an option to specify whether one wants them to always do it in one direction or work clockwise - north one turn, east the next and so on. I mean, the AI never tires of doing recon flights every turn, but for a human player it's micromanagement of the most trying kind.
4. An old suggestion I still want to promote: introduce minor civs. They could be barbarian cities that have reached a certain degree of development or settlements that the mother civ has neglected for too long. They should be unable to expand to more than four cities; they should also be possible to dominate, but not to annex and assimilate when a certain point has been reached. Of course, their culture might become deeply influenced by yours so that they tend to side with you instinctively. And they could switch allegiance depending on how well they are treated and so on. This would make diplomacy more interesting.
2. If a spy successfully poisons the water system of one of your cities, blows up a building or destroys an improvement, include the possibility that the victim discovers who is responsible and make such acts of terrorism a valid cause for war without any diplomatic repercussions.
3. Automatize patrol flights for airships and fighters. Just make it possible to tell them to do recon flights every turn. One could even have an option to specify whether one wants them to always do it in one direction or work clockwise - north one turn, east the next and so on. I mean, the AI never tires of doing recon flights every turn, but for a human player it's micromanagement of the most trying kind.
4. An old suggestion I still want to promote: introduce minor civs. They could be barbarian cities that have reached a certain degree of development or settlements that the mother civ has neglected for too long. They should be unable to expand to more than four cities; they should also be possible to dominate, but not to annex and assimilate when a certain point has been reached. Of course, their culture might become deeply influenced by yours so that they tend to side with you instinctively. And they could switch allegiance depending on how well they are treated and so on. This would make diplomacy more interesting.
Antonionius
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 5
I've always had a problem with 'building' units (settlers,workers and military), just like you build a building. They're people!
How about allocating citizens to either of these three units. No hammers, no building time. The worker unit can go as your citizens are working the fields or towns or mines anyway. Settlers can just leave, leaving a lower population in the city they've just left, (like Civ 1,2,3)
As for military. You build a barracks, then allocate citizens to the barracks, a bit like you do with specialists. You want 4 units in your city? Then you'll have to allocate citizens to the barracks. Or you can just have one and then you've freed up 3 to work as farmers, miners, scientists, artists etc.
If you get into a war and you're on the offensive, then those troops leave your city and your population decreases.
Also, you could use forges and factories to build military equipment. In the late came you could have military factories knocking out helicopters and tanks while your regular factories build everything else.
How about allocating citizens to either of these three units. No hammers, no building time. The worker unit can go as your citizens are working the fields or towns or mines anyway. Settlers can just leave, leaving a lower population in the city they've just left, (like Civ 1,2,3)
As for military. You build a barracks, then allocate citizens to the barracks, a bit like you do with specialists. You want 4 units in your city? Then you'll have to allocate citizens to the barracks. Or you can just have one and then you've freed up 3 to work as farmers, miners, scientists, artists etc.
If you get into a war and you're on the offensive, then those troops leave your city and your population decreases.
Also, you could use forges and factories to build military equipment. In the late came you could have military factories knocking out helicopters and tanks while your regular factories build everything else.
UrSpaceInvader
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1
I like Civ 4 in terms of civilization building, however combat is the most serious issue that still plagues the game.
I have edited my own version to add each unit with terrain attacks and defence bonuses, an example is that chariots are better attacking units in grassland that on hills. Due to this it means that you have to think not only about the units abilities but also the terrain there both on.
A another thing ive added is era based bonus's on units, for example armoured units have a huge bonus vs melee, and like wise melee units have a negative bonus vs armoured. This means that tanks in the game can pound 36 swordman units and not even get a scratch.
I ve also added a addition civic option known as military, with Militarism, Imperialism, Chivalry, Mobilisation and Peacekeeping. They all have a effect on your military such as Chivalry means you can draft five units per turn, Mobilisation is sweet for war as it grants 100 percent military production however it stifles the economy as each unit has additional support cost, meaning less research and culture rates.
I would like to add a new civic much like RFC expansion that helped civs build colonizing empires without the crippling maintenance cost. I played a game on huge map and found the cost so extortionate that i couldnt possible acheive a conquest victory even though my research, culture and espionage were all at 0%.
I would also like to put in additional features such as civil wars, like a nationality, tax, religious, political, independence or war weariness agenda between citizens that means civil war, however the war would only go on for a select period, such as a minimum of ten turns and a maximum of thirty, and who ever had the advantage at the end (killed the most, took the most cities, damaged the most improvements) would win.
I also like the idea of barbarian states becoming civs of there own if left, for example if on a fractal world and a state started up on a separate island it could flourish (however slowly at first) into a distinct seperate civ.
I also tweaked my version so that units are much easier to build. I can understand the great wall taking a thousand years to build, but it takes also a hundred years to arm a bunch of neoanderthals with wooden sticks.
I like Civ 4 however i think there is still much to do.
I have edited my own version to add each unit with terrain attacks and defence bonuses, an example is that chariots are better attacking units in grassland that on hills. Due to this it means that you have to think not only about the units abilities but also the terrain there both on.
A another thing ive added is era based bonus's on units, for example armoured units have a huge bonus vs melee, and like wise melee units have a negative bonus vs armoured. This means that tanks in the game can pound 36 swordman units and not even get a scratch.
I ve also added a addition civic option known as military, with Militarism, Imperialism, Chivalry, Mobilisation and Peacekeeping. They all have a effect on your military such as Chivalry means you can draft five units per turn, Mobilisation is sweet for war as it grants 100 percent military production however it stifles the economy as each unit has additional support cost, meaning less research and culture rates.
I would like to add a new civic much like RFC expansion that helped civs build colonizing empires without the crippling maintenance cost. I played a game on huge map and found the cost so extortionate that i couldnt possible acheive a conquest victory even though my research, culture and espionage were all at 0%.
I would also like to put in additional features such as civil wars, like a nationality, tax, religious, political, independence or war weariness agenda between citizens that means civil war, however the war would only go on for a select period, such as a minimum of ten turns and a maximum of thirty, and who ever had the advantage at the end (killed the most, took the most cities, damaged the most improvements) would win.
I also like the idea of barbarian states becoming civs of there own if left, for example if on a fractal world and a state started up on a separate island it could flourish (however slowly at first) into a distinct seperate civ.
I also tweaked my version so that units are much easier to build. I can understand the great wall taking a thousand years to build, but it takes also a hundred years to arm a bunch of neoanderthals with wooden sticks.
I like Civ 4 however i think there is still much to do.
jsweeney
American
ummm, i think there should be a way to "buy" a tile from whoever owns it. With that tile you could build a city, build an improvement or anything. Just the price would vary per tile, like if the tile has gold on it, it will be worth more then a tile with nothing on it.
