Let's make Civ 5

[exhile]

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.

What is peaceful conflict? Is that some sort of oxymoron? Cities are captured by military force and they are either kept or razed. I don't see Baghdad reverting to US control because of culture. Saddam's statue was torn down by a tank.

 

[rysmiel]

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.

No, actually, I'd hate it. Interstate highway systems are symbolic of a certain sort of excess.

 

[rysmiel]

What is peaceful conflict? Is that some sort of oxymoron?

Culture, religion, espionage, trade; any of the aspects of competition in the game other than the military. because if all I wanted was a wargame I'd play Risk, and if all I wanted from Civ was a wargame I'd play C-evo.

Cities are captured by military force and they are either kept or razed. I don't see Baghdad reverting to US control because of culture. Saddam's statue was torn down by a tank.

How would you model the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the subsequent absorption of much of Eastern Europe into the EU, then ?

 

[Ramesses]

No, actually, I'd hate it. Interstate highway systems are symbolic of a certain sort of excess.

Yeah, I guess it would only work within capitalist civilizations.

 

[Antilogic]

Antilogic won't like that.

Wow, I'm not going to try and explain what I thought others were thinking. People tend to mistake it for my own.

I would point out that my major complaint are events like culture flipping are "fair" in my eyes because you see it coming: you can know where cities are on your borders, count the tiles, and see when the borders pop. You can avoid it by building culture in your own cities.

The reason why I don't like this meteor strike or alien invasion and wiping out a continent is because it is completely random. There is some skill you can put in to maintain your borders and not let your cities flip.

Also, on the random events complaint with all the plane crashes and forest fires...well, that is more a function of how the random events occur in the game. The game takes a random number to see if a random event will occur on that turn. If so, then it looks at the random events that can occur, and then picks one based on the weighting factor of the active event set in that game, which is determined at the start. Thus, by increasing the appearance rate of events/quests, you can avoid the problem of having 20 airplane crashes or a dozen forest fires. The other alternative is to program some additional ones: I've added 14 homemade ones to mix it up, and I'm going to incorporate another 30 or so I've found from others.

The fact is, the selection system for the random events is the issue, not the events themselves.

 

[Onionsoilder]

How much have modern expressways contributed to the development of civilizations, compared to railroads?

Much, much less. Railroads are better then highways in nearly every way.

 

[exhile]

Culture, religion, espionage, trade; any of the aspects of competition in the game other than the military. because if all I wanted was a wargame I'd play Risk, and if all I wanted from Civ was a wargame I'd play C-evo.

How would you model the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the subsequent absorption of much of Eastern Europe into the EU, then ?

How is one suppose to capture a city with trade, espionage, religion or culture? I've never seen it done in real life. It's like Havana's state atheist religion, Cuban Missiles, Sugar Canes and Cigars is going to capture Miami. In the opposite direction, Christianity, the CIA and Ford F-150s have yet to capture Havana.

The Warsaw Pact fell because the Soviet Union fell. Eastern European countries and their respective cities are still operating independent of the EU. The EU is a regional block of countries. It's borders are tier based. They don't have a unified military command. The Euro currency is not the de-facto standard in all EU member states. This is a total different phenomena from capturing cities by cultural or military means.

The city of Saigon was captured and renamed Ho Chi Minh when the Viet Cong won the Vietnam War. Baghdad was captured when the statue of Saddam fell. Capturing a city can only be accomplished by the use of military units.

 

[Junuxx]

The city of Saigon was captured and renamed Ho Chi Minh when the Viet Cong won the Vietnam War. Baghdad was captured when the statue of Saddam fell. Capturing a city can only be accomplished by the use of military units.

Well, other cities can switch sides when one city is taken. It happened in the Eighty Years' War.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Well, other cities can switch sides when one city is taken. It happened in the Eighty Years' War.

That's a whole different concept. (plus that involves war)

 

[Shackel]

Baghdad was captured when the statue of Saddam fell.

Uprising = Revolt.

WHO helped with the revolt? America.

How can you make this make sense? Make units give off a tiny bit of culture.

PROBLEM SOLVED. (Oh, and culture CAN make a city change in theory. America's culture made Panama because we interfered and caused a "revolt")

 

[Ramesses]

Uprising = Revolt.

WHO helped with the revolt? America.

How can you make this make sense? Make units give off a tiny bit of culture.

PROBLEM SOLVED. (Oh, and culture CAN make a city change in theory. America's culture made Panama because we interfered and caused a "revolt")

Hmm... maybe there should be a Spy promotion for non-spy units. Then soldiers could start revolts.

 

[mehatch]

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

...

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

...

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.

Thanks for the tips re: maps and city radius. that was very helpful. a couple notes back:
1. "difficult for you to grasp"? so so grumpy...tsk tsk tsk. anywho, during wwII, russia moved whole cities to dodge the invading Nazi's, and who knows what housing trends we can expect in the future? I say we allow city movement, but only under certain government types, or once some cool future-tech arrives, like some super-cheap way to levitate stuff.
2. the city-radius thingy doesn't show the city-radius shape on cities which haven't yet reached that size yet. also, i'd like a way to anticipate future city layouts, and a mode where i could drop markers ahead to show how the next 20cities will all most efficiently fill a continent would be the coolest. also, in my ideal civ-experience, one of my minions, say in this case, a cartographer or engineer, whatever, could reccomend a particular city layout for a given continent shape, again with options. that'd be rad.
3. as far as "taking all the strategy out" and "options you'd never use" i get that alot of ya'll like to really go for high scores, etc. But i've been a dedicated and duly addicted civ fan since i was playing civ 1 on my 100mhz dell in 1995, and tho i respect the avid micromanagers out there, the big-picture lazy bastards like me who never go above warlord should have the option automate any aspect of the game we don't want to worry about.

in conclusion

Everybody has a least favorite part of this game, so why not make a way to automate EVERYTHING and ANYTHING if we want to....and if we do toggle everything to automate, how cool would it be to watch whole game simulations based on saying yes to every reccomended option using preset strategies, all without clicking a mouse more than once, and then just sit back and watch?

this gives more options to everybody, while still allowing hard-core "king" level players and above to do their detailed expert stuff.

let us eat cake!

-mehatch

 

[Ramesses]

"difficult for you to grasp"? so so grumpy...tsk tsk tsk.

Sorry about that. I really didn't try to come off all condescending, it just kinda happened. But I want to reiterate that Civilization is all about strategy, and to bring big plans into motion, you have to be willing to take the small steps required to realize them. If everything is just done for you, there's less satisfaction to be had when all is said and done.

But I will confess, even on Noble difficulty, all the management that needs to be done, starting from the Renaissance era onward, tends to give me a headache, even with the new and improved BtS interface. So it's not that your ideas don't have merit, it's just that they're going too far and removing major elements of gameplay. I think most of your suggestions would be successful if they were implemented on a smaller scale.

The building hopper could work, but only if limited to 5 units/buildings. I can't imagine that having any more than that would still allow you to build in reaction to your surroundings and opponents.

Changing production in multiple cities simultaneously is an excellent idea, but not for selecting all cities in your empire or on one continent, since that has limited usefulness. The City Advisor Screen should have two features for changing production in cities without entering Full or Reduced City View. "Set Multiple City Production" is a feature which lets you change the current assignment of all cities which you previously ctrl-clicked in the menu, and even includes a switch to set the new mass order to take effect immediately (top of the queue) or after all previously queued projects are complete (bottom of the queue). The second feature is "Assign to Big Plan," which I will talk about next.

As for setting all cities to try and build an army of units as efficiently as possible, perhaps this "Big Plan Customization" menu could work. First, you would create an order for units and buildings (as simple as 11 Libraries, or as complex as 8 tanks, 2 transports, a battleship, and 2 mech infantries). Once you've drawn up your Big Plan, you go to the City Advisor Screen and select a city's current production. A drop-down menu of all units and buildings in your Big Plan are shown, and you simply select which to build, and do this for all cities which are most suited to the task. As you assign units and buildings from the Big Plan, they are removed, so once you've chosen two cities to make Transports through the Big Plan feature, you cannot make any more Battleships through the Big Plan feature (but you could go into the city and set it up there if you wish.) Finally, if any cities request something new to produce, and there are still things to be built from your Big Plan, they will be offered at the top of the list. So this Big Plan feature requires management still, but it's made a lot easier as the game helps keep you from building more of something than you previously specified and reminds you to stay on track.

Wow, that was a bit of a mouthful.

 

[mehatch]

Don't sweat it Ramesses, im new to these chatboards, and upon further review, i'll just bring thicker skin when in Rome...

anywho,

I love your idea to for putting the options i mentioned into a "big projects" menu. that actually solves like half my problems with the game. cool stuff.

however...

...Civilization is all about strategy, and to bring big plans into motion, you have to be willing to take the small steps required to realize them. If everything is just done for you, there's less satisfaction to be had when all is said and done.

But I will confess, even on Noble difficulty, all the management that needs to be done, starting from the Renaissance era onward, tends to give me a headache, even with the new and improved BtS interface. So it's not that your ideas don't have merit, it's just that they're going too far and removing major elements of gameplay. I think most of your suggestions would be successful if they were implemented on a smaller scale.

The building hopper could work, but only if limited to 5 units/buildings. I can't imagine that having any more than that would still allow you to build in reaction to your surroundings and opponents.

...

I would TOTALLY use a building hopper with like every building through to warp gates in 90% of my cities. I know it's categorized as a "Strategy Game" but for me the civ experience is almost more like a laboratory than a chessboard. i like trying out different strategies and letting them spread around and bump into eachother. I love it so much I continue to do it despite the tedium of building assignments. Infact, i'd really like to see an AI editor, where you could edit the AI of all the players in a given game, and set them to play against eachother and watch the whole of history play out in 3 minutes, like at the end of a normal game. kind of like that old life-evolution-squares game that came free with windows 95. (does anyone remember the name of that?)

anyways

i'm not suggesting removing any element of the game play, im merely pushing for a omni-toggle (new word?) to turn them on and off, that you're free to use or not. THink of the freedom that Warcraft II allowed with map editors, character and AI edits, etc. etc, that were all really user friendly. That worked out really well, and the game still holds up.

This is probably more of a philosophical game-play issue, but...

I just don't think any element of gameplay should be limited because other players are worried they might not be able to avoid the temptation. (which, im presuming, but could be totally wrong, might be behind your desire to limit certain options?) because in that case, it would be someone else's weakness limiting my fun.

also,

when i was talking about all those crazy future techs, fantasy stuff, aliens, etc, that you said antilogic wouldn't like, I'd probably hold those off for an explansion pack. like the last big one before civ 6.

ok, that's all i got

vroooooom!!!

-Hatch

 

[Antilogic]

when i was talking about all those crazy future techs, fantasy stuff, aliens, etc, that you said antilogic wouldn't like, I'd probably hold those off for an explansion pack. like the last big one before civ 6.

Believe it or not, there are far more people besides myself that like the historical focus of Civilization. When you start adding Clone Armies, Arcologies, and all the other Next War "content" into the main game, it detracts from that historical focus.

I think Civ4 has it right (suprise, I know). Anybody who wants to have all sorts of scifi units and buildings can play the Next War mod. Meanwhile, the rest of us can enjoy the main game without all that extra crap. It's a perfect compromise. Why change it? My point is, so long as it is a mod, it can be included in the base game as a scenario/mod. I don't care, so long as it is optional (as in, I can opt out of it).

 

[Ramesses]

Here's another Tech Tree related suggestion that I think has been mentioned before, either in this thread or somewhere else. I can't be arsed to find it.

It involves grouping similar techs into fields of study. This is nothing like the "6 static fields of research" I suggested a few pages back. Instead, it takes the Tech Tree idea and adds a third dimension to it, wherein you access very broad technologies and attain multiple levels of mastery within them. Example: The technology of "Metal Working" can be researched after learning "Mining", and by investing research into "Metal Working", you unlock new units/buildings/civics/etc. Naturally, a technology like "Metal Working" will have at least two levels of mastery: 'Bronze Working' and 'Iron Working', but there's certainly room for more levels.

Some technologies will have research locks which can only be unlocked by obtaining mastery levels in other techs. Example: When researching "Spirituality" (which encompasses "Mysticism", "Priesthood", and "Code of Laws"), you cannot research anything past the second mastery level (i.e. Code of Laws) until you have attained sufficient mastery of "Literacy" (a tech which includes "Writing", "Alphabet", and "Literature"). In particular, you must reach Level 1 Mastery of "Literacy" before you can reach Level 3 Mastery of "Spirituality".

The above example is very much grounded in the mechanics of CivIV, but it helps illustrate my point. The real system will be much more flexible than the Tech Tree can currently allow. Case in point: Medicine. The "herbalists discovering possible new treatment" random event from BtS shows that technologies should not be restricted to being researched in the era in which they were "fully mastered".

The technology of "Medicine" is one that will see a very big role in this new system, along with many areas of research that have persisted since the days of old. "Medicine" is unlocked during the Ancient era and has an infinite number of levels (it partially replaces what is now the "Future Tech" tech). Each level provides one extra health to all cities (with units of health being less valuable to compensate), along with some other advances like Medic promotions and Hospitals. Naturally, this tech will have many locks which must be opened through research in other areas to avoid abuse (even though researching nothing but Medicine would be a poor strategy anyway). Most importantly, by making "Medicine" something which can be researched throughout the entire game, it reflects how the study of prolonging life and eliminating disease has played a large part in human history, from the medicine men of Ancient Rome to the highly-developed practices today.

But of course, while some technologies are almost always present, many more fields of research will come and go. The working of raw materials, the development of literature and drama, and the attempt to discover the divine forces which run the Earth; all of these research fields have a limit, and when reached, new fields of research appear to overshadow their significance and gradually obsolete them.

 

[Ramesses]

It's getting really lonely in here, guys.

Guys?

 

[Naokaukodem]

Seems a good idea but a little complicated. On the tech part, it could be interesting if we have several techs for the same things, representing our mastery in it. Example: we have several level of bronze working, providing each a new upgrade to units.

This idea could be generalized to all techs, or some of them. For example, mysticism level 2 could allow a new wonder.

It would not be called Mysticism II, but another name, so it would be possible to choose from one specialisation among others.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

I'd like them to reintroduce the espionage system from Civ III. The one in Civ IV really is not fun at all.

 

[Chiyochan]

Yeah. I don't find it a disappointment at all. What is disappointing is not having enough time to play.

i wasnt dissapointed either but, civ 4 IS rather lacking.