Let's make Civ 5

[noah999]

You kidding ive played all civilization games and civ 4 wiped them all away, all you need is a better computer with a marginal 3d graphics card and the game looks amazing. however if there is to be a civ 5 i would like it to go all the way into the space age and not just end in 2050 it made me mad how i was fighting the last empire and it said my time was up. (yes i know you can tur off time limit in custom game)

 

[rysmiel]

You kidding ive played all civilization games and civ 4 wiped them all away, all you need is a better computer with a marginal 3d graphics card and the game looks amazing.

If you don't actually give a toss for how the game looks but are interested in how it plays it's possible to come to a quite different conclusion.

 

[stgelven]

with civ3 modding was really easy, now with civ4, you need to know too many thing, python, xml, i don't want to programming, simply modding, i really want that civ5 include powerfull tools for modding.

 

[ZooMan2]

Okay, I believe I've pitched this idea before, but hopefully this time I'll be able to fully express why it's something Civ 5 should incorporate. The one thing that Civ needs is to play not in turns, but in years. 6050 of them.

No, I don't mean like a mega-ultra-Marathon speed. See, while there are 6050 years in a full game of Civilization, only about 10% of those will actually be played. So what's the point of it, you ask? Why to create a game with a more realistic and engaging flow of time, of course!

Here's how it works: You give all of your commands to units and cities, which will then be carried out as soon as you hit the End Turn button. (So this means all your units will carry out orders simultaneously when End Turn is pressed.) Once you end your turn, the years will pass and you will watch as your units carry out your orders. Eventually, the game stops auto-playing, and your next turn begins.

So you're saying it's just like the turn-based system Civ already uses, but between turns you watch your civilization carry out your orders? That doesn't sound necessary at all. Don't judge just yet, hypothetical critic of my imagination! The whole point of this system is that it's much more fluid than playing in turns. Normally, the game will autorun for a predetermined number of years before starting your next turn. For example, in the early game, on Normal speed, after ending your turn, the game plays out 40 years and gives you your next turn. However, it will often be the case that your next turn comes early... say in 34 years instead of 40.

The reason your turn may come early is because an event occurs which requires your immediate attention. Events that warrant an early turn start include:

- Your unit has finished moving.
- Your unit has encountered a hostile unit.
- A hostile unit has been spotten near your territory.
- Your city has finished producing whatever it was making.
- You have researched a new technology.
- Your city is about to grow.
- A rival leader has changed the availability of diplomatic options (Open Borders, Tech Trading, etc.)
- A random event has occured.

An interface not unlike BUG will keep track of any events which require your attention, and when one pops up, autoplay will stop, and your turn will begin. So you may have your beginning turn, your next turn 40 years later, your next 40 years later, your next 3 years later, 39 years, 26 years, 40 years, 40 years, 40 years, 40 years, 24 years, 40 years, 12 years, 40 years, etc. The odd frequency of turns comes from important events.

Not only this, but the pacing of the game will change considerably when you are at war. Because each turn counts, turns will start coming once a year. This means wars can take just as many turns to resolve, but will occupy less of history. A 40-turn war will last 40 years, not 200. Once the war ends, the years begin to fly by again.

Some have also complained that the endgame is uneventful and boring. This system will resolve that issue: the years will not creep by when it is unnecessary. If your units are all fortified, relations with neighbors are peaceful, and your workers are all building railroads automatically, the game will give you your turn every 10 or 20 years by default, allowing you to plow through the uneventfulness. Meanwhile, the game will pick up on anything that needs attention (new orders, etc.), so the years will fly by only as long as there is really nothing to be done.

Basically, turns only come whenever there is something to do, and if there is nothing to do, then every few decades or so, as a precaution. The amount of turns which involve only pressing the red button are severely reduced.

I think this is a really cool idea ... you could also add the ability for the player to pause the action and give new instructions between auto-stops ...I think the combination would give a much more enjoyable game and remove a lot of the tedium factor.

 

[ZooMan2]

with civ3 modding was really easy, now with civ4, you need to know too many thing, python, xml, i don't want to programming, simply modding, i really want that civ5 include powerfull tools for modding.

There is a trade off here - while the modding was much easier in Civ3 it was also limited ... modding in Civ4 runs the gamut from simple (and easy) to ultra complex (and hard) ... that said, I think it would be really nice if Civ5 had a nextgen mod tool built on the Civ4 engine but allowing things like those options provided in Colonization without the modder having to be a python programmer.

What I don't want to see is a complete re-write of the Civ engine that makes all of the Civ4 modding work obsolete and incompatible with the next version -ugh! That was my biggest issue with Civ4 - all the work I had done in Civ3 modding had to be redone from scratch in Civ4.

By the way - has anyone heard what the time frame for Civ5 is? I've looked but I haven't seen anything.

 

[Afforess]

with civ3 modding was really easy, now with civ4, you need to know too many thing, python, xml, i don't want to programming, simply modding, i really want that civ5 include powerfull tools for modding.

Civ III modding is non-existant. You can barely mod anything. Heck, Civ2 was more moddable than CivIII.

I love CIV4 Modding. The Dev's gave us 80% of the game to mod. Go learn to program, it's not any harder than learning a foreign language.

 

[Camikaze]

By the way - has anyone heard what the time frame for Civ5 is? I've looked but I haven't seen anything.

Unfortunately, no, there is no news as to when or even if there will be a Civ 5. Recent speculation has it that there won't be one, given the shift of focus to Civ Network, but I would think that that would represent a delay in the development of Civ 5, rather than a complete abandonment of the series. Just don't expect anything in the next while.

 

[ZooMan2]

Civ III modding is non-existant. You can barely mod anything. Heck, Civ2 was more moddable than CivIII.

Hmph - I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion - even when it is not based on facts. I don't know about Civ2 but if you'd check the Civ3 part of this site you'll find several hundred mods and scenarios - far more than exist for Civ4 - in part because it was much easier to create mods in Civ3 - true you couldn't mod to the same level that you can in Civ4 but what you could do was easier and took less time. You might not consider that modding but there are a lot of Civ3 fans who would disagree.

I love CIV4 Modding. The Dev's gave us 80% of the game to mod. Go learn to program, it's not any harder than learning a foreign language.

And another thing, what is it with all of the rude comments on this site lately? As it happens I'm a programmer - I just don't do it for fun ... and modding Civ should not be so much work that you lose the fun ... apparently programming Civ4 is fun for you - great - don't belittle others who have more interest in the result (playing) than in the coding required to create the game.

Live and let live - a little civility goes a long way!

with civ3 modding was really easy, now with civ4, you need to know too many thing, python, xml, i don't want to programming, simply modding, i really want that civ5 include powerfull tools for modding.

In the end the game designers and developers get paid to create a game (including the mod engine) that the Civ community is willing to pay for. I agree with stgelven that when/if Civ5 is ever created it should include a much stronger set of modding tools ... in fact I'm sure they already have much better tools than we have - they just won't release them because it takes too much work to polish them up for commercial release. That is why I hope civ5 is more of an expansion of the existing Civ4 build than a whole new engine as Civ4 was to Civ3.

Anyway - that's my $0.02 for what it's worth.

 

[Afforess]

Hmph - I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion - even when it is not based on facts. I don't know about Civ2 but if you'd check the Civ3 part of this site you'll find several hundred mods and scenarios - far more than exist for Civ4 - in part because it was much easier to create mods in Civ3 - true you couldn't mod to the same level that you can in Civ4 but what you could do was easier and took less time. You might not consider that modding but there are a lot of Civ3 fans who would disagree.

What we have here is a disagreement on terms. What is modding? Modding is altering core-gameplay. Sure, in CivIII the scenario editor was easy to use, and adding more content was easy; but that's it. That isn't really modding.

When I fundamentally alter the game, whether by making it so I can have Dark Ages, or research multiple techs per turn; that's real modding. Content != Modding.

And another thing, what is it with all of the rude comments on this site lately? As it happens I'm a programmer - I just don't do it for fun ... and modding Civ should not be so much work that you lose the fun ... apparently programming Civ4 is fun for you - great - don't belittle others who have more interest in the result (playing) than in the coding required to create the game.

Rude? How so? Tell me who I insulted, so I can go apologize. Re-read my post. It's not rude. Just because the facts differ with your interpretation of reality doesn't mean it's rude.

In the end the game designers and developers get paid to create a game (including the mod engine) that the Civ community is willing to pay for. I agree with stgelven that when/if Civ5 is ever created it should include a much stronger set of modding tools ... in fact I'm sure they already have much better tools than we have - they just won't release them because it takes too much work to polish them up for commercial release. That is why I hope civ5 is more of an expansion of the existing Civ4 build than a whole new engine as Civ4 was to Civ3.

I don't disagree with the general premise, but there isn't much left they could have given us. A dedicated unit or building artwork creater would have been useful; perhaps some documentation of the SDK, the EXE source code; but other than that, they gave us EVERYTHING. Seriously, if you think Civ4 modding sucks, try modding a game like Tropico 3, or AOE 3, where the Dev's actively try to stop modders. Civ4 was the most moddable game in gaming history, at least when it was first released.

 

[ZooMan2]

Unfortunately, no, there is no news as to when or even if there will be a Civ 5. Recent speculation has it that there won't be one, given the shift of focus to Civ Network, but I would think that that would represent a delay in the development of Civ 5, rather than a complete abandonment of the series. Just don't expect anything in the next while.

Thought that might be the case since I couldn't find anything on Firaxis or 2K and in the normal cycle of things you'd expect something to be in the works. I hope you're right about it just being a delay - guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Thanks.

 

[ichbinsehselber]

Ramesses' idea sounds really good, but in reality, would we really like it? Look at Master of Orion 3. This game has what you are proposing. And it is sooo much less interesting than the absolutely amazing Master of Orion 2. But who knows, if the problem is in the concept or somewhere else.

My 5 cents for a CIV5:
If a new game is developed again with the same idea and just better graphics it is pretty worthless for me. In my eyes the game should be based on one of the CIVs. It does not matter which one. Build on it and improve it. If they start from 0 they will make some things better and others worse.

Take CIV3 - it has some things improved and some things worse than CIV2.
Take CIV4 - same it has some things improved and others worse than both CIV3 and CIV4

CIV4 is very good at configurability and modability.
It allows for a lot of variety in game play.

CIV4 is very bad at the combat system. It is worse than CIV3 and CIV2. There is in reality only one value for combat, which is not enough.
I have to admit it does a fairly good job at disguising this weakness by offering a lot of different promotions, abilities etc.
CIV5 should again have at least different values for health and for attack and for defence and it would be good if there was a damage factor or something similar as well.

Due to the problem above CIV4 lacks real artillery like in CIV3, some modders tried to introduce that into the game system, but even if they do a good job, it does not work as nice as in C3C.
CIV5 should have separate unit type for artillery type units, not just a unit with a bonus vs cities or bombard city defenses like in CIV4. This is a CIV4 weakness.

Another weakness of CIV4 that should be remedied is that you have to watch those combat animations. I am sure there are lots of guys who like combat animations, but there are also guys who just like strategy games and do not want to what animations. Why not allow switching them off?

CIV4 BTS finally allowed the AI to make amphibious landings. Funny since even the CIV1 AI already managed that.
Another reason why CIV5 should not start from 0.

Consider a combat system like in C-evo, where there is no randomness. A deterministic combat system. Simple and effective.

And yes I like CIV4 even though I just talked a lot about it's weaknesses.

 

[Afforess]

Another weakness of CIV4 that should be remedied is that you have to watch those combat animations. I am sure there are lots of guys who like combat animations, but there are also guys who just like strategy games and do not want to what animations. Why not allow switching them off?

You know you can turn those off in the graphic settings, right?

 

[ichbinsehselber]

hm, maybe this is my fault then. The last time I tried it either the mod crashed or I did not succeed.

One more important point for CIV5: Stacks should be penalized again (it is too boring and unrealistic to just simply put many units of different types in one square to attack the enemy. Real armies would get surrounded and out of supply and eradicated. The penalty does not have to be as hard as in CIV2, but there should be some.

 

[ichbinsehselber]

hm, where can you disable these animations? I have already set
- no combat zoom
- frozen animation
- single unit graphics
- effects disabled
- all graphic settings low

Still there is the combat animation.

 

[Afforess]

"Quick Combat" for offense and defense will disable the battle animations.

 

[old_civver]

A couple of suggestions for civ5;
- a summary page at the end of the game suggesting things you could do to improve your play
- another victory condition: more points than all others combined

 

[Shiggs713]

A couple of suggestions for civ5;
- a summary page at the end of the game suggesting things you could do to improve your play
- another victory condition: more points than all others combined

the summary page sounds good.

The victory condition not so good. I can't imagine ever being that bored that I would continue playing when I had more points than all others combined... maybe unless it was a 3 player map

I'd really just like an updated version of civ4. More realism, better graphics and better AI I would pay for. Totally get rid of the production/food process with the cities and make it more realistic. I don't wanna see an earth map where Kansas City is the most populated city on earth. Oh and actually include some decent scenario's and maps for gods sake. The ones included with original civ4 are wretched.

 

[old_civver]

The idea with another victory condition is to have the AI simply concede the game when it's clear the player will win. Using the points as the basis for this calculation would serve to use them for something significant. Exactly how many points this should be is to be determined. Perhaps twice as many as the next (or any other mathematical calculation that is deemed appropriate).

 

[awesome]

one thing i'd like to see is the next war scenario having the auto-city-naming feature from rfc.

 

[Camikaze]

How would a summary page work? Wouldn't it just be like a list of all the suggestions that you didn't take during the game (like blue circles or suggested builds)? Wouldn't it be just as broken a mechanism as those?