My vision for Civilization V

[Mayan Raptor]

Yes, I know, not enough time has passed since Civ4 to think about Civ5, but I decided it would entertain many to speculate on the features of a Civilization V. Below, I've written my first draft of my vision for the next Civilization.

GRAPHICS

3D graphics, just like Civ4 now. However, terrain tiles would not have to look square; they could have diagonal as well as horizontal and vertical edges. This would make coastlines, highlands, and other terrain features look more realistic.

The player could rotate, zoom, and pitch the game camera, giving him or her a dynamic view of the game world.

Water could reflect boats and coastal cities.

Each unit would look like a whole army or workforce, with hundreds of people, instead of a wimpy one to three people.

ESPIONAGE

You could have spies to infiltrate other civilizations' cities. They could steal technology from enemies, or plant bombs that go off and reduce an enemy city's population. Or they could spread propaganda so that an enemy's civilians turn against their government and take over the city, which would turn to your rule.

Alternatively, your spies could enter an ally's city and spread propaganda against an enemy, so that the ally will grow hostile towards your enemy to the point of willing to attack that enemy alongside you.

TECHNOLOGICAL DIFFUSION

If your civilization has cities next to those of another civilization, that civilization's discoveries may "diffuse" into your own territory, and you would thus gain that technology without having to research it or beg your neighbor for it. Diffusion wouldn't occur between civilizations hostile to each other.

COLONIES

Colonies would return, so you could take control of resources far from your own territory. However, a resource would benefit you more if it lay in your own land (e.g. luxury resources would add more to happiness, unit creation relying on strategic resources would take less time, and bonus resources would provide a bigger bonus).

TWO PROJECTS PER CITY

You could have a city working on two projects at the same time, to get things done more quickly. A city may train one unit and build one building at the same time. This would let people solve crowding issues without having to postpone building projects.

MORE THAN ONE TECH AT ONCE

Your researchers could work on multiple technologies (up to four) at the same time. However, the more techs you research at any given time, the more money you spend on research, and not all research projects would necessarily end simultaneously.

MOVEMENT BONUSES PROVIDED BY RIVERS

Units move much faster alongside rivers, though this bonus increases for downriver as opposed to upriver movement.

RANDOM MAP SCRIPT: EARTH

Similar to Civ4's Terrra, the Earth script would generate an exact replica of Earth, though players could adjust the size just as they could any other script. Civs may begin in their historical locations or in very different locations; the players have that option.

AGES

Players could choose at what age they begin their game at. The game would have 6 ages: Prehistory, Antiquity, Enlightenment, Age of Industry, Modernity, and the Future (lightsabers, blasters, and spaceships, oh my!).

CIVILIZATIONS AND CULTURE GROUPS

I have classified my civilizations into several culture groups: African, Middle Eastern, Northern European, Southern European, Far Eastern, and American. Civilizations within a culture group share similar architecture and unit appearances (African units have brown skin, European units have pale skin and blond hair, etc.). Civilizations also have easier relations with others of the same culture group.

Each civilization also has its own personality. A civilization may have the following personality traits: aggressive (militaristic and prone to war-mongering), artistic (emphasizing culture and the arts), scientific (investing heavily in science and progress), religious (emphasizing religion and theology), industrious (working harder and getting jobs done at a faster rate), commercial (emphasizing commerce and wealth),
adventurous (emphasizing expansion and exploration), seafaring (emphasizing ships and navies), and organized (emphasizing civic-related research and government stability).

African
Egypt
Led by Hatshepsut
Industrious, artistic
Unique Unit: Chariot Archer
Bantustan (Bantu peoples; apologies for lumping them together)
Led by Cethswayo
Aggressive, organized
Unique Unit: Impi
Songhay
Led by Sunni Ali
Commercial, religious
Unique Unit: Songhay Knight
Ethiopia
Led by Menelik
Religious, artistic
Unique Unit: Oromo Horseman
Kush
Led by Taharqa
Industrious, aggressive
Unique Unit: Medjay Archer
South/West Asian
Israel
Led by Solomon
Aggressive, religious
Unique Unit: Makkabi
Babylon
Led by Hammurabi
Artistic, organized
Unique Unit: Bowman
India
Led by Asoka
Religious, industrious
Unique Unit: Mahout (think war elephant)
Arabia
Led by Abu Bakr
Scientific, adventurous
Unique Unit: Camel Rider
Turkey
Led by Suleiman
Commercial, organized
Unique Unit: Basilica Cannon
Persia
Led by Darius
Religious, adventurous
Unique Unit: Immortal
European
Spain
Led by Ferdinand
Seafaring, adventurous
Unique Unit: Conquistidor
Greece
Led by Leonidas
Scientific, organized
Unique Unit: Hoplite
Rome
Led by Augustus
Scientific, adventurous
Unique Unit: Legionary
Celtia
Led by Arthur
Aggressive, artistic
Unique Unit: Woad Warrior
Germania
Led by Barbarossa
Organized, industrious
Unique Unit: Stormtrooper
Scandinavia
Led by Ragnar
Aggressive, seafaring
Unique Unit: Berserker
Russia
Led by Ivan the Terrible
Organized, scientific
Unique Unit: Red Troops
East Asian
China
Led by Qin
Religious, organized
Unique Unit: Dragon Song Cannon
Japan
Lead by Tokugawa
Commercial, aggressive
Unique Unit: Kamikaze
Korea
Led by Wang Kon
Religious, seafaring
Unique Unit: Turtle Ship
Cambodia
Led by Suryavarman II
Commercial, adventurous
Unique Unit: Siege Crossbow on top of an Elephant
Mongolia
Led by Genghis Khan
Aggressive, adventurous
Unique Unit: Keshik
American
Iroquois
Led by Hiawatha
Organized, adventurous
Unique Unit: Tomahawk Warrior
Mexico
Led by Montezuma
Aggressive, religious
Unique Unit: Jaguar Warrior
Maya
Led by Pacal
Industrious, aggressive
Unique Unit: Guerrilla
Inca
Led by Parachuti
Commercial, adventurous
Unique Unit: Chasqui Scout

LEADERHEADS

Each civilization would have a leaderhead that dresses differently for each age. What would Hiawatha look like as the President of the United States in 2006? How about Lenana as an Enlightened despot?

I will update this later; feedback and suggestions encouraged strongly!

 

[Commander Bello]

Some of your proposals are already implemented - at least in a similar way.

Then you should revise your cultural groups:
Egypt, Israel and Arabia would fit much better into the Mediterranean group than into the African or Middle Eastern group.

The aggressive trait doesn't fit to Germany very well. Most of its history, Germany was a weak cluster of more or less independant states, most of them small and not very strong.
The three most known "German" states had very different history:
While Austria grew out of the area of the HRE (Holy Roman Empire of German Nation), Prussia grew into it. Bavaria on the other hand became a kingdom from Napoleon's sake, already displaying how little influence Germany as a whole did have.

 

[Mayan Raptor]

Then you should revise your cultural groups:
Egypt, Israel and Arabia would fit much better into the Mediterranean group than into the African or Middle Eastern group.

When I wrote "Mediterranean", I meant "southern European" or "Greco-Roman". I have changed the Mediterranean category to "Southern European", and took out the Carthagians.

Many different cultures and populations have developed around the Mediterranean Sea, so I erred in creating an overtly broad category, "Mediterranean" to refer to a specific group of people.

 

[Mayan Raptor]

The aggressive trait doesn't fit to Germany very well.

Germans could have warlike attitudes; ever heard of the Goths, Bismarck, and Hitler? You don't have to have a lot of power to have an aggressive, vicious personality.

 

[hammard]

Don't think you can really have a civ called South-East Asia. Would probably replace that with Khemer (ancient Cambodia). But otherwise cool ideas

 

[Lockesdonkey]

Germans could have warlike attitudes; ever heard of the Goths, Bismarck, and Hitler? You don't have to have a lot of power to have an aggressive, vicious personality.

Goths=tribe of Germanic people, not Germans.
Bismarck preferred diplomacy to war; to him, war was a tool, used when necessary, but to be avoided when it is not (i.e. most of the time)
Modern Germany is committed to peace, and war only an occasional thing for Germany throughout history. Efficiency (remember that Bismarck=Organized!) is more accurate and consistent throughout history.

More important than the Khmer is Thailand and its forerunners.

 

[Commander Bello]

When I wrote "Mediterranean", I meant "southern European" or "Greco-Roman". I have changed the Mediterranean category to "Southern European", and took out the Carthagians.

Many different cultures and populations have developed around the Mediterranean Sea, so I erred in creating an overtly broad category, "Mediterranean" to refer to a specific group of people.

You should keep in mind that the Mediterrenean Sea was one of the most traveled areas worldwide in the past. Egypt and Rome were pretty close in terms of trading during the times of the Roman Empire, which included trading between the Nile region and cities in nowadays Spain. Furthermore, Asia Minor (parts of modern Turkey) was a part of the Roman Empire, as were cities in nowadays Tunesia as well.
With the Arabs spreading Islam over the northern part of Africa and into Spain, once again trading was going on from the area of the Lebanon to the western parts of Spain. Even Crete, Malta and Sicily became parts of this trading networks (although there were eventually fights between the Christians and the Muslims).
Starting with Napoleon's attempt to conquer Egypt, Europe's focus at the Levante and Egypt, as well as at Tunesia, Algeria was revived.

So, the Mediterrenean area was more a cultural melting pot than something different during most times of known history.

Germans could have warlike attitudes; ever heard of the Goths, Bismarck, and Hitler? You don't have to have a lot of power to have an aggressive, vicious personality.

Forgive me, but most probably I've heard more about it than you.
The Goths have been a tribe originating in the northern part of Europe and slowly wandering to both, the western part of Europe (Spain) and the eastern part of Europe (up to the Black Sea). Therefore, the were called the West Goths and the East Goths later on. This happened during the 5th to the 7th century.
Bismarck for sure fought three wars, yet he established the 2nd German Reich and kept it apart from any wars later on. Indeed, since the German Reich was united under the rule of Prussia (1871), it faced the longest time of peace ever up to that time (up to 1914). It was just modern Germany that managed to face a longer time of peace (1945 to 1999 or nowadays, if you wouldn't count the contribution to the NATO engagement against Serbia-Montenegro in the Kosovo region).
From the 16th century up to Napoleon, German states in the western part of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation were constantly invaded by the French trying to establish the "natural border" of the river Rhine.

Although WW2 was undisputably caused by Germany, I don't think that these 12 years allow to call a nation being "aggressive".
WW1 wasn't caused by Germany alone, although they have taken their part in making the Austrian-Serbian conflict over the assassination at Sarajevo becoming a world-wide war.

In total, during the last three centuries, the US, Great Britain, France and many other countries clearly have fought much more wars than Germany and therefore could be called "aggressive".

 

[NP300]

Although WW2 was undisputably caused by Germany,

Was it? It was England and France that declared war on Germany, not the other way around. Up until the French and British declarations of war on September 3 it was merely a German-Polish war, not a world war. Also if you still insist the war started with the German invasion, why not also blame the USSR, which invaded Poland in concert with Germany?

The historian AJP Taylor blamed England as much as Germany for the outbreak of war on account of England's offering Poland a guarantee which made the Poles refuse to a negotiation. Further, the gurantee had a secret provision which stated that the uk would not help Poland if the USSR invaded. Why keep this a secret? What was England hiding?

So the notion that Germany is solely to blame for the outbreak of war is far from "undisputable".

In total, during the last three centuries, the US, Great Britain, France and many other countries clearly have fought much more wars than Germany and therefore could be called "aggressive".

Agreed. I once saw a statistical analysis of wars and Germany turned out to have been involved in far fewer wars than countries like England or France. The US, France and Britain were very aggressive empires that invaded and annexed country after country. England didn't obtain control of 1/4 of the world's land and population through peaceful means. People forget the brutal methods used by the Britain in its war against the Boer republics, for one example.

 

[Baloo]

In total, during the last three centuries, the US, Great Britain, France and many other countries clearly have fought much more wars than Germany and therefore could be called "aggressive".

Exactlly. It was only fairly recently that the Germans could be considered agressive. Same with Japan, for most of its history it was fairly peaceful. It traded with China and Korea, and actually traded with nations as far as India and Persia. Also there's speculations that Japanese could have gone as far as South America. There's also the period of isolationism, you can't really call that agressive. The only time Japan can be considered agressive is from early 1900's to WW2.

 

[Armed_Maniac]

You forgot Québec, how dare you!

Khemer would be cool.

Anyways, for civ 5, i want ALL PREVIOUS FEATURES. Why do they ALWAYS go cheap on us and REMOVE features we had in previous versions? By that I mean i want it to have all civ 1, civ 2, civ 3 (civ3, civ3 PTW, and civ3C), civ 4 (Civ4, Civ:WL, wathever other expansion they might do). Of course some tweaking to balance it all, but no omiting! Bring the guerilla unit back! Bring back partizans! DO NOT CHANGE TO A 'BETTER' GRAPHIC ENGINES, JUST FIX THE CURRENT ONE!

However, that's all wishfull thinking and we'll probably have an exact replica of civ4, but with buggier graphics, 'cool' new useless features, a grid change, a few unit switches and a few civ switches. That's what we can expect for civ 5...

 

[Albatoonoe]

I think there needs to be some techs that, once researched, elimanate other researches and the same with units. that way, not all civilizations use the same units. The game would grow more diverse as time goes on.


Also, I think they need an option for extended time periods. A player could just play the classical era. but there would be more related techs to hhat era. I would prefer that over scenarios.

 

[Mewtarthio]

I think there needs to be some techs that, once researched, elimanate other researches and the same with units. that way, not all civilizations use the same units. The game would grow more diverse as time goes on.

What's to prevent the player from gifting away one of the "gateway" techs to ensure that he is the only one who can trade with that AI?

Also, I think they need an option for extended time periods. A player could just play the classical era. but there would be more related techs to hhat era. I would prefer that over scenarios.

In essence, you want a mod that goes more deeply into a particular era?

 

[Commander Bello]

Was it? It was England and France that declared war on Germany, not the other way around. Up until the French and British declarations of war on September 3 it was merely a German-Polish war, not a world war. Also if you still insist the war started with the German invasion, why not also blame the USSR, which invaded Poland in concert with Germany?

The historian AJP Taylor blamed England as much as Germany for the outbreak of war on account of England's offering Poland a guarantee which made the Poles refuse to a negotiation. Further, the gurantee had a secret provision which stated that the uk would not help Poland if the USSR invaded. Why keep this a secret? What was England hiding?

So the notion that Germany is solely to blame for the outbreak of war is far from "undisputable".
[...]

No, it isn't.
The guarantee of the Polish borders didn't come without cause. Hitler had broken almost any promise he had given during negotiations with the western powers of France and Great Britain.
At the latest, after establishing what was called the "Reichsprotektorat Böhmen-Mähren" ([Reich's protectorate Bohemia-Moravia] a vassal state made of the remainders of former Czech-Slovakia) it was clear that he was just unable to stop.

He started in 1935 with the military re-occupation of the de-militarized Rhineland region. He moved on with the annexation of Austria, the forced hand-over of the "Sudeten"-region (north-western part of Czech-Slovakia) and finally established above mentioned "Reichsprotektorat".
And then he ultimatively asked for access to the Danzig area. At this point, he had completely lost any confidence the western powers would ever have had in his reliability, therefore this guarantee.
It is correct that the declaration of war was issued by the western states (actually the United States were the only country which ever was declared war by Germany during the 2nd world war), nevertheless it was clearly Germany which made no attempt to stop its expansion.

Therefore I hold my statement valid that WW2 (at the European theatre) was started by Germany.

 

[Veteranewbie]

They are good suggestions, quite a few of them come to my mind as well when I'm playing, especially the multitasking bit - with multi-tasking civ can build up faster, so in another way we can afford some civil war or internal unrest issue that halt development without totally putting a civ out of league with the rest of the world in the game. This can create more variety, for example a civ with little civil unrest can become a developed nation while others remained a developing nation

 

[diablodelmar]

Many of those proposals would make the game really bad. Most annoyingly, you've listed Spain as Commercial instead of your so-called adventurous, which Spain most certainly was. Also Arabia is better lead by Saladin, Not Abu Bakr, because Saladin was far more powerful/significant.

 

[SkippyT]

I would say each civ would have 2 leaders in the first place.
Are you crazy not including Russia?
Izzy should be Sea/Adv
Herod shouldn't be in the 2 leaders for Israel. David, Solomon or Saul I are all better.
America should be modern America, since America is a divided into S- and N-America. Although Iroquois should be in with Hiawatha.
Wang Kon should be Rel/Sci not Rel/Sea. Maybe Korean second leader could have Seafaring trait.
Why may I ask, is Barbarossa leading Germany? Hitler, Bismarck, Frederick and Arminius are better.
I truly want Scandinavia, my civilization, to be represented as Scandinavia, not Vikings as you and Firaxis think of them. And by naming them Scandinavia is just wrong.
I've got nothing against Vikings, but Scandinavia had more leaders and more history (late medieval up to modern) [second Viking leader (Canute) should be Adv/Sea since Vikings were all three Agg/Sea/Adv at the same time.
Qin should be industrious. The great wall of china is a work to have any leader industrious. Org/Ind to Qin.
Pacal should be Art/Sci unless second leader will be
Joan d'Arc should be Rel/Org [saint, revelated by God and led a hopeless army to victory] not Art/Sci. Second French leader needs to be Artistic though. (Don't see Napoleon artistic)

To spice things up when you add Espionage leader trait. New melee, gunpowder, recon and spy units have +1 range. +30% odds for succeeding spy mission

What do you wanna do about Unique buildings and Unique Units?

I like the 2 projects at a time idea.
You can't really research 4 techs at the same time unless techs take 4x longer to be researched
Hihihi. European units pale and blond hair. But we blonds will be dead in 200 years . More like pale and lightbrown hair

 

[Technocactus]

African
Egypt
Led by Hatshepsut
Industrious, artistic
Zululand
Led by Shaka
Aggressive, organized
Mali
Led by Sundiata
Commercial, religious
Ethiopia
Led by Menelik
Religious, artistic
Middle Eastern
Israel
Led by Herod
Aggressive, religious
Babylon
Led by Hammurabi
Artistic, organized
India
Led by Asoka
Religious, industrious
Arabia
Led by Abu Bakr
Scientific, adventurous
Turkey
Led by Suleiman
Commercial, organized
Persia
Led by Darius
Religious, adventurous
Southern European
Spain
Led by Isabella
Seafaring, commercial
Greece
Led by Pericles
Scientific, organized
Rome
Led by Augustus
Scientific, adventurous
Northern European
France
Led by Joan D'Arc
Scientific, artistic
England
Led by Elizabeth
Seafaring, artistic
Germany
Led by Barbarossa
Organized, industrious
Scandinavia
Led by Ragnar
Aggressive, seafaring
Far Eastern
China
Led by Qin
Religious, organized
Japan
Lead by Tokugawa
Commercial, aggressive
Korea
Led by Wang Kon
Religious, seafaring
Cambodia
Led by Suryavarman II
Commercial, adventurous
American
America
Led by Hiawatha
Organized, adventurous
Aztec Mexico
Led by Montezuma
Aggressive, religious
Maya
Led by Pacal
Commercial, artistic
Inca
Led by Parachuti
Commercial, adventurous

Russia and Mongolia don't make it, but Cambodia does?

 

[SpriteSODA]

Israel
Led by Herod
Aggressive, religious

Im Israeli and I dont know who the **** is this leader lol

 

[mjs0]

Im Israeli and I dont know who the **** is this leader lol

Perhaps one of these...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_Antipas

Neither of which seems a particularly good choice to me.

 

[SpriteSODA]

ohhh its Hordus in hebrew, and he is not Hebrew at all! he's a Roman leader who's been sent to Israel to be the local ruler.
Change it to Solomon,David,Hizkia,Ahazia,Shaul,Joshua but not him lol