Nitpicky Things You'd Like Fixed

[Arachnofiend]

You can already ask for favors, actually. If you have a DoF and you use the demand option it's presented as a request for assistance rather than a threat.

 

[moysturfurmer]

Haven't played the game in a while, does the Great Wall still reset to fit a civ's current borders whenever you load a game? Because it'd be a lot better if it kept its original form regardless of how many new tiles you popped since completing it.

 

[Depravo]

I'd like to be able to do things that the AI can do to me such as:

Ask a favor of Gold, resources etc.

Call them out on troops near my border.

I'd also like the "Lying about troops on the border" thing to not influence civs who have never met me before and not influence them Centuries after said event.

Further to this, I don't think there's currently any way of knowing when your promise not to attack (or build cities near AI territory) lapses.

 

[Arachnofiend]

That is also already a thing. When one of those promises lapses you will receive a notification that you kept it.

 

[Pembroke]

Lot's of complicated stuff which would be nice but here's one truly nitpicky one: Fix finally the d*** bug that calculates wrong the "turns still left" when worker is improving a tile. It's annoying!

 

[Depravo]

Lot's of complicated stuff which would be nice but here's one truly nitpicky one: Fix finally the d*** bug that calculates wrong the "turns still left" when worker is improving a tile. It's annoying!

And make that info clearly visible when I mouse over the worker... that's a pain in the balls and all.

 

[Tsar NicholasII]

That is also already a thing. When one of those promises lapses you will receive a notification that you kept it.

I'd like it if the promise stuff would go by faster, I got the notification that I had kept my promise to not declare war on the Maya 3 eras after he declared war on me and I had already conquered all of his cities (save one colony on the other continent) and the rest of my continent as well.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Haven't played the game in a while, does the Great Wall still reset to fit a civ's current borders whenever you load a game? Because it'd be a lot better if it kept its original form regardless of how many new tiles you popped since completing it.

I like how it grows. It fits nicely with how the Great Wall of China was constantly changed and rebuilt over the centuries. I wish it would more readily absorb your other cities though.

 

[Depravo]

I'd like it if the promise stuff would go by faster, I got the notification that I had kept my promise to not declare war on the Maya 3 eras after he declared war on me and I had already conquered all of his cities (save one colony on the other continent) and the rest of my continent as well.

Ludicrous ain't it. A promise not to attack should be automatically cancelled in 10 turns or so if your troops have moved along. I'm not giving them an open-ended assurance - even formal peace treaties run out long before these promises do. And what's more, you can't do the same to the AI.

 

[JSMCAG]

Actually, I have a really nitpicky thing that I think could be corrected in a question of minutes: I'd really like they would change the wording on Ethiopia's UA. No, not the UA itself, just the way they word it. To me, it seems weirdly put together and not in conformation with the rest of the UAs.

Let's take, for example, Persia's UA:

Golden Ages last 50% longer. During a Golden Age, units receive +1 Movement and a +10% Combat Strength bonus.

But then Ethiopia's like this:

Combat bonus (+20%) when fighting units from a Civilization with more Cities than Ethiopia.

Why the bonus between parenthesis? Why no icon? To me it seems like they made the UA first with no detailed bonus and then just stacked the "(+20%)" at the end. To me, it should read as such:

Spirit of Adwa
Units receive a +20% Combat Strength bonus when fighting units from a Civilization with more Cities than Ethiopia.


Likewise, Mongolia's UA could also have a little tweak so it reads like so:
Mongol Terror
+30% Combat Strength when fighting City-State units or attacking a City-State itself. All mounted units have +1 Movement.

Denmark's UA has the movement icon in the wrong place (it should be before "Movement", not after), and Russia's UA doesn't have icons for the resources (while Arabia's has).

These are really minor, but it kinda annoys me and I think would give the game slightly more polish - and as I said, it shouldn't take more than a few minutes (heck, I can probably do it if I find the file or files that hold the UA's descriptions ).

 

[blackcatatonic]

It would be good if they could add Declarations of Friendship to the deals tab in the diplomacy screen. Unless you make a note of when you sign them, it can be difficult to keep track of who can still sign RAs with.

 

[SamBC]

It would be good if they could add Declarations of Friendship to the deals tab in the diplomacy screen. Unless you make a note of when you sign them, it can be difficult to keep track of who can still sign RAs with.

You only need to be in DoF at the start of an RA, not all through it, so all you need to know is who you currently have a DoF with - which can easily be seen in the diplomacy overview, the last tab of that dialog, I think.

 

[blackcatatonic]

But sometimes you sign a DoF with someone who has no money, and you have to wait for them to have enough money (or for you to have enough to give/loan them the cash). There are also other issues, like predicting when you will be able to go to war with someone, or whether you will be able to denounce them for a City-State quest, etc.

The point is that I'd find it helpful to have access to that information and I can't see a good reason why it's not currently available.

 

[otaman1]

Oh the irony; when you want something to be fix but it can't be fixed cause it's already fixed

 

[ferretbacon]

You can already ask for favors, actually. If you have a DoF and you use the demand option it's presented as a request for assistance rather than a threat.

Huh, this is true? It always annoyed me that I couldn't make a "friendly" demand.

 

[codepoet]

Knights should have a higher combat strength than the Longswordsmen, Medieval battles on the field were determined by the actions of the heavy cavalry. The way its set up now, I never even think of building early cavalry units unless its a UU unit like the Keshik

Agreed. Mounted Units are FAR too weak in general. I think they intended the extra movement to compensate, but it's just not worth it. The problem is mounted troops should be able to easily get the flanking bonus vs. infantry but it's not always the case with the way zone of control restrictions work currently.
Maybe mounted units should be able to ignore the zone of control restrictions vs. specific unit types (infantry / foot, etc.) rather than be flatly stronger. And maybe always gain a flanking bonus vs. range units (to portray the use of cavalry in history)

Horsemen and Knights:
Ignore ZoC vs. Melee Units; 100% flanking chance vs. Archers, Composite Bowmen and Crossbowmen.

Cavalry:
Ignore ZoC vs. Melee Units and Gunpowder Units until Great War Infantry; 100% flanking chance vs. Archers, Composite Bowmen, Crossbowmen and Gunpowder Units until Great War Infantry.

Landship+:
Ignore ZoC vs. Melee Units and Gunpowder Units until Mechanized Infantry; 100% flanking chance vs. Archers, Composite Bowmen, Crossbowmen and Gunpowder Units until Mechanized Infantry.

They really need to re-categorize Infantry and Mechanized Infantry into a separate category... the proficiency of arms to hit horses is part of why technology went to landships and armor. Maybe Musketman and Riflemen are "Early Gunpowder" or something similar. Point is as technology advanced, horses eventually lost their advantage... but they definitely had an advantage for a long time and it changed history.

 

[bison21]

leaders graphics/appearance change to reflect the current tech line their in.

I would love to see Nebuchadnezzar on the Great Firewall of Babylon

 

[glaivemaster]

Huh, this is true? It always annoyed me that I couldn't make a "friendly" demand.

After reading this thread I tried it in a game earlier, and it didn't work at all. Maybe I didn't actually have a DoF with him like I thought (I was going on the basis he was Friendly, rather than having a DoF), so maybe I need to try again.

Even if it is true, they could at least change the button from Demand to Request so you can tell.

 

[Colmar]

I definitely agree with the earlier comment about betraying others. I said my troops were merely passing through the Moors (Almohads? Can't remember.), and eventually broke my word. Even my closest friends and the worst enemies of the Moors were not happy with me. Fast forward 100+ turns and that one incident still follows me around. It feels like high school.

 

[nunor]

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, and it really is small and nitpicky, but I'd like to have civilizations listed alphabetically by their names and not by leader's name.