Nitpicky Things You'd Like Fixed

[S.O.T MAHak]

That would be kind of missing the point of the Neuschwanstein wonder ...

Historically, Neuschwanstein was not built as a defensive fortress (which the in-game "castle" building represents), but rather it was a whimsical bit of (artistic or garish depending on your point of view) conspicuous consumption.

The in-game benefit of the wonder is that it gives a culture bonus for your castles, representing the fact that by the industrial era, castles were obsolete as pieces of state of the art military infrastructure, but even the most spartan, utilitarian relic of a castle was becoming something like cultural capital for a nation, attracting tourists and locals alike with romantic ideas of past glories.

But in CIV a castle still provides a bonus to a city's defence, and it just fills weird to build a wonder thats a castle and not getting a regular one in the city. You could consider a castle the equivalent to a fort which still up to WW 1 had some significance, military wise.

Another example was the Monte Cassino monastery while not technically a castle it was still an archaic building, and it proved to be a major obstacle during the italian campaign in WW 2.

Oh and welcome to the forum!

 

[Depravo]

The in-game benefit of the wonder is that it gives a culture bonus for your castles, representing the fact that by the industrial era, castles were obsolete as pieces of state of the art military infrastructure, but even the most spartan, utilitarian relic of a castle was becoming something like cultural capital for a nation, attracting tourists and locals alike with romantic ideas of past glories.

That's an excellent summary. I always thought of wonders representing not so much a physical structure as a particular set of institutions or values, in Neuschwanstein's case Victorian romantic nostalgia which did so much to shape German identity.

 

[JFM2796]

There are a ton of wonders that should provide free stuff but don't.

The Louvre doesn't give a museum.
Sydney Opera House doesn't give a free opera house.
Temple of Artemis doesn't give a free temple.
Shouldn't the Eiffel Tower give a free broadcast tower? It functions as one doesn't it?
Notre Dame doesn't give a free cathedral.
Angkor Wat doesn't give a free wat and maybe it shouldn't since its a unique building, but if wonders can provide religous buildings they should be able to provide uniques as well.
If that's the case then Mausoleum of Halicarnassus should give a free burial tomb.
Hubble Space Telescope should give a free observatory.
Pentagon should give a lot of stuff.
Taj Mahal should give a free mosque.
Hagia Sophia should also give a free mosque.

Thats probably a slightly excessive list, but some of those definately should be in. Sydney Opera House with no free opera house? Makes perfect sense.

 

[nunor]

Taj Mahal should give a free mosque.

Taj Mahal is a mausoleum, not a mosque...

 

[JSMCAG]

There are a ton of wonders that should provide free stuff but don't.

The Louvre doesn't give a museum.
Sydney Opera House doesn't give a free opera house.
Temple of Artemis doesn't give a free temple.
Shouldn't the Eiffel Tower give a free broadcast tower? It functions as one doesn't it?
Notre Dame doesn't give a free cathedral.
Angkor Wat doesn't give a free wat and maybe it shouldn't since its a unique building, but if wonders can provide religous buildings they should be able to provide uniques as well.
If that's the case then Mausoleum of Halicarnassus should give a free burial tomb.
Hubble Space Telescope should give a free observatory.
Pentagon should give a lot of stuff.
Taj Mahal should give a free mosque.
Hagia Sophia should also give a free mosque.

Thats probably a slightly excessive list, but some of those definately should be in. Sydney Opera House with no free opera house? Makes perfect sense.

I bolded the ones I need to mention:
There is already a wonder that gives a free Broadcast Tower (in all cities even!), that being the CN Tower, and it makes much more sense than the Eiffel Tower for that.
The Hubble Telescope gives already a free Spaceship Factory, and that late in the game, is more useful than an observatory, so it's preferable that way.
Why would the Taj Mahal give a free mosque? Isn't it a mausoleum?
The Hagia Sophia already gives a free Temple, and since it only became a mosque after the Ottomans took Constatinople (if I'm not mistaken), it is preferable that way.

Here's a reminder:

• Alhambra - free Castle
• CN Tower - free Broadcast Tower (in all cities)
• Great Mosque of Djenne - free Mosque
• Himeji Castle - free Castle
• Hubble Space Telescope - free Spaceship Factory
• Petra - free Amphitheater
• The Great Library - free Library
• The Great Wall - free Walls
• The Hagia Sophia - free Temple
• The Hanging Gardens - free Garden

About giving unique buildings, that sounds kinda fun, and it's not like getting other civilization's uniques is unheard of or anything - you already get unique units from Militaristic City-States!
Even for those who have that unique building, it would give them a free of charge one, so I'm not all that opposed to the idea...
I would add the Chichen Itza giving a free Pyramid and make The Pyramids give the free Burial Tomb instead of the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus.

 

[Calouste]

Nitpicky thing:

I'm looking forward to being able to build a Monument, pick Tradition, and then not having to wait a few dozen turns to get any benefits if I pick Legalism as the second policy on the way to Landed Elite.

 

[teddybroosevelt]

Thats probably a slightly excessive list, but some of those definately should be in. Sydney Opera House with no free opera house? Makes perfect sense.

it does make perfect sense, because there's no reason you shouldn't have an opera house in that particular city if you're building the Sydney Opera House.

of course I'm of the persuasion that having every World Wonder give you a free copy of a building is silly and kind of cheapens the effect, so take that as you will.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

Additionally to city-viewing on city surrender, I'm surprised this is not mentioned. Another 'InfoAddict'-like change: luxury luxes luxuries

Make all (non-imported) luxuries visible on the trade screen regardless of their tradeability. Just grey out the ones that can't be traded there - maybe with a tooltip: "You are already importing this resource." "You have domestic access to this resource." "They already have this resource." It would be so helpful and not just that, it would grant strategic information about foreign trading which is currently -theoretically- available but again requires painstaking tracking of an indirect feedback about what is tradeable to you.

In this way, information you already are permitted is given in the screen, to know what you cannot import (because you have it), and the information of what they have is not less available just because you also have the resource. (Currently you are penalized because you have a resource; e.g. if you have silver, can they not trade silver because they have none or because you have silver?) If it is a design decision please let the interface just communicate this.

There are obvious problems with this situation (Mainly along the lines of selling luxuries), but I certainly would like to see the ability to "push" other people's units around when they're in my territory. It's annoying when you can't get to a luxury or move workers quickly because a friendly civ is using your roads. It's positively infuriating when you can't save a city because 'friendly' units are stopping your own troops from moving to the front line.

Yes, it makes it decidedly impossible to sign open borders in good faith. With A.I.s they will get in the way every time (it's almost what they're trying to do, except for knowing the A.I. doesn't make any plans ever), with players the idea of signing over that ability does not make sense with the idea of the agreement - at least, not accomplishing it with one scout standing somewhere inconvenient for 500 years.

"Pushing" sounds good, it would interact naturally with some kind of system where if the player really -did- want to get in your way, they could, but would have to, put a lot of units inside your borders. The pressure would be apparent and not just look like an exploit with dumb limitations in the software. I'm fighting an OCC war and friend Germany is standing on my highground fort and I'm going "GET OFF, MAN!"

 

[elder abuser]

One thing that always bothered me, and I think someone earlier raised this point, is that other civs shouldn't know my aggressive history if I have completely wiped out another civ before meeting them. I think it would be a cool touch if the newly acquainted civ only found out this history upon reaching Archaeology and discovered my dark past. Maybe this could even tie into the new Archaeology mechanics.

 

[Uberfrog]

Nitpick-wise: I'd like it if they made the unique embarkation graphics for Polynesia and Denmark (which are otherwise lovely) era-specific.

Mechanised infantry really shouldn't be landing on the beaches in longboats.

 

[kajillion]

Civilians should be able to move through hexes occupied by other civ's units. I hate when someone blcoks my own roads by plopping their scouts in the way of my workers.

 

[Rub'Rum]

Make all (non-imported) luxuries visible on the trade screen regardless of their tradeability. Just grey out the ones that can't be traded there - maybe with a tooltip: "You are already importing this resource." "You have domestic access to this resource." "They already have this resource." It would be so helpful and not just that, it would grant strategic information about foreign trading which is currently -theoretically- available but again requires painstaking tracking of an indirect feedback about what is tradeable to you.

True. I find figuring out what resources I have to trade, which I get through trade or domestically, etc., how many I have left, etc etc. extremely confusing for some reason. Especially from the diplomatic screen. But then the game makes it a point to make as little info as possible available from the diplo screen. I suppose that's a "feature".

 

[God of Kings]

Barbarian privateers should be renamed pirates.

 

[sprintonwater]

I'll start:

1. If I'm sending my troops into fog, I obviously would like to reconsider attacking the appeared unit.

2. I would love to be able to look at my relationship with my city states before making a decision such as return worker.

Any small things you'd love to further transform this expansion to the finest Civ series to date? (IMHO)

Yes these things.

And it's probably been said but being able to check the diplo screen when an ai is offering you friendship/shall we declare war against X/your empire is an example of strength so can you give me X.

 

[de_baser]

Late game barb camps need an upgrade. Graphics especially, but also gameplay wise. Their units should be stronger and more composed, not just stumbling drunkenly around the map. Preferrably, it would be great if a barb camp gathering of units would form and uprising and march on the closest city, or conversely, found their own city. These wouldn't be much more than a 3-pop village in the tundra, but it would seem much more logical than a set of sticks and torches, a brute, a pikeman, a musketeer and 25 galleys.

 

[The Swede]

I want a clock...

 

[God of Kings]

I want a clock...

Watches and alarm clocks are not that expensive, though there should be a built-in timer for Civ V.

 

[Rub'Rum]

I want a clock...

Yeah I miss that all the time. Plus, I stopped playing Civ 5 for like a almost a year, when I came back, I was there once again going "uuuuh where's the clock option again?".

 

[PerceeP927]

I feel like the map is just too difficult to traverse. There are almost never chains of unbroken flat lands, Even on marathon, in the classical era it takes something like 500 years to just cross your own capital, without roads. I think units need more moves, or hills, forest, and hills need to be less restrictive.

prehaps, hills and forest could not require any move moves than flatland, but could still give defensive bonuses. The way it just STOPS your units is a little ridiculous

 

[Calouste]

I feel like the map is just too difficult to traverse. There are almost never chains of unbroken flat lands, Even on marathon, in the classical era it takes something like 500 years to just cross your own capital, without roads. I think units need more moves, or hills, forest, and hills need to be less restrictive.

prehaps, hills and forest could not require any move moves than flatland, but could still give defensive bonuses. The way it just STOPS your units is a little ridiculous

Caesar Augustus at one point received emissaries from India at his court. It had taken them four years to travel to Rome. Things were a bit slower in those days.