One that should go, one that should be added (Game mechanics).

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by orasis, Nov 19, 2013.

  1. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    441
    Go - Resource penalties (at least until late game on Oil).

    It makes zero sense that if I fairly traded for horses and built 16 units that after the trade I receive a penalty unless I disband them. Same with units built from Iron. In reality this sort of thing would be insane. The only resource that makes sense with this penalty is Oil. Of course the A.I (or player) receives zero penalty for the gold I paid.)

    This would only apply with traded resources. --Losing your own has a penalty.

    Add - Religious intolerance that wears down over time.

    Different religions should have an impact on diplomacy much more than it does now until the modern era where degrades heavily and should have little impact whatsoever by the information age (as long as you have not recently been at war).
     
  2. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    441
    Really? No one thinks any game mechanic should go or be modified?
     
  3. Reus

    Reus Polar Bear

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2013
    Messages:
    388
    Location:
    Devon Island
    Civ 5 have a lot to fix and things to improve, but I can't think of many ideas right now.
    Perhaps some crucial ones would be:

    To Add/Improve:
    -BETTER AI diplomacy system
    -BETTER AI City Placement
    -IMPROVED Combat AI that can utilize the 1UPT system tactically.

    (I don't think I need explanation for these ones)
    -BETTER City-State befriending/influencing
    (It is to simple, It all ends up to who bribes them the most. Influence from Gold should be reduced and Influence from Quests should be increased; and the Quests should not be random, but instead it is based on the City-State's situation. Such as if a threatening Civ is nearby they might ask for protection or they request interventions if they are attacked. I know that these are in the game already but it does not feel as effective as gold. The AI never tried to intervene when a City-State is attacked, and I also feel reluctant to intervene when a City-State is invaded, because the rewards are not rewarding and its more effective to waste your gold on them rather than sending your units to fight another Civ just to defend them. City-States are a great concept in Civ 5 that can actually balance the game and become points of conflicts, it have a great potential but the potential is wasted, and it requires more improvement.)
    -Balance some of the Civ's Unique Power and Ideologies
    (There are Ideologies, such as England's faster naval movement; or Alexander's City-State benefits that can be overshadowed by an Social Policy or Wonder such as Exploration that gives you additional naval movement or Patronage that benefits your CS relations; and not to mention the Great Lighthouse of Alexandria; but there are also Powers that would last throughout the game and no Ideology nor Wonder can balance for example the Civs like Rome, Byzantium, Poland, Indonesia, etc. It makes some Civ have useless powers. I think either all the Civ Powers can be overshadowed by an Ideology or Wonder and could wear-off at a certain Era for balance or it should be made completely Unique and its power cannot be duplicated by an ideology or can be duplicated but NOT overshadowed.)


    To Remove/Reduce:
    -The pointless Denounce system that ends up in a Domino Effect of Denounces
    -Remove or SIMPLIFY how the other Civs tells you their opinion about something

    (It is frustrating to click through series of Diploscreens because the AI just wan't to mock you or approve your ideology e.t.c. a simple notification that we can voluntarily click for further explanation would be better)
    -REDUCE the negative effects from expanding large sprawling Empires.
    (This one have a LONG explanation but currently my fingers are getting tired)

    I think that is all in my head for now.
    There are certainly many more, and oh yeah, also add In-game WB
     
  4. householder

    householder Lord of the Fleas

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    320
    I disagree. Horses get old or disabled, they need to be constantly replaced. If they are not, a military unit will become depleted. If anything, an un-resourced unit should face increasing penalties the longer it goes without its resource.

    What would I like added? Casus Belli

    The warmonger penalties should be reduced if you declare war in defense of a city-state you have pledged to protect. This would apply if an AI civ declared war on your city-state, or repeatedly abused the CS despite a warning and a denouncement from you.

    The warmonger penalty should also be reduced if you capture a city belonging to an AI civ which declared war on you.
     
  5. Reus

    Reus Polar Bear

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2013
    Messages:
    388
    Location:
    Devon Island
    I agree, but I don't think it should be a harsh combat penalty like the one we have right now; its better that when a unit that have a minus amount of resource to be unable to heal (because it lacks the material to repair/replace/heal/etc.) it would be more realistic.
     
  6. Talcove

    Talcove Slayer of Spies

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    792
    Location:
    Mississauga
    GO
    I really, really, really, REALLY hate the mechanic that, if a unit moves, or attacks another in territory which you can see it automatically pulls the camera there. This is REALLY annoying in both team play, and when using FireTuner's autoplay feature.

    ADD
    Canada Civ
    A better warmonger penalty system. If I have to go to war with a friend because of a Defensive Pact, then the friend should have to declare war on me (THEY are the backstabber), rather than me declaring on them.
     
  7. Browd

    Browd Dilettante Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    11,936
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Rural Vermont
    Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions.
     
  8. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    441
    I think another thing that should be added to CIV V or more likely 6 is seasons.

    The map never changes, the seasons never change...

    Seasons and potential natural disasters/opportunities would really be fun.
     
  9. Redaxe

    Redaxe Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,519
    I'm not in favor of the ranged city attack
    Perhaps instead allow 2 units to be garrisoned in a city.
     
  10. jlim201

    jlim201 King

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2013
    Messages:
    825
    Location:
    Somewhere North of the South Pole
    GO- Piety in Ancient Era. It is more likely to be picked in the Classical, once you have a decent empire. Or at least switch it with Patronage.

    ADD- Better AI. At least when settling cities. It is so annoying when they put their second city 5 tiles from your capital when their capital is 40 tiles away.

    Wide penalties are only there once you settle the city. After 50 turns or so, the city will pay for itself and more. A lot of ideology policies give stuff for MORE specialists, buildings etc. How I do is: Build any production increasing building, then food, science, culture, happiness, then whatever I need at the moment. The thing that takes the longest is the workshop (20 turns).
     
  11. Wojciech Rodzik

    Wojciech Rodzik Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Add:

    Slavery (you capture slaves in wars, you can turn capture citizens and city population to slaves) - slaves work harder on tiles, are terrible as specialists, can cause additional unhappiness and slave rebellions. After certain tech level all slaves are freed (emancipation).

    Biological warfare - terrible, ideal for AI which is behind, let's make nukes ridiculously expensive and hard to get - bio weapons = easy, tends to backfire.

    Faster city razing - you can KILL\ENSLAVE all the population in one turn (only after capture) in orgy of pillage. You get a lot of money (not as much as you would get systematically selling buildings), unit doing dirty work gets some nasty trait.

    "Topple their idols" - after you capture enemy city with different religion you can convert their religious buildings to yours for no cost.

    Burning heretics - inquisitors are stupid idea - you should be able to prosecute religions be default.

    Growing morality of the world - as time progresses, and new ideas are surfacing: slaves are freed (countries which haven't done that are pressured), all civs start at war by default, then you get diplomacy, peace, trade, atrocities are no longer tolerated, after modern era wars are less and less tolerated, alliances for peace, some initiatives are raised to stamp piracy (descendants of barbarians).

    Permissions for traders - after signing that you can send caravans
    Trade agreements - you can connect rival cities to your capital (he can do the same) via roads, and use them for your city connection income.

    Open ports - the same, but income generated by connecting that port to trade network is shared among owner and civilization signing.

    More guilds - "architect guild" 3 specialists. generating 1 production, each of them gives 5% bonus for building construction empire wide, no GE points:)

    Alcohol related buildings and luxuries besides wine

    Research grants\public works - you can spend some % of your income for those. Can give each city +1 production +1 science, more % of your budget spent that way, more benefits.

    Space stations, manned mission to Mars, etc, required for science victory. Idea that you can build space ship on Earth is preposterous - that has to be done on the orbit.

    Some more time to play - more futuristic eras\techs
     
  12. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    441
    I'm always like :confused: when people say that the A.I tends to place their cities far from theirs but too close to yours. I've never seen it yet in a game.
     
  13. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    441
    Do you have a reason that isn't subjective for why you don't like the ranged city attack?

    I think it makes sense from a design perspective or else cities would be far too easy to capture with the way unit production is now.
     
  14. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    441
    I agree with your "GO" ... I know there was an option to stop this in CIV III but I haven't been able to find it in CIV V.
     
  15. epicivfreak

    epicivfreak Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    USA
    Go: Civ5

    Add: Civ6

    There's just too much that's fundamentally broken or just plain unfun in civ5 that will not get fixed in an expansion cycle, so bring on the next one.
     
  16. Arcaian

    Arcaian Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2013
    Messages:
    208
    Only way to stop it is to turn on Quick Combat.
     
  17. Wojciech Rodzik

    Wojciech Rodzik Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    I have to agree. CIV 5 brought in few nice concepts (I am very fond of hexes and new combat system), but it is overlay to simplified. Let's hope next one will better.
     
  18. Redaxe

    Redaxe Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,519
    I think it makes it too easy to defend cities. You almost never need to guard your cities from barbarians. In the ancient-classic era cities would get sacked quite easily. So much so that every settlement of importance would be walled.
    Cities should still have damagepoints but if you want to protect your empire you should have to invest in a good military. All your ancient cities should require walls.
    My suggestion would be to allow 2 units to garrison a city instead of 1. Each unit would boost city defense.
     
  19. MKDELTA3

    MKDELTA3 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    126
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    Go: Warmonger penalty. Needs to be replaced with a system that takes account both the aggressiveness and the actualy threat level of the aggressor civilization compared to others. I've seen games where everyone keeps brutally assaulting Mongols which were in a very weak starting position to begin with because they took two city states in the Bronze Age...

    Add: 3UPT
     
  20. Lorf Yimzo

    Lorf Yimzo Atheist

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Empire of Colorado
    Go-Warmonger penalties, make them less severe for minor wars. Entire system needs an overhaul.

    Add-More diplo options. As in Civ 4.
     

Share This Page