Hallo there,
I have been playing Civ since Civ2 and from time to time, I also came to civfanatics for inspiration. As a scholar of religion, I dealt with the Civ franchise professionally a few times, quite some articles in cultural stduies are written about the game from a post-colonial or whatsoever perspective. Time for my first post, after all this many years!
I've been playing Civ6 for 120 hours or so (says Steam), and I quite like it so far. The way the map has become very meaningful, the diversity in city states, ressources, support units, and the new natural wonders plus Sean Bean are just great! I dislike the new leader graphics, but I guess it's okay to get rid of Philipp for annoying me by gesturing excessively. (I miss Isabella so much!) I read many good posts here about the AI, units not being up-to-date, movement, spies and many more, also exciting ideas about future leaders. My personal three biggest wishes (for patches, expansions or mods) - besides having Persia back asap - are:
Ethnic Religions, Schisms and more
I find religion quite dull as it is. Not only from a historical point of view, but also when it comes to gameplay. Basically every religion is the same. I would very much like to see the religious victory condition disabled, thus making religion more flexible and more an instrument of shaping relations and the way your (early) Empire works.
Historically there were and are many religions that didn't proselytise (i.e. spread a religion, not the wrong way the word is used in the game! And English isn't my native language, but how could they?). I do fully understand that Civ isn't a real life/history simulation. But I want options that enhance both accuracy and gameplay. A religion that is more immune to proselytisation from the outside, but less able to proselytise for instance. I want to be able to close my borders to foreign missionaries. (In the Ottoman Empire, to name one of many examples, the Greek Orthodox Church was afforded a certain protection by the state. When Catholic missionaries appeared, Ottoman officials simply chopped of their heads. Second rate citizens they were, the Greeks, but protected ones.)
All in all, missionaries should be only one option to spread religion. Trade routes, culture, science, war and peace, diplomatic agreements and so on should all come into account. I want to be able to declare a state religion or declare a schism (through a Great Prophet or something different, the religious units should be reworked anyhow). X brings religion A to Y. Y declares A to become B, its benefits now belong to Y. But a certain amount of people stay true to A and X isn't amused. We have a casus belli and probably the danger of loosing one of B's cities to A.
But religions shouldn't all function the same. If you make your religion an ethnic religion, foreign missionaries would take hits every turn they are in your borders (like in good old Civ5 times). There could be a flexible formula: City population strength x 2.5 = hit points. While a newly founded city with little borders thus could still be easily converted, the centre of an Empire is only hard to reach: With a population of 10, a missionary would take 25 hits per turn. Easy prey.
Ethnicity
And since we talk about ethnicity: I want that as well. When I as, let's say, Chinese conquer Roman cities, the population theoretically stays Roman, doesn't it? But there is nothing that makes this meaningul in any way - except for warmonger and occupation hate. Yet, there would be dozens of possibilities: Do you build a multinational state? Or a single nation state? Some policies would favour the first, others the latter. It would affect the way you conquer and rule. Do I oppress, or do I co-opt? If I have a multinational empire, what makes my citizens happy and united? A unifying religion? Policies? Many, many possibilities! And it would make a big difference: Right now, going wide is rewarded, going tall penalised. I like going wide. I like going tall. Both should be possible - and different.
Puppet States and Vassals
First of all: Destroying cities removes all its features from the map. Why should that be? When I conquer a city and decide to destroy it, it should take time. It gives time for a reconquest, binds troops and adds a layer of realism. If the city has a wonder, a ruin should remain, same for districts, farms and basically every improvement. (I also want to be able to destroy capitals, really).
Second: After having conquered thirty cities or so, I often couldn't care less what city X is building. I keep the city for strategic reasons, and because it doesn't hurt. Then I built sewers, because they take the most turns. And I do not want to be bothered selecting anything in thirty unimportant city every three turns. (A queue would certainly help.) I want to have puppets back. Keep the city, keep the territory, and pretty much nothing else. Likewise, there should be real colonies. Not just new cities of my empire, or something called "settler colony." But real exploitation colonies! Again, ethnicities would make this meaningful.
Third: Vassals! As in Civ4. Make Diplomacy Great Again!
I look very much forward to your comments and thoughts!
I have been playing Civ since Civ2 and from time to time, I also came to civfanatics for inspiration. As a scholar of religion, I dealt with the Civ franchise professionally a few times, quite some articles in cultural stduies are written about the game from a post-colonial or whatsoever perspective. Time for my first post, after all this many years!
I've been playing Civ6 for 120 hours or so (says Steam), and I quite like it so far. The way the map has become very meaningful, the diversity in city states, ressources, support units, and the new natural wonders plus Sean Bean are just great! I dislike the new leader graphics, but I guess it's okay to get rid of Philipp for annoying me by gesturing excessively. (I miss Isabella so much!) I read many good posts here about the AI, units not being up-to-date, movement, spies and many more, also exciting ideas about future leaders. My personal three biggest wishes (for patches, expansions or mods) - besides having Persia back asap - are:
Ethnic Religions, Schisms and more
I find religion quite dull as it is. Not only from a historical point of view, but also when it comes to gameplay. Basically every religion is the same. I would very much like to see the religious victory condition disabled, thus making religion more flexible and more an instrument of shaping relations and the way your (early) Empire works.
Historically there were and are many religions that didn't proselytise (i.e. spread a religion, not the wrong way the word is used in the game! And English isn't my native language, but how could they?). I do fully understand that Civ isn't a real life/history simulation. But I want options that enhance both accuracy and gameplay. A religion that is more immune to proselytisation from the outside, but less able to proselytise for instance. I want to be able to close my borders to foreign missionaries. (In the Ottoman Empire, to name one of many examples, the Greek Orthodox Church was afforded a certain protection by the state. When Catholic missionaries appeared, Ottoman officials simply chopped of their heads. Second rate citizens they were, the Greeks, but protected ones.)
All in all, missionaries should be only one option to spread religion. Trade routes, culture, science, war and peace, diplomatic agreements and so on should all come into account. I want to be able to declare a state religion or declare a schism (through a Great Prophet or something different, the religious units should be reworked anyhow). X brings religion A to Y. Y declares A to become B, its benefits now belong to Y. But a certain amount of people stay true to A and X isn't amused. We have a casus belli and probably the danger of loosing one of B's cities to A.
But religions shouldn't all function the same. If you make your religion an ethnic religion, foreign missionaries would take hits every turn they are in your borders (like in good old Civ5 times). There could be a flexible formula: City population strength x 2.5 = hit points. While a newly founded city with little borders thus could still be easily converted, the centre of an Empire is only hard to reach: With a population of 10, a missionary would take 25 hits per turn. Easy prey.
Ethnicity
And since we talk about ethnicity: I want that as well. When I as, let's say, Chinese conquer Roman cities, the population theoretically stays Roman, doesn't it? But there is nothing that makes this meaningul in any way - except for warmonger and occupation hate. Yet, there would be dozens of possibilities: Do you build a multinational state? Or a single nation state? Some policies would favour the first, others the latter. It would affect the way you conquer and rule. Do I oppress, or do I co-opt? If I have a multinational empire, what makes my citizens happy and united? A unifying religion? Policies? Many, many possibilities! And it would make a big difference: Right now, going wide is rewarded, going tall penalised. I like going wide. I like going tall. Both should be possible - and different.
Puppet States and Vassals
First of all: Destroying cities removes all its features from the map. Why should that be? When I conquer a city and decide to destroy it, it should take time. It gives time for a reconquest, binds troops and adds a layer of realism. If the city has a wonder, a ruin should remain, same for districts, farms and basically every improvement. (I also want to be able to destroy capitals, really).
Second: After having conquered thirty cities or so, I often couldn't care less what city X is building. I keep the city for strategic reasons, and because it doesn't hurt. Then I built sewers, because they take the most turns. And I do not want to be bothered selecting anything in thirty unimportant city every three turns. (A queue would certainly help.) I want to have puppets back. Keep the city, keep the territory, and pretty much nothing else. Likewise, there should be real colonies. Not just new cities of my empire, or something called "settler colony." But real exploitation colonies! Again, ethnicities would make this meaningful.
Third: Vassals! As in Civ4. Make Diplomacy Great Again!
I look very much forward to your comments and thoughts!
