Share your 3rd expansion design suggestion

[Aussie_Lurker]

-3rd Party Diplomacy.....especially with regards to City-States (forcing Major Civs to end wars, offering to protect City-States etc).

-It would be interesting if certain resource deposits (Luxury, Bonus & Strategic) had some kind of semi-unique bonus attached to them. For example, you might have a Horse "deposit" that results in your Civ building faster moving mounted units, or allows you to build mounted units more quickly. This might make said resource deposits more sought after by other Civs.

-in general, I'd like to see changes to the resource & trading systems to make bonus & luxury resources much more important. These resources-along with Strategic Resources-should grant Empire Wide buffs that increase the more of that resource you have access to. Likewise, I'd like to see changes to these systems that make overseas colonies a much more viable tactic. I feel a combo of the "Unique Buff" system, the "Empire-wide buff" system, resource deposits of variable sizes & better distribution of more "unique" resources, due to geography, might all help with this. Even existing luxuries-like Spices & Dyes-could have different variants unique to certain parts of the map......& which grant different Empire-wide buffs as a result. So a spice from your home continent might provide +0.2 gold & +0.3 food per city for each spice you have access to. Yet a spice from another continent might generate +0.2 culture & +0.3 food per city instead.....even before we consider any potential "semi-unique" buff a specific spice deposit might have.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Oh, another thing-more viable Specialist based economies. Make assigning citizens to District Buildings more enticing-by increasing yield outputs above the base building(s), as well as greater GPP yields.

 

[Abhi24]

City state should have leader with traits.
Leader with economic trait will like civs which will gift money.
Military leader will like to expand army
Expansionist trait will like to attack by military or a religion warfare or ideological warfare.If we help him to get territory or his interest your influence increases.
Religion trait will like civ with same religion.

Spy can have assassination mission to kill a leader or helping leader to take power.
Civs can go war to citystate by having a specific casus bella

There should be economic victory.
There should currency which value will increase or decrease.
There should be revolutionary which will appear when people are not happy and will attack city and capture it and make new city state which can have 1 or more cities.If there proposal of recognition is approved by other civs.
There should be trade war which will decrease points like currency income or production fron factory.
Crisis will like emergency like decrease in income of civs by bad action of other civs, but actions like embargo will occur.
Borders should also be closed for trade units.
Global market should also there from where we can import resource shared by other civs.Its price will be set according to availability.
Diseases should also be there which will decrease population and if it spread in more civs can be declared as crisis in world congress.
There should also more tech for climate change reduction or reversal.
Migration should also be there and if there is mass immigration can decrease loyalty.

There should be bridge district

 

[Rawrking]

There should be economic expansion.In it expansion can achieve economic victory.Currency research will open new feature like introducing our own currency.The currency introduced by us will deflate and inflate.There should be international market where civs will be sell resource which will help to make currency more influential.Civs can carry out big infrastructure project like dam, etc.There should also be new proposal in world congress for converting free state to city state.

I could assume that it actually would cause problems as there is no definite parameter to measure economic victory. Would it be your cash? or your resources? Just like what it is in real world, economy is always dynamic, nobody would know who's winning or losing, nobody's stay neither at the top or the bottom forever. Trade war is only a term to legitimize hostile economic actions and policies between nations. How would you define an economic victory exactly?

 

[Abhi24]

My new views for 3rd expansion are

There should be option for vassalising any civ or citystate.
There should be colonialism mechanic in which civs will make building like company headquarter which can be made once. From it we can form unit called colonist which will bring money to us and taking our permission it will attack civ of its own interest and the captured city will be under company rule not in our rule. The captured city of civ will be shown part of it, but the civ will lose power to produce or use resource in city territory.
Passing of anti colonies proposal the companies will have to lose territory to respective civs. Successful colonialism will also empower your currency.
In cold war old renesciance companies will covert to corporation which will expand but will not conquer or attack cities of any civs, but they can perform projects which will provide benefit to civs and us by providing money or resource.

Economic victory can be achieved by dominating your currency in world trade.

Disease mechanic will be there which decrease efficiency of population and can cause less yield and military units weakening.

New projects should be there like bridge and many more.

If disease spread more than 1 civ the epidemic emergency will declare .

Society welfare district will consist of building like
Hospital-which will control disease and also increase mortality rate of population in disaster affected area.
Security building can decrease the working level of enemy spy and also decrease spawning of revolutionary units.

Revolutionary units are like barbarians but have ability to control territory. If ignored can decrease loyalty of city or capture it to transform directly to free state.Then emergency resolution will come to choose option the free city converted to city state or not. These units can make large city state by capturing more cities.
Due to 0 loyalty free city form can also appear in emergency to become citystate or not.

Citystate should have temporary leader with traits

Expansionist : Leader will try to invade nearby civs and these leaders will have ability to make large armies. If citystate capture more than 5 cities after leader change the city state will fallapart into 2 cities or 3 cities civs.

Religious: leader of this citystate will not like anyother religion.

Industrialist will always be concern about its production and power.

Researcher will increase science output of citystate.
It can also do research agreements.

Spy will have assassination of leader or help in coup which will help to get leader of our choice.

Land Trade routes will be affected by closing or opening of border.

 

[Rawrking]

My new views for 3rd expansion are

There should be option for vassalising any civ or citystate.
There should be colonialism mechanic in which civs will make building like company headquarter which can be made once. From it we can form unit called colonist which will bring money to us and taking our permission it will attack civ of its own interest and the captured city will be under company rule not in our rule. The captured city of civ will be shown part of it, but the civ will lose power to produce or use resource in city territory.
Passing of anti colonies proposal the companies will have to lose territory to respective civs. Successful colonialism will also empower your currency.
In cold war old renesciance companies will covert to corporation which will expand but will not conquer or attack cities of any civs, but they can perform projects which will provide benefit to civs and us by providing money or resource.

1. We do have vassal system, that's what it means to be a suzerain of the city state. Annexing it, would require military attack on the city state center.
2. Do you mean the one that similar to corporate mod in Civ V? Building company HQ as a wonder?
3. I would agree on rebelling cities should create a new-quasi/proto-civilization with random name chosen from history after certain turn and become an AI nation. Instead of joining other civ. For example Indonesia and Malaysia from Majapahit / Dutch or Singapore and South Africa from the UK.
4. I suggest disease, welfare and plague should be in a mod instead of an expansion. IMHO, there are still a lot of game mechanics that should be developed more instead of working on new game mechanics. Don't you think it's better for them to focus on trading and economic system, turn to production ratio, or larger maps for the next expansion? It's just suffocating to see in the game it would take a century just to produce an army of archers because it's too expensive to buy on the 20th plus turn.

 

[Abhi24]

1. We do have vassal system, that's what it means to be a suzerain of the city state. Annexing it, would require military attack on the city state center.
2. Do you mean the one that similar to corporate mod in Civ V? Building company HQ as a wonder?
3. I would agree on rebelling cities should create a new-quasi/proto-civilization with random name chosen from history after certain turn and become an AI nation. Instead of joining other civ. For example Indonesia and Malaysia from Majapahit / Dutch or Singapore and South Africa from the UK.
4. I suggest disease, welfare and plague should be in a mod instead of an expansion. IMHO, there are still a lot of game mechanics that should be developed more instead of working on new game mechanics. Don't you think it's better for them to focus on trading and economic system, turn to production ratio, or larger maps for the next expansion? It's just suffocating to see in the game it would take a century just to produce an army of archers because it's too expensive to buy on the 20th plus turn.

I don't agree because a new mechanic should be there instead of mods because most of players see mechanics not mod.It is not suffocating the game it will make game interesting. I want that free city convert to citystate because i have seen big empire captures citystate and endgame left with less no. of citystates. Plague will be a good mechanic because natural disasters are not that harmful.
If they design own corporate mechanic it will be better than mod in civ 5. It cannot be ignored that world was once colonized by major powers. I want this mechanic because it will give better experience and new challenge.
Suzerianship is not vassaling of citystate it is an alliance. A vassal civ cannot take decision against dominating power. If dominating empire wants then the civ can be released from vassalization.
I want new mechanics because to get different experience than old civ games. It makes the game interesting not suffocating.

 

[Weraptor]

Just a heads up, there is a mod that makes it possible for Free Cities to turn into City States.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1405531706&searchtext=free+city+state

 

[Rawrking]

I don't agree because a new mechanic should be there instead of mods because most of players see mechanics not mod.It is not suffocating the game it will make game interesting. I want that free city convert to citystate because i have seen big empire captures citystate and endgame left with less no. of citystates. Plague will be a good mechanic because natural disasters are not that harmful.
If they design own corporate mechanic it will be better than mod in civ 5. It cannot be ignored that world was once colonized by major powers. I want this mechanic because it will give better experience and new challenge.
Suzerianship is not vassaling of citystate it is an alliance. A vassal civ cannot take decision against dominating power. If dominating empire wants then the civ can be released from vassalization.
I want new mechanics because to get different experience than old civ games. It makes the game interesting not suffocating.

In other words, what you wanted was a completely different game than Civ ? I'm sorry, I don't get it.....
I agree that there are there are still a lot of rooms to improve and I agree something must be done with the trading and economic system.
You should check wikipedia on the definition of suzerainty : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzerainty
Vassal states were actually able to make their own decision irl, e.g. India under British rule. If what you meant was to input a system to differentiate between protectorate vs vassal states, what would make the difference with the current mechanics? You want them to do your bidding, capture them. You want a subordinate, be the suzerain. You want free cities, there's a mod for it (@Weraptor).
I'm sorry if my assumptions were wrong, but what I caught from your previous post is that Firaxis should combine EU4 mechanics with Civ, which I would never agree. It doesn't matter whether EU4 was considered a good game or not, as the game stands, it was too Euro-centrist, too inflexible, too unsympathetically pleasing, too white and too racist for my personal taste, despite it aims for "historical accuracy". I'm sorry, but I just want to see what would happen if Europe never colonized America and never did start triangle trade. I apologize to all EU4 fans who also plays Civ, but it's just what it is.

 

[Abhi24]

In other words, what you wanted was a completely different game than Civ ? I'm sorry, I don't get it.....
I agree that there are there are still a lot of rooms to improve and I agree something must be done with the trading and economic system.
You should check wikipedia on the definition of suzerainty : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzerainty
Vassal states were actually able to make their own decision irl, e.g. India under British rule. If what you meant was to input a system to differentiate between protectorate vs vassal states, what would make the difference with the current mechanics? You want them to do your bidding, capture them. You want a subordinate, be the suzerain. You want free cities, there's a mod for it (@Weraptor).
I'm sorry if my assumptions were wrong, but what I caught from your previous post is that Firaxis should combine EU4 mechanics with Civ, which I would never agree. It doesn't matter whether EU4 was considered a good game or not, as the game stands, it was too Euro-centrist, too inflexible, too unsympathetically pleasing, too white and too racist for my personal taste, despite it aims for "historical accuracy". I'm sorry, but I just want to see what would happen if Europe never colonized America and never did start triangle trade. I apologize to all EU4 fans who also plays Civ, but it's just what it is.

You don't get it because to remain in market you should always to try something new. Previous civs games were more complex.

 

[Abhi24]

In 3rd expansion, I want revamped civilization 4 colonization and also we can expand colonies by controlling cities. But conquered cities will be not part of our civilization. We can exploit resource and can stand a large army. It will be era of great wars and fill gold in treasury heavily. At end of this colonial era in world congress a resolution will be there to abolish colonies or keep.
If we keep colonies it will change into our cities but will cause greivence from civ which cities are captured. There will be colonial settler which will settle a colony not city . The speciality of colony is it doesn't get affected by loyalty. It will be in danger of rebellion. The rebellion are units which can appear when there is unhappiness and can cause independence and new citystate will form.
If anti colonialism resolution passes all colonies will have loyalty pressure and formation of rebellion.

 

[Rawrking]

You don't get it because to remain in market you should always to try something new. Previous civs games were more complex.

As I said, I agree we need to try something new with Civ V, but that change would also require Civ brand to differentiate itself from Paradox games.
Just look at how they put disaster mechanism into new Imperator Rome game, it's bordering ridiculousness.

Oh and btw I love the palace building mechanics in Civ 3, which helped Civ brand to feel more personal, that should be on the next expansion with 3 different production column windows idea. The unit production, building production and wonder production needs to be on different columns. When idle, unit production column would automatically produce experience for the whole units, building column would produce money, wonder production column would increase food and production and so on.

I agree with your idea for Civ to revamp its mechanics for rebel states independence. They should be able to become another AI civ instead of becoming barbarian. I just still don't get with your colonization idea as new states is practically a new colony found by settlers produced from city center. That's just how Civ works.

 

[Abhi24]

I want colonization because it will give a new experience and if i attack a city i occupy it and get into my territory. If this mechanics come i will take city but not go into my territory. I want colonization because it will give me different view and more political it will get. If i play civ6 the game goes like same and only tiles change and cities expand. If colonization will be there a heavy colonizing civilization will be challenge for me. I can experience great wars like never before. I will have to fight him or become part of its empire . The settlement of city by colonial settler will gain independent citystate if resolution passes in world congress. It will be like observing a changing world. Seeing a large empire which collapsed by heavy rebellion or decolonisation resolution.

 

[MagGlb]

It would be interesting if a third expansion added an economic victory. This victory method could be accompanied by in game corporations (possibly with some customization), new types of economic agreements with varying degrees of benefits and commitments and consequences, and possibly the ability to have civilizations adopt the currency of another (someone mentioned this earlier).

Also, there should be more Future Era units. Some examples:

Power armor wearing infantry or combat suit equipped infantry (upgrade from Mechanized Infantry)
Remotely piloted or autonomous aircraft (upgrade to Jet Fighter)
At least one future naval unit

 

[AntSou]

It would be interesting if a third expansion added an economic victory. This victory method could be accompanied by in game corporations (possibly with some customization), new types of economic agreements with varying degrees of benefits and commitments and consequences, and possibly the ability to have civilizations adopt the currency of another (someone mentioned this earlier).

Also, there should be more Future Era units. Some examples:

Power armor wearing infantry or combat suit equipped infantry (upgrade from Mechanized Infantry)
Remotely piloted or autonomous aircraft (upgrade to Jet Fighter)
At least one future naval unit

Modders monthly issue 9 already describes a way to handle the economic victory type. You might want to read it. (it's towards the end of the document)

 

[cain3456]

Corporations: They would need great Entrepreneurs, separate from great Merchants. The great Prophet column that is empty after the last religion can be used.
Corporations can set policies, much like religious beliefs. either emphasize money or 'go green' to slow global warming.

 

[Ownsya]

I mentioned this idea even before GS was announced. Now it is even more realistic and appealing to me. The climate system that came out with GS is a bit too inconsequential imo, albeit interesting. Most disasters feel simply like sprinkled seasoning to the game play rather than something that truly alters your game. The only things that really make you reconsider your actions is placing cities near tiles that will drown early, or near volcanoes. The occasional serendipitous flood or storm can make you have to reroute your armies as well and can make for interesting surprises, but mostly just delay your plans. Also, people who play efficiently will often finish the game before sea levels even rising significantly at all.

My idea is to have climate and your carbon footprint directly linked with the loyalty system. If your city is highly polluting due to co2 emissions, has low appeal tiles, and not many natural resources (trees, luxury resources) this should have a negative impact on loyalty. However, this type of loyalty effect should happen relative to the carbon footprint of neighboring cities and civs. Also the overall climate impact of your empire should affect the loyalty of all cities to a lesser degree regardless of the conditions of the particular city. Similarly for neighboring cities. If you have a city with all chopped trees, an industrial zone with a coal powerplant, and it's right next to a city from your neighboring civ with beautiful appeal and clean air then loyalty impact is increased due to proximity of a much more attractive city. This way, climate effects require some consideration from the start of the game and aren't just something to keep the late-game more interesting.

I don't think civ 6 right now is lacking anything major. I like the idea of an economic victory that was proposed above, but whatever a new expansion might introduce it should also focus on making all the various concepts of the game more synergized and improving certain mechanics to really round up the game.

 

[cultured barbarian]

World Congress: Every congress session will have a host, who will be the tie-breaker. He wins the session if his vote is one of the highest, and if he doesn't have one of the highest vote, he gets an extra vote to break the tie.

Disaster: Make water level affect more tiles, add tsunami and earthquake.

Loyalty: fudge loyalty and fudge Eleanor. loyalty makes domination so hard and cross-continent conquest almost impossible.

Add more options to increase loyalty for civs that plays around cross-continent conquest, naval exploration, and settling on another continent. for example, increase effect of loyalty boost policy card, add more stuff that provide loyalty, like building, government bonus, governor bonus.

I suggest the total war system where immediately after conquest, there is great disloyalty that trickles down over time, and instead of immediately flipping the city, spawn rebel units instead. if the rebellion is not crushed in X number of turns, flip the city. if the rebellion is crushed, add a modifier to boost loyalty so the city won't rebel for a while.

Add a culture modifier which affect loyalty, more culture per turn means faster conversion of foreign culture in conquered cities, resulting in less rebellion.

City-state: Increase diplomatic favors gained from city-states, make them better and play bigger role.

I opened a new thread for this, not knowing there's already a thread for it.

 

[HumanMap]

I think that another cool thing would be to greatly expand the usefulness of Great Musicians by adding things like an Opera House. But also I was thinking along the lines of Rise and Fall. With Gathering Storm possibly representing a "fall" maybe "rise" could be represented via a "cultural revival" mechanic? Perhaps it could come in the form of graphic cultural alterations to cities and affects to loyalty and tourism? The designation of ethnic-towns in your cities? Civs I was thinking of are Mexico, Coahuiltecan, Italy, Ireland, South Africa, Ethiopia and other civs that have been "reborn" in various ways.
I agree that immigration should be a more dynamic feature (they already recognize its imporance int he World Congress vote about -5 Loyalty with some% growth).

 

[Jeppetto]

I would understand If people though this doesn't fit this game, but I'd like Decisions and Affinities of CivBE. Even though the new Policy system already is basically ideologies and tenets, Ideology would be probably best fitting name.

Basically every x turns you face Event. There are three Decisions, choose one of them. This unlocks Decision Wildcard Policy with unique effect. Also 1 Ideology Point towards one of three Ideologies (Freedom -> pseudoCommunism [wide], Equality -> pseudoDemocracy [tall], Brotherhood -> pseudoFascism [war]). Reaching x Ideology Points towards Ideology grants Tenet from that Ideology. Only one per Tier, meaning that it's flexible, but encourages focusing on one decision path. Example:

Need 1 Ideology Point first.
Get 1 Brotherhood Point so you get Tier 1 Brotherhood Tenet.
Now you need 3 Brotherhood Points for Tier 2 Brotherhood Tenet but only 1 Equality/Freedom for Tier 2 Equality/Freedom Tenet.
This is because milestone only moves for one Ideology when reaching the milestone, but you may not recieve multiple Tenets of the same Tier.
So you can be flexible with correct management. However If you only like benefits of single path, you must hard-focus it.

I had this idea prior to expansions, so one of Tiers would unlock unique Wonder. For Freedom Kremlin, for Equality Statue of Liberty, for Brotherhood Brandenburg Gate. This isn't really possible now anyway. But I'd still prefer the Tenets to have impactful effects, like unique unit, district, improvement, wonder etc.