Jono
Emperor
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
Suggestion Box Concepts
- Thread starter Jono
- Start date
Jono
Emperor
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
This system would allow certain units to apply poisons to certain things like spells, catapult boulders and items (assuming items will become units which can be carried by units). Poisons would be applied by spellscasters with levels in Nature/Entropy or Assassins (which could also maybe get those promotions for creating more advanced promotions). Certain poisons could spread disease while others could make units move slower. Different poisons will last longer than others poisons can dry out or become overwritten by other poisons.
Nikis-Knight
Deity
moved to your other thread...
Chandrasekhar
Determined
Edit: Guess this is more of a balance change, anyway. Wouldn't want this one to dilute the idea I'm about to post.
Chandrasekhar
Determined
How about this one: each Civ has some spells that are specific to the Civ itself. This would help especially for those Civs that have unique mechanics (like the Calabim's vampires), but for whom there are no spells that effect this unique mechanic specifically. For a spell that effected vampires specifically, there would be no incentive for a Civ beside the Calabim to spend a promotion to learn it. However, with Civ-specific spell spheres, the Calabim could have vamire spells, the Kuriotates and Sheaim might have a high level spell that synergizes well with their dragons, and so on.
AndrewDJ
Warlord
With the changes to Mana upcoming in 0.15 how about:
Each lesser tower (Alteration, Elements, etc) gives you an extra mana of each type required to build it.
The Tower of Mastery would give an additional one of every type of mana, but this would only be important when the Tower of Mastery Victory is deactivated.
Each lesser tower (Alteration, Elements, etc) gives you an extra mana of each type required to build it.
The Tower of Mastery would give an additional one of every type of mana, but this would only be important when the Tower of Mastery Victory is deactivated.
Jono
Emperor
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
This system would make sense of units leaving your civilization. If a unit grows stronger, it should be less dependant on others or if it grew up in an unhealthy/unhappy environment, it would be willing to go against the goverment which created that environment. Basically, if this were to come into play, a unit would have begin with a certain amount of Loyalty depending on where he was created and what type of unit he is (Religious units would start with more Loyalty) at every level up you would choose from a few promotions (as usual), but now you would consider the amount of Loyalty your unit has, because every promotion would cost (yes, it's like a kind of currency) a certain amount of Loyalty (promotion like races and Law I/II/III wouldn't actually take up any Loyalty and there would be a promotion that you could take as many times as you'd like to increase your total of Loyalty). Units would also gain Loyalty through combat or time defending a certain city (depending on their class), this would make expirienced units more loyal, but they most likely will still have a problem maintaining 20 promotions and/or magic items once quests came out (assuming magical items are coming out with quests). I think I've covered all of it, I'm sorry it's not as organized as I hoped it would be...
Jono
Emperor
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
A resource, which only one of spawns in an entire map (sometimes none). This resource is then worked on by workers (sometimes maybe monks/high priests). After a long time of being worked on, this resource can produce certain units or work as a wonder by giving a certain promotion to all units built. Cities receive their culture bonus (and all other bonuses, other than spawning units, etc.) by working the tile the wonder is on.
Jono
Emperor
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
This is a fairly simple, if you chose "Require Complete Kills" as an option, the remaining units of a dead civilization would receive a promotion which would allow them to ignore cultural defences. The promotion would stay after they took over a city or 2...
Jono
Emperor
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
This idea probably won't be considered at all, but it's just a thought. All units outside of borders would have hidden nationality and aslong as combat wouldn't be witnessed by other units, towers or cultural borders (this is only after 2 turns within the cultural borders) then war wouldn't be declared. Basically, this would make the neutral areas a warzone, you would be able to raze entire cities without being caught, as long as you leave no one alive, and so on (I mean, you get it 
)...
)...tyrantpimp
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2006
- Messages
- 65
Heres a suggestion for I have about the vampire civ. Seems like forcing them to conquer a whole city of tasty blood pets is not fair to them. Im sure some cruel vampire overlord would surely let his menions devour the whole city, similar to razing it to the ground only tastier. Maybe this option would give higher than usual XP. Certainly they must gain more experience hunting "untamed" game
strategyonly
C2C Supreme Commander
tyrantpimp said:Heres a suggestion for I have about the vampire civ. Seems like forcing them to conquer a whole city of tasty blood pets is not fair to them. Im sure some cruel vampire overlord would surely let his menions devour the whole city, similar to razing it to the ground only tastier. Maybe this option would give higher than usual XP. Certainly they must gain more experience hunting "untamed" game
Heres a guy that wanted a whole vampire mod, you should also talk to him about it: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=181596
tyrantpimp
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2006
- Messages
- 65
So another vampire thought i had. Since vampires can get up to around 31 levels or so, at some point it would be neat to have some sort of super vampire upgrade. Sort of like the mages have lichedom, maybe restrict it to only one though.
Heres i figure it would work,
At a certain level, say level 20 your vampire can become lord of all vampires. Give the unit a spell which turns him into this vampire lord.
The spell has to be cast in a friendly city, whatever city its cast in gets a special building the lords crypt. Maybe it gives a bonus to vampires created there. It most definitely should give a food penalty. Not in asense that the vampires eat more food but to simulate that the vampires eat more people
The possiblities are wide open really
Heres i figure it would work,
At a certain level, say level 20 your vampire can become lord of all vampires. Give the unit a spell which turns him into this vampire lord.
The spell has to be cast in a friendly city, whatever city its cast in gets a special building the lords crypt. Maybe it gives a bonus to vampires created there. It most definitely should give a food penalty. Not in asense that the vampires eat more food but to simulate that the vampires eat more people
The possiblities are wide open really
tyrantpimp said:So another vampire thought i had. Since vampires can get up to around 31 levels or so, at some point it would be neat to have some sort of super vampire upgrade. Sort of like the mages have lichedom, maybe restrict it to only one though.
Heres i figure it would work,
At a certain level, say level 20 your vampire can become lord of all vampires. Give the unit a spell which turns him into this vampire lord.
The spell has to be cast in a friendly city, whatever city its cast in gets a special building the lords crypt. Maybe it gives a bonus to vampires created there. It most definitely should give a food penalty. Not in asense that the vampires eat more food but to simulate that the vampires eat more people
The possiblities are wide open really
Good idea. Lets assume something like the following:
Vampire Lord (replaces Immortal)
Strength 14 (instead of 12)
Starts with the Immortal and Vampire promotion
Is an "Immortal" unit (gains immortality each turn)
Minimum level of 12 (instead of 6)
What else could the Vampire Lord have? I need a special ability, and Im not a big fan of the crypt idea.
Frozen-Vomit
Prince
Kael said:
I would shoot for something from the vampire: the masquarede rpg:
The ancients vampires (methusalems) feed on lesser vampires instead of humans.
So give them the consume vampire ability that gets them 50% (probably needs to be balanced - just first idea) of the other vampires exp.
tyrantpimp
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2006
- Messages
- 65
Maybe it could be immortal as long as its resting place was not destroyed, give it an escape spell so that it can return home when its tomb is endangered. In a sense immortal but still bound.
Few upgrades that might be fitting
hideous thoughts, fear, and perhaps when it gifts vampirism give the victem a slight xp boost
Few upgrades that might be fitting
hideous thoughts, fear, and perhaps when it gifts vampirism give the victem a slight xp boost
QES
Court Jester
Maybe Give Vampire Lords some sort of summons.
Summon bat swarm
Summon Wolves
Summon Werewolves
Summon Vampires
Summon Thralls (other form of servants)
would be examples.
Maybe also give it teleportation/the ability to rebase despite it being a ground unit?
-Qes
Summon bat swarm
Summon Wolves
Summon Werewolves
Summon Vampires
Summon Thralls (other form of servants)
would be examples.
Maybe also give it teleportation/the ability to rebase despite it being a ground unit?
-Qes
tyrantpimp
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2006
- Messages
- 65
A charm upgrade would probably fit too, let me give it some thought. I am approaching originality any minute now.
If this suggestion box is open to all ideas, I'm still endorsing the inclusion of regicide, myself (I can quote myself on an idea I posted elsewhere a while back).
As for the idea of Loyalty, I feel that loyalty shouldn't really be an issue in high-leveled, promoted units. Heck, I think it should be far from that. If a unit has survived for so long at the hands of the leader, they should be quite loyal to the cause and, personally, I'd feel irritated if my heroes started deserting me.
Perhaps, on the other hand, morale could be present. Morale would be increased for a unit if it won battles, recieved promotions, if a hero (or one of Bannor's crusading units or the Order's crusaders) was present, or (but only a little) if a unit in ajacent tile (or same stack) won a battle. Morale would be increased for all units if you 'won' a war (wiped out the other civilization or agreed to peace-terms where they gave you tribute), if you were in a Golden Age, if you built any wonders (military wonders especially) or if you killed an enemy hero (I'm thinking especially of Orthus or any of the dragons). Certain rituals would give a major bonus to morale (eg Glory Everlasting).
A soldier would lose morale if they lost a battle, were in a town under seige (maybe. When backed into a corner, some fight better, of course), if they were forced into retreat, if hit by magic, if diseased, etc. All units lose morale if certain rituals are performed (perhaps Blight, Bane Divine and Apocalypse especially? I don't think Wrath Unleashed would actually damage morale since I think it might greater inspire folk to take up arms.). Losing a war (if your civilization makes peace with an enemy and has to give tribute to them to gain that peace, this could be seen as 'losing').
High Morale units may fight harder, gain a first strike and maybe March or increased heal rate? High Morale might also cause enemy units to defect/be demoralised by the fervor of their enemies?
Low Morale causes units to be poorer fighters (and perhaps withdraw in the middle of combat) or, if attacked, to retreat akin to Loki with a significant portion of their health missing. Low Morale units who retreat from fights in either ways lower the morale of other nearby units (and raise the morale of the unit they retreated from). If morale falls too low, a unit may just disband itself or take up arms against its leader (become Barbarian or, perhaps, join an enemy army).
Being in a fort or city (especially one with walls/castle/palace) would cause morale to raise to a certain threshold (that could only be increased further by winning in combat).
Certain units, are immune to morale issues (specifically undead and golems and possibly demons though I somewhat suspect with them that, from vicious battle, they could at least gain morale to say the least).
Not sure if its a good idea (and its probably quite complicated) but its an alternative, perhaps, to Loyalty.
I really like the Battle idea here but, the problem is, you'd never know really who was attacking you then. Granted, if you see Elven archers attacking your troops it may be slightly obvious but if a Macemen whacks you over the head, you don't know where to point the finger. And I know, to some extent, its realistic and interesting to have a bit of paranoia in it. But in that case, wars are going to be pretty difficult to start if you don't know who's attacking you.
Perhaps, all units are identifiable outside your borders but can attack each other (instead of the Go To War pop up when moving into a square, it says 'Attack?' as an alternative to moving there peacefully) without declaring war. Doing so would give some diplomatic penalties to attacker ( -3 You attacked us on neutral ground and maybe a -1 "You spilled the blood of our allies/friends on neutral ground" for allies). So, though fighting in neutral territory would automatically open up a war, it'd spoil relations for the two powers and could, eventually, cause a war. Especially if those attacked are enslaved or were workers/settlers ( I can imagine a -6 "You killed innocent civillians!" which, I think, may automatically make a Good Civ go to war with the attacker whilst an Evil one may not be so concerned about civillian lives).
As for the idea of Loyalty, I feel that loyalty shouldn't really be an issue in high-leveled, promoted units. Heck, I think it should be far from that. If a unit has survived for so long at the hands of the leader, they should be quite loyal to the cause and, personally, I'd feel irritated if my heroes started deserting me.
Perhaps, on the other hand, morale could be present. Morale would be increased for a unit if it won battles, recieved promotions, if a hero (or one of Bannor's crusading units or the Order's crusaders) was present, or (but only a little) if a unit in ajacent tile (or same stack) won a battle. Morale would be increased for all units if you 'won' a war (wiped out the other civilization or agreed to peace-terms where they gave you tribute), if you were in a Golden Age, if you built any wonders (military wonders especially) or if you killed an enemy hero (I'm thinking especially of Orthus or any of the dragons). Certain rituals would give a major bonus to morale (eg Glory Everlasting).
A soldier would lose morale if they lost a battle, were in a town under seige (maybe. When backed into a corner, some fight better, of course), if they were forced into retreat, if hit by magic, if diseased, etc. All units lose morale if certain rituals are performed (perhaps Blight, Bane Divine and Apocalypse especially? I don't think Wrath Unleashed would actually damage morale since I think it might greater inspire folk to take up arms.). Losing a war (if your civilization makes peace with an enemy and has to give tribute to them to gain that peace, this could be seen as 'losing').
High Morale units may fight harder, gain a first strike and maybe March or increased heal rate? High Morale might also cause enemy units to defect/be demoralised by the fervor of their enemies?
Low Morale causes units to be poorer fighters (and perhaps withdraw in the middle of combat) or, if attacked, to retreat akin to Loki with a significant portion of their health missing. Low Morale units who retreat from fights in either ways lower the morale of other nearby units (and raise the morale of the unit they retreated from). If morale falls too low, a unit may just disband itself or take up arms against its leader (become Barbarian or, perhaps, join an enemy army).
Being in a fort or city (especially one with walls/castle/palace) would cause morale to raise to a certain threshold (that could only be increased further by winning in combat).
Certain units, are immune to morale issues (specifically undead and golems and possibly demons though I somewhat suspect with them that, from vicious battle, they could at least gain morale to say the least).
Not sure if its a good idea (and its probably quite complicated) but its an alternative, perhaps, to Loyalty.
I really like the Battle idea here but, the problem is, you'd never know really who was attacking you then. Granted, if you see Elven archers attacking your troops it may be slightly obvious but if a Macemen whacks you over the head, you don't know where to point the finger. And I know, to some extent, its realistic and interesting to have a bit of paranoia in it. But in that case, wars are going to be pretty difficult to start if you don't know who's attacking you.
Perhaps, all units are identifiable outside your borders but can attack each other (instead of the Go To War pop up when moving into a square, it says 'Attack?' as an alternative to moving there peacefully) without declaring war. Doing so would give some diplomatic penalties to attacker ( -3 You attacked us on neutral ground and maybe a -1 "You spilled the blood of our allies/friends on neutral ground" for allies). So, though fighting in neutral territory would automatically open up a war, it'd spoil relations for the two powers and could, eventually, cause a war. Especially if those attacked are enslaved or were workers/settlers ( I can imagine a -6 "You killed innocent civillians!" which, I think, may automatically make a Good Civ go to war with the attacker whilst an Evil one may not be so concerned about civillian lives).
