Suggestions and Requests

[Dracosolon]

One thing to keep in mind is that city size in Civ games isn't really about simulating real life population growth, but what capacity is best for gameplay. This is why the modern era doesn't see your cities explode in size to the same extent as what happened in the 20th century. If that was properly reflected and costs in the modern era would have to be truly enormous, else you'd end up with everything being completed in a few turns.

 

[Lzz]

Yeah, that is a good point

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

There are some wonders that require a certain civic: WTC - Free Enterprise. Motherland Calls - Central Planning, Triumphal Arch - Constitution, Statue of Liberty - Democracy, Berlaymont - Multilateralism).


Should we add/restrict wonders to more civics or is it good as it is?

 

[freethink]

There are some wonders that require a certain civic: WTC - Free Enterprise. Motherland Calls - Central Planning, Triumphal Arch - Constitution, Statue of Liberty - Democracy, Berlaymont - Multilateralism).


Should we add/restrict wonders to more civics or is it good as it is?

The main point is that the game remains balanced especially for modern civics. If there are too many constitutions or free enterprise wonders the AI sill have even less of an incentive to establish, totalitarian/non-democratic systems which would actually be counter-intuitive. This actually makes me think of another point, in UN elections civs should not easily vote for global civics/free trade that contradicts their own societies. At the very least a dictatorial regime should be defying some resolutions.

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

The main point is that the game remains balanced especially for modern civics. If there are too many constitutions or free enterprise wonders the AI sill have even less of an incentive to establish, totalitarian/non-democratic systems which would actually be counter-intuitive. This actually makes me think of another point, in UN elections civs should not easily vote for global civics/free trade that contradicts their own societies. At the very least a dictatorial regime should be defying some resolutions.

Agree. I agree that there should not be many wonders per civic, only one that is associated with the civic. For example, Versailles is a monument to absolute monarchy so it should have either Monarchy or Centralism as its requirement. Himeji Castle makes sense to be restricted by Vassalage. I'm thinking that these civics need a wonder: Elective, Colonialism, Nationhood, State Party, Totalitarianism, Revolutionism, Public Welfare.

As for UN, it does not make sense either for the last civic in the row to be always the global one. There should be an option to either have that or the General Secretary's civic.

 

[Dominus the Mentat]

The tibetan swordsman that spawn regularly after the rise of tibet should be removed after its rise and replaced to spawn at the begining of the 9th century, ending in 1240, when Tibet was conquered by the Mongol Empire. If Tibet was united as an empire, why they still have enemies armies in their core land? Also, historically, the absence of enemies in the tibetan plateau was one of the motivations for the tibetans to expand into China, southern and central asia. My suggestion is to replace the barbarian spawns to the early years of 9th century is because at this time the Era of Fragmentation begins in Tibet. Its last emperor was assassinated and a civil war have begun between regional warlords, with many revolts that occured in the provinces of the empire, making it be fragmented into small kingdoms and tribes. This age of unrest was only ended with the conquest of Tibet by the Yuan dynasty in 1240, uniting Tibet under the khan's control.
Since this event is too much dependant of external factores, another suggestion, more close to its own society is the unification of Tibet by the Dalai Lamas, which would put the ending of the swordsman spawns to the begining of the 18th century.

For gameplay purposes, it would give Tibet a more easy start, since sometimes Lhasa is overrun by barbarian swordsman, which destroy every improvement the player builds and Tibet only begin with a few units that the player need to make survive at all costs or risk doom the entire gameplay. Also, would allow the player to have more work to build earlier missionaries and have more chances to win the second UHV goal. Also, the mid and late game would have more challenge for the player.

 

[Publicola]

Versailles is a monument to absolute monarchy so it should have either Monarchy or Centralism as its requirement. Himeji Castle makes sense to be restricted by Vassalage. I'm thinking that these civics need a wonder: Elective, Colonialism, Nationhood, State Party, Totalitarianism, Revolutionism, Public Welfare.

Pretty sure the 'Monarchy' civic refers to more ancient kings than early modern 'absolutism'. Definitely inclined to say 'Centralism' for Versailles.

Which tech/column unlocks 'Elective' and 'Revolutionism'? I'm forgetting when those become available.

Colonialism : El Escorial seems like the obvious choice here
Nationhood: possibly Triumphal Arch, or Brandenburg Gate? 'Motherland Calls' might also be a good fit.
State Party or Totalitarianism: Lubyanka fits with either.
(Alternately, a while ago someone suggested the never-built Volkshalle as a wonder; that might fit well with Totalitarianism. Or the Ryugyong Hotel in North Korea might work as well. But neither of these are existing wonders)
Public Welfare: not really sure... maybe 'Gardens by the Bay'?

 

[freethink]

Pretty sure the 'Monarchy' civic refers to more ancient kings than early modern 'absolutism'. Definitely inclined to say 'Centralism' for Versailles.

Which tech/column unlocks 'Elective' and 'Revolutionism'? I'm forgetting when those become available.

Colonialism : El Escorial seems like the obvious choice here
Nationhood: possibly Triumphal Arch, or Brandenburg Gate? 'Motherland Calls' might also be a good fit.
State Party or Totalitarianism: Lubyanka fits with either.
(Alternately, a while ago someone suggested the never-built Volkshalle as a wonder; that might fit well with Totalitarianism. Or the Ryugyong Hotel in North Korea might work as well. But neither of these are existing wonders)
Public Welfare: not really sure... maybe 'Gardens by the Bay'?

Do you think the Itaipu Dam goes with Public Welfare or State Party?

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

Do you think the Itaipu Dam goes with Public Welfare or State Party?

Was Brazil a one-party state or having a high-taxes/high-spending economy when they built it?

Pretty sure the 'Monarchy' civic refers to more ancient kings than early modern 'absolutism'. Definitely inclined to say 'Centralism' for Versailles.

Which tech/column unlocks 'Elective' and 'Revolutionism'? I'm forgetting when those become available.

Colonialism : El Escorial seems like the obvious choice here
Nationhood: possibly Triumphal Arch, or Brandenburg Gate? 'Motherland Calls' might also be a good fit.
State Party or Totalitarianism: Lubyanka fits with either.
(Alternately, a while ago someone suggested the never-built Volkshalle as a wonder; that might fit well with Totalitarianism. Or the Ryugyong Hotel in North Korea might work as well. But neither of these are existing wonders)
Public Welfare: not really sure... maybe 'Gardens by the Bay'?

Elective I think is unlocked by Politics, while Revolutionism is unlocked by Journalism. "Elective" is mostly represented by the HRE and Mongols, maybe Silver Tree Fountain could suit.

El Escorial doesn't mean a big deal for colonies, but gameplay-wise it is so I agree with locking it with Colonialism. In real life, it is to king Phillip II (Spain's most powerful monarch ever) what Versailles was to Louis XIV.

I agree about the other choices. I'm looking at Lubyanka and even its Civilopedia article states that it was a building that was repurposed to be the seat of the KGB. It would suit State Party but it would make it so a civic that gives +3 Espionage per specialist unlocks a wonder with the same effect so it would be OP espionage-wise.

Triumphal Arch makes no sense to me requiring Constitution, but Nationhood or Revolutionism could do. Napoleon's empire started it and restored Bourbons finished it. Both were absolute monarchies so it should be either of those two civics. One wonder that could make sense to require Constitution is Westminster, more or less. The UK does not have one single codified constitution but it works like a constitutional system. Also, Westminster is the seat of the Parliament, something that would not make sense in a country without a significative legislative body.

Speaking of requirements. I don't see any reason for Mole Antonelliana to be a Catholic Wonder. Both Wikipedia and Civilopedia state that it was originally built as a synagogue until the Jewish community changed its mind about it so it got repurposed to a secular, completely different thing.
I've also been thinking about something encouraging Latin American wonders (Chapultepec, Salt Cathedral, Cristo Redentor, etc.) to be built by Latin American civs or regions. For example, Guadalupe is required to be on a different continent than the Catholic holy city, while "developed" civs tend to snatch these wonders from their rightful builders. I remember a long time ago saying that Oxford should also have a similar requirement (pretty much locking it to England. Not my brightest idea though). So I have thought of maybe them being built next to certain features or resources, like jungles, mountains, hills, coasts, Bananas, Tobacco or Coffee.

 

[need my speed]

It strikes me that, indeed, the game uses many requirements to make sure a wonder goes to a certain (subset of) civilisations, such as how requiring Corn ensures the wonder is built in the Americas... Why not implement a 'requires continent'-tag, and use that one? Allow it to have 'or'-optons, and it should work nicely?

 

[Dracosolon]

Versailles would make sense for Centralism, but it's already a pretty good civic so I'm not sure that it needs the boost.

El Escorial for colonialism is an obvious fit.

Elective + Silk for the Silver Tree Fountain would do a good job at effectively restricting it to the Mongols (or Turkestan), though it seems to me that Despotism would still be vastly superior for them given the absurd non-core population they get otherwise.

Lubyanka should probably boost Totalitarianism more than State Party, which is already one of the strongest civics in the game.

Revolutionism needs the Triumphal Arc more than Nationhood does, but if it's supposed to be a stand-in for various similar buildings then Nationhood might be a better thematic fit.

Mole Antonelliana requiring the presence of Judaism instead of Catholicism could work, though it's worth noting that some religious requirements seem to just represent a particular cultural heritage so a Catholic requirement can still make sense even if the Wonder has nothing to do with Catholicism.

 

[Krieger-FS]

Do you think the Itaipu Dam goes with Public Welfare or State Party?

Was Brazil a one-party state or having a high-taxes/high-spending economy when they built it?

Brazil was a Military Dictatorship when built it. Wasn't a one-party state but it did have a high spending economy based in the developmentalist and industrialist policies, but it is hard to say that was a Public Welfare, since it was, you know, a dictatorship (with censorship, repression, and torture) and a period of major increase in social inequality.

 

[LukeAtmey]

Is there any chance of having an option to enable dynamic leaderhead change for the player as well?

 

[Leoreth]

I think it's better to respect the leaderhead choice the player makes when starting the game.

 

[Uncle Paul]

I think it's better to respect the leaderhead choice the player makes when starting the game.

Can you please add a link to all the possible leaders for a civ from its Civilopedia page, the way that unique buildings and units are linked there?

 

[ThreeBlackSevens]

I think Indonesia's UP could use a pretty significant buff, maybe like double the amount of gold it currently gets? It's just not really an amount that benefits you much at all, and very inconsistent.

Also, I think it could be good to move the advanced start thing to the turn after you build your first city, so that if you move to a different starting spot you can still get the boost.

 

[Leoreth]

That might be better, but you can actually already place improvements anywhere within your core/birth area even before having settled anywhere.

 

[Cacaso]

Also, I think it could be good to move the advanced start thing to the turn after you build your first city, so that if you move to a different starting spot you can still get the boost.

I also think this would be interesting, the advanced start would be much more useful to the player if he could wait to found a first city / or something like 2/3 turns. Because then it would be possible to add buildings in this new city, or distribute the buildings in a more equitable/strategic way among all cities (with the improvements this is not significant because it is already possible to apply them in the birth area, but with the buildings in the cities this wait would be useful)


Example:
In the current situation if you start with BrazilCIV, you start with a settler in the tile of the city of Rio de Janeiro, then you spend the first turn to move that settler to the location to found the city of Brasília (but you would need the next turn to founding the city), but as the Advanced start has already started, it is not possible to add buildings in Brasília and this city starts very weak and takes a long time to have the capacity to be productive in science/production.

If it is in this new changed situation, of waiting about 2/3 turns / until founding a city, this city of Brasília could be founded and benefited by adding buildings to it so that it becomes a productive city earlier in the game.

In the scenario of being the first city, the damage for not being able to add more buildings is even more pronounced.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Can you make it so watermills can coexist with other improvements on a tile? There's no reason that a mill on a river should prevent, say, a pasture or a farm from being built.

 

[HighFunctioningAlcoholic]

Can you make it so watermills can coexist with other improvements on a tile? There's no reason that a mill on a river should prevent, say, a pasture or a farm from being built.

That would probably benefit areas like Central Europe way too much; you would build a watermill on possibly the majority of your tiles. Also, this logic could apply to a lot of improvements (pasture/farm, workshop/anything else, etc).