Suggestions and Requests

manio curio said:
interesting material, could you please share the spreadsheet with Italy and Rome? I would like to contribute
Click to expand...
That spreadsheet is only for the new civs (or renamed civs like the dravidians)! You can just make suggestions for Rome or Italy however tou want
 

The Harappans/Indus Valley Civilization:​

I didn't want to make a whole separate post for this civilization, because, unlike Egypt, this civilization is fairly simple, and doesn't really interact with any other civilizations. But I would still like to share my thoughts on the Harappans, and some possible changes.

Historical Goals:​

1.) Establish a trade connection by turn 42; This requires the player to go down a tech path they would probably avoid if not necessary for getting a trade connection, thus adding a small degree of difficulty to the next two goals. I would just say there is room to make this deadline a little more strict if you wanted to, as I completed it on turn 29.

2.) Construct three reservoirs, two granaries, and two weavers by turn 55. Again, no complaints here with the basic premise of the goal, its good to have a goal promoting infrastructure development before the population growth goal. But I think there is room here to make the goal a bit more strict if you wanted to, as I felt like I had plenty of time to achieve it. A note about building the weaver: It currently doesn't do a whole lot for the Harappan historical game. There is a cotton resource that can be developed with Calendar, a sheep that is covered with forest, and some dye that is covered with rainforest and savanna. Since Alloys is too out of the way for the Harappans tech path, I suggest that the forest and savanna be removed from the sheep and dye in the Harappan area, in order to encourage their settlement and development, and give the weaver some utility. Also, since happiness is probably your biggest enemy in the Harappan game.

3.) Have a total population of 45 by turn 97. So of course I love the population goal, that's what the entire Harappan game and toolkit has been building to up until this point. However, I think we should go about it slightly different. I recommend the goal should be changed to "Control a total population of 50 inside historical territory by turn 92. More population, less time, and less territory allowed. In my game, I won with 45 population in historical territory on turn 84, so this should be roughly doable. Requiring population in historical territory would also obsolete the old cheap strategy of spamming out City Builders, and settling them all on a single turn, to meet the population goal.

On the topic of historical territory, I don't understand why the Harappans have a sizeable Conquest Area to the north of their spawn. From my understanding, the Harappans were never found to have military weapons, nor murals depicting warfare, and are presumed to have been peaceful? I recommend this Conquest Area be changed to Historical Territory. And Harappa has a random historical tile in Afghanistan which, Google tells me, was a trading outpost of the Harappans? I think it's cool, a great incentive for the player to go settle up where they otherwise wouldn't.

Barbarians:​

In my opinion, I don't think barbarians have a place in the Harappan historical game. As I referenced earlier, the Harappans are thought to be very peaceful, and I think with this civilization, we have the opportunity to craft one of the only civilizations without any outside threat, and just be forced to contend with internal conflicts. I think there is enough barbarian gameplay in the other civilization gameplays, the Harappans should have this as a unique aspect. I propose those barbarian chariots and swordsmen spawns be removed if the Harappans are still alive, at least until the end of the historical game. Increasing the population goal in UHV3 would keep the game sufficiently difficult, if the barbarian threat is removed.

Great Bath (of Mohenjo-Daro):​

I'd like to make another plug for this wonder. :) I hate to see the Harappans as the only 3000 BC civilization without a single wonder, and I think this wonder would tie in very nicely with the Harappan unique power and goal.
I found this model and movie on the forums:

The Great Bath of Mohenjo-daro Wonder (XML+Python)

I made this for my Thomas' War mod The Great Bath of Mohenjo-daro: Kinda self explanatory. Once you build it the city plot becomes a source of fresh water (for farms etc). This does not obsolete. If you own the wonder any settler...
forums.civfanatics.com

That version of the Great Bath gives a source of fresh water and an extra population in new cities, which is mostly unnecessary and already covered by the City Builder unique unit

However, I suggest:
  • +2 :health: (stolen from Aqua Appia, Romans don't need more health! More health works perfectly with the Harappan unique power)
  • 180 :hammers: cost, double production speed with stone
  • Inspires a Great Engineer
  • Requires Masonry, Obsoletes at Medicine
Having more health in all your cities would help your many cities grow to help meet the population goal.
 
Anyone else feel like medieval units are a bit "uninspired"?

My main thought is perhaps that it's all a bit mushed together, Things like pikemen should be late pike-and-shotte, but often feel like they cover the space that heavy spearman occupies. Dunno, crossbowmen too, I feel they come a bit too early.

id like to see a bigger divide between the early middle ages and the late ones.
 
I'd like to see a bigger division too, not just with land units but with sea units as well. I actually have a whole post written up on Renaissance, Global, and Digital age sea units but I'm sitting on it until 1.18 is in a more balanced state and we have time to think about minutiae like units.
 
Probably it was already asked, but we need move Saint Basil's Cathedral to Firearms or Statecraft.

1st - Russia have no chances to get Urban Planning and build Cathedral before 1550
2nd - since Cathedral was build in commemorates the capture of Kazan where one of the first time Streletz was used so, Firearms are suit
or Statecraft - as Ivan IV made huge expansion of Moscow state beyond traditional Rus area and the end influence of the Golden Horde splinters
3d - and any way there no other Orthodox civs on map usually, so it have no impact on other civs
 
banzay13 said:
Probably it was already asked, but we need move Saint Basil's Cathedral to Firearms or Statecraft.

1st - Russia have no chances to get Urban Planning and build Cathedral before 1550
2nd - since Cathedral was build in commemorates the capture of Kazan where one of the first time Streletz was used so, Firearms are suit
or Statecraft - as Ivan IV made huge expansion of Moscow state beyond traditional Rus area and the end influence of the Golden Horde splinters
3d - and any way there no other Orthodox civs on map usually, so it have no impact on other civs
Click to expand...
Also it means the UHV no longer relies on getting good RNG from the Turks, Byzantines, and Arabia and being able to conquer Byzantium before the Ottomans do.
 
Taking inspiration from Pie's ancient Europe I would suggest enabling the purchase of military promotion to mock military training. If a unit is 'trained' it cannot move during that turn. I am not sure if it is better to allow this only for the UU or all units. I would slightly prefer UU only but still thinking.
 
I should probably mention how the Aztec unique power feels pretty awful to me.

Losing 1 happiness in your capital for 10 turns that stacks, for a mere golden age for just 1 turn absolutely does not seem like a trade-off to me.

80 turns of 8 unhappiness for a measly 8 turn golden age is absolutely not worth it, especially when you can sell all those slaves to make 800 in money.

It also synchronises terribly with the population UHV that the Aztecs have.

Maybe it’s meant to be useless and actively detrimental to your nation; human sacrifice wasn’t exactly “meta” in real life, but honestly, this could lose the unhappiness altogether, and even then it wouldn’t even be that viable.
 
Apple111111 said:
human sacrifice wasn’t exactly “meta” in real life
Click to expand...
1*4Cd2uxKrlL3UUf-z5cZSgw.jpeg
 
I would suggest adding a watermark on the "'nameplayer' achieves a historical victory" screen message if the player in question enters the worldbuilder. Same on the score recap table. Similar with the civ II 'used cheat mode' watermark which hopefully I am not the only one old enough to remember.
 
Is the only benefit to building a major canal, be it by building a city or a fort is seemingly gaining/controlling passage through that space? I think there should be some extra perks to controlling the Panama Canal, Bosporus Strait or Suez Canal. For example, it could increase other civilizations' willingness to have open borders, or have a tile boost in gold, or something. The other side of that is it seems too easy to build these passageways, maybe it should be more difficult. A wonder representing them doesn't really make sense as they can only be built in very specific geographic spaces, but some perk would be interesting.
 
Bu77Trout said:
Is the only benefit to building a major canal, be it by building a city or a fort is seemingly gaining/controlling passage through that space? I think there should be some extra perks to controlling the Panama Canal, Bosporus Strait or Suez Canal. For example, it could increase other civilizations' willingness to have open borders, or have a tile boost in gold, or something. The other side of that is it seems too easy to build these passageways, maybe it should be more difficult. A wonder representing them doesn't really make sense as they can only be built in very specific geographic spaces, but some perk would be interesting.
Click to expand...
Giving +1 trade route or +5 gold on cities and forts along straits would be really cool, maybe without a special graphic, or with a special graphic of having like, ships in the water of the tile if that's possible. Would be kinda broken for the Strait of Malacca, but the Strait of Malacca is kinda broken historically, entire civilizations were funded on trade going through there.
 
Bu77Trout said:
Is the only benefit to building a major canal, be it by building a city or a fort is seemingly gaining/controlling passage through that space? I think there should be some extra perks to controlling the Panama Canal, Bosporus Strait or Suez Canal. For example, it could increase other civilizations' willingness to have open borders, or have a tile boost in gold, or something. The other side of that is it seems too easy to build these passageways, maybe it should be more difficult. A wonder representing them doesn't really make sense as they can only be built in very specific geographic spaces, but some perk would be interesting.
Click to expand...

If it's technically feasible, I could see a wonder working. They could only be built in a specific area, kind of like how solar plants can only be built at a certain latitude. The Panama Canal could only be built in cities on the tiles currently designated 'Central America', add a new region just with the feasible tiles. Same for the Suez and maybe a couple of others like the proposed Thai Canal. The wonder could then give commerce bonuses based on how many open borders the controlling civ has
 
Happily, both Suez and Panama canals run pretty much straight north-south, so you could even use the same graphic (build wonder --> auto-place improvement on tile?) Similar to the graphic variants for resources (dyes, camels, etc.) this could be a graphical variant for the 'fort' improvement, albeit with no option to raze it and with separate bonuses given by the wonder itself. (I do like the 'extra commerce per open borders' idea, that fits really well. Or perhaps '+1 trade route per open borders', so it scales with any other bonuses to trade routes in the city).
 
Nobody remembers the Sound Strait :(

The strait between Copenhagen and Scania, Sweden. Historically, until 1850s, it was Denmark's biggest tax revenue with the Strait Toll. In fact, Copenhagen's capital decision was solely because it was even closer to the coast than Roskilde.
 
Does the new map and untangled civ slots open up the possibility of brining in some minor civs for the ancient era? Civs like Elam who could start from around 3000BC (or even more peripheral and later like Colchis). They'd be unplayable so wouldn't require the same amount of effort to add them, and would be conquered or destroyed by around 1000BC to 500BC so wouldn't impact the later game or take up civ slots when the world starts to get busy. Basically take some of the independent cities and turn them into minor civs, ideally make them contactable for civs where leaderheads are available. Would add some more intrigue and diplomacy to the first 2000 years of the game, especially with the new playable civs that have been recently added. Make the barb or conqueror swarms raze-happy if the minors build bad cities to give the the region a reset around the bronze age collapse or later conqueror events
 
Suggestion: Give Great Scientists the ability to hurry production of Space Ship parts and Projects. When you're at the point of building a space ship you no longer have much need for research as most techs are already researched and thus no need for Great Scientists. It would also make sense from an immersion angle to be able to use scientists for space endeavours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nikas Kunitz
Russia and Rus civilizations thread: suggestions and discussion.
Replies
7
Views
2K
Apple111111
A
Leoreth
New Map City Names Development Thread
2
Replies
24
Views
4K
Leoreth
Leoreth
L
A Proposal to improve Crete
Replies
13
Views
959
Lennon789
L
Hickman888
The Phoenicia Thread
Replies
6
Views
1K
1SDANi
1SDANi
T
Religious Victory Thread
Replies
7
Views
882
Tak Tubo
T
Back
Top Bottom