Suggestions and Requests

[trexeric]

Either or both of those would be cool, and I've advocated for adding the Temple at Uppsala and Þingvellir as potential pagan Viking wonders in the past. I also think that limiting the UP to only working under paganism would be a great constraint for the player. Though Christianization did not end the Viking Age (and indeed most rulers in Scandinavia were at least nominally Christian well before 1066), it was certainly one of the factors that contributed to it, and it would be pleasingly efficient to represent the Christianization, the Norse resistance to Christianization, and the impermanence of the Viking Age all with that one UP change.

 

[Dracosolon]

There's also this proposal by Publicola:

Okay, let's write this up as a full proposal:

Jomsborg

Primary Effect: all units get +10% combat bonus when attacking cities with a state religion (or boost it to 20%? Not really sure; that seems a bit OP)
OR
Primary Effect: Units get +25% bonus to loot when capturing cities with a state religion (or boost it to 50%? Same issue as above)
OR
Primary Effect: all units produced here get free City Raider I promotions (and City Raider II?)

Great People Points: Great General

Double Production Bonus: either Stone or Furs, depending on whether we use Furs as a required resource

Tech Requirement: Generalship?

(I wanted something early enough that the Vikings could build it shortly after spawn, and 'Generalship' fit the military theme for this wonder -- it's not notable for its construction or appearance, but for the military order that was based there).​

Obsolete by: Clergy?

(It was destroyed by the Christian king Magnus the Good during the period when Scandinavia was being Christianized, so Clergy fits)​

Other Requirements: Coastal city + 'Pantheon' civic + 'Furs' resource

(Coastal because it's a harbor fortress, Pantheon because it's a military order dedicated to the Norse gods, Furs to geographically restrict it to northern Europe. Though if we do add an early native American civ to the game with the new big map, it'd be hilarious to see this wonder built in early America...)​

Paganism + Fur might be a bit too conveniently restrictive for the Vikings, but maybe it could be something like:

- Requires Fur, coastal city.
- Gives a bonus (pillage? city attack?) against civs or cities with a different religion. That way you're still encouraged to not convert if your targets are mostly Catholic, but some rival civ like England or Russia can potentially build it if you're not fast enough.

 

[smileywalk]

Stacking melee and archery units does not enable the archery unit to strike an opposing melee unit without getting engaged in direct combat. If the archery unit is weaker than the stacked melee unit, the archery unit does nothing while the melee units fight it out. This is contrary to the very nature of archers being SUPPORT troops. In real life, archers would be protected behind melee soldiers and would fire on the enemy without getting engaged. I propose supporting fire ability for archers and gunpowder units if they are present at a melee or pre-gunpowder cavalry battle. I would use the first strike number to calculate the damage inflicted by supporting fire.

 

[smileywalk]

So I'm playing China and Kunming is my southern city bordering Indochina. I knew war elephants were gonna appear and positioned two spearmen at the border. Guess what? The elephant appeared THREE tiles within my territory. Barbarians should not appear deep within your land, right? Maybe at the outermost tile but that's it. Not to mention that this elephant destroyed my paddy field. That's another thing. How do you destroy a paddy field? It should be possible to destroy improvements that can be set on fire but not a paddy field. Mines can only be blown up, so I'd make then destructible when 1/2 of civilizations have gunpowder.

 

[Dracosolon]

The elephant ate all the rice and crapped in the field.

 

[Leoreth]

Barbarians should not appear deep within your land, right? Maybe at the outermost tile but that's it. Not to mention that this elephant destroyed my paddy field. That's another thing. How do you destroy a paddy field? It should be possible to destroy improvements that can be set on fire but not a paddy field.

Me posting during the warring states period

 

[Logoncal]

Me posting during the warring states period

This Fella would have fun trying out India, Russia or Persia.

 

[CometHalo]

I’m not sure how feasible the transformation from land unit to sea unit but I have always thought Civ4 should allow inland cities to build ships (maybe a unit named “Galleon (parts)” or something) and then you bring it via road to a port city or fort and it turns into a ship

 

[smileywalk]

Barbarians invading China are suicidal. I fortify my cho-ko-nu at the border preferably on hills and horse archers attack them almost always. If their goal is to pillage and capture cities, they should go past my border troops and wreak havoc. That would make defending a long border challenging. The way it is now is unrealistic and too easy.

 

[Gen1_]

But it's how barb IA works.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

I’m not sure how feasible the transformation from land unit to sea unit but I have always thought Civ4 should allow inland cities to build ships (maybe a unit named “Galleon (parts)” or something) and then you bring it via road to a port city or fort and it turns into a ship

Yo Mehmet.

 

[IrishDragon]

Create a unit similar to the persecutor, except it can remove a foreign core area tile from other civs

- It should take a number of turns, during which it generates hostile enemy units
- It should have a (probably lowish) chance of being successful
- You suffer a permanent diplo hit with that civ for attempted genocide, including any rebirths
- You suffer a diplo hit with their allies/friends, and any civ running multilateralism/democracy if in the modern era. Maybe even the possibility of war declarations
- You gain the possible stability benefits of removing some/all of a foreign core from your territory, and reducing the probability of losing cities to a rebirth

 

[smileywalk]

When another civ is about to cancel a trade deal, you can renegotiate the deal. Apparently not the same when YOU want to renegotiate. I made a deal to trade gold and rice for gems to save a little gold. Later I wanted the rice back for myself and was willing to pay more gold for gems. I thought I could cancel the deal and make a new one. Surprise! Gems disappeared from the trade menu once I canceled the deal. There should be a way for the player to renegotiate deals if he/she wants to.

 

[Cypriot]

Create a unit similar to the persecutor, except it can remove a foreign core area tile from other civs

- It should take a number of turns, during which it generates hostile enemy units
- It should have a (probably lowish) chance of being successful
- You suffer a permanent diplo hit with that civ for attempted genocide, including any rebirths
- You suffer a diplo hit with their allies/friends, and any civ running multilateralism/democracy if in the modern era. Maybe even the possibility of war declarations
- You gain the possible stability benefits of removing some/all of a foreign core from your territory, and reducing the probability of losing cities to a rebirth

I think it would be pretty much useless. Foreign cores do not give any additional stability penalty (except for overextension), but poor diplomatic relations do, and a lot. So I doubt additional stability for no foreign cores will end up beneficial. Rebirths do not happen if you are on solid (or probably even stable) anyway, so there is no real benefit to use this unit.

 

[Leoreth]

Barbarians invading China are suicidal. I fortify my cho-ko-nu at the border preferably on hills and horse archers attack them almost always. If their goal is to pillage and capture cities, they should go past my border troops and wreak havoc. That would make defending a long border challenging. The way it is now is unrealistic and too easy.

Not to say you are wrong to give this feedback, but right now it seems that you come to post in this thread for every small unexpected thing that happens in your ongoing game. Maybe it makes more sense to finish your game, and perhaps play more than one civilization, and then give more comprehensive feedback after that.

 

[hnrysml]

I’m not sure how feasible the transformation from land unit to sea unit but I have always thought Civ4 should allow inland cities to build ships (maybe a unit named “Galleon (parts)” or something) and then you bring it via road to a port city or fort and it turns into a ship

Why? Certainly the raw materials for ships can come from inland but historically and even today ships are almost exclusively built in port cities or those on a few large rivers (which would be the exceptions to the rule).

 

[Logoncal]

Why? Certainly the raw materials for ships can come from inland but historically and even today ships are almost exclusively built in port cities or those on a few large rivers (which would be the exceptions to the rule).

The only famous example of building a ship and taking to the sea if i recall was Garibaldi doing it on Laguna, during the Farrapos War.
But thats it. A very strange suggestion.

 

[Dracosolon]

Yeah, there is naval activity in-land but that's probably not worth representing. At most there could be something simple, like letting cities by a river build Harbors (to add to tiles in their second ring and allow Wharfs), but that's another bonus to rivers and those are already pretty powerful.

 

[Logoncal]

Yeah, there is naval activity in-land but that's probably not worth representing. At most there could be something simple, like letting cities by a river build Harbors (to add to tiles in their second ring and allow Wharfs), but that's another bonus to rivers and those are already pretty powerful.

Best way to make Dujiangyan completely trivial.

 

[Dracosolon]

I meant food on sea tiles, obviously.