A Civilization 5 wish I'd like to see is a big Earth Map that represents the Civs of the world today in terms of their current borders.
Basically, 18 civs start out but only the remaining civs between 1800AD - 2050AD remain at the end of the game. Therefore some civs would transform or attain their current borders. For example, the Americans would have all of North America except for Montezuma and Mexico. Montezuma would not send settlers to where Seattle or Chicago is and George Washington would not send settlers overseas or to South America. The same applies to India where they would be confined to the Indian continent, the Japanese to the islands, Saladin to the Arab pennisula.... etc.
No other civ would settle beyond their own borders. Areas such as Australia, Canada, Phillipines, Vietnam, would be settle by barbarians unless their is an Australia & Canada, Vietnamese & Phillipine Civilization in the Civ 5. Otherwise different barbarian civs for each continent would exist.
Ah I think the issue here is that this goes against the concept of the Civilization game. As someone earlier stated it would probably be left best as an idea for a "Scenario" concept.
The idea of the Civilization game is to create your own civilization (OR at least change the civilization you are playing) and raise it to be your own. It is the reason I personally believe that the game should be moving away from true historical accuracies... The game should not revolve around what happened in history but instead revolve around the possibilities of that civilization in a new history and world...
Otherwise we may aswell set it up so that game over occurs in about 300 AD for the Romans or 900 AD for the Byzantium as thats when those civs crumbled and in all truth I already hate the current gameover after 200 turns (Thank god you can continue though) to see a game over in what could be 50 turns would just make me scream lol.
Though I can see this being utilized so that the game limits how far you may build a new city without certain techs and stuff like that. An Ancient Period civ would never be able to efficiently hold a territory as large as the US without a ton of issues coming up at every corner of the Empire... Rome suffered a lot from this, I have always thought that Rome could have held out much longer if it didnt spend so much of its resources on these areas and just gave it up (Or at least some of it)...
AutomatedTeller I definately agree with the idea of enhancing Archers. Archers were a key piece in almost every military. China was said to be impenetrable due to its massive standing armies utilizing the Crossbow as its core weapon (Moreso than spears, swords or any weapon at all). Mongolia conquered almost the whole world thanks to the skilled horseback archers. Rome's "Great" (I used quotations cause I think they are overhyped) Legions were stopped by the Parthinians simply because the Romans Legions shields could not withstand the Parthinian Bow's strength and the Parthinians used hit and run tactics with these bows (It, to an extent, resulted in an overhall of the Roman Armies to include more Archers and Cavalry to deal with Archers).
eddiewillers I definately agree that food should be taken from elsewhere. One issue almost EVERY early civilization saw was that feeding armies was difficult. The earliest standing armies of Sumeria and Assyria had to cut campaigns short to return there soldiers back home for the Harvest seasons meaning that the armies were never really able to go out on proper full length campaigns, giving time for there enemies to re-cuperate and re-establish themselves. One solution was to use the vassal states to provide food for armies marching that direction, Romans constantly bled its Vassals dry for its armies and where able to conquer a lot of land due to it. I would personally like to see a proper Logistics system added where food must be taken from somewhere in specific (Maybe vassals or cities you have established on the front lines). Maybe the further an army marchers the weaker the Supply Line gets, resulting in less food for troops... Heck this could utilize the Civics stuff so that you can select a specific method of food provisions...
One of the biggest differences between modern combat and ancient combat is how much easier it has become to provide food to soldiers, more importantly its become easier on a global scale... It amazes me how the US are able to provide food to there soldiers in Iraq, you gotta respect how well they do it... And this is coming from a person who is Iraqi by blood
There are so many more examples of how well Logistics has advanced in the Modern Age:
-Vietnam
-Falkland Islands (Then again this was like a one week thing)
-US's Attack on Japan
-Japans Attack on US
Whereas in the past people like Alexander the Great (Considered as one of the best when it comes to logistics) had a hard enough time trying to figure out how to feed their soldiers. Alexanders biggest accomplishment was marching his men over the mountains, and his attack on India, both requiring very well planned logistics in an era where it was very difficult to transport goods.
![[party]](/images/smilies/partytime.gif "Party [party]")
