The Civ V wish-list!!!

[rysmiel]

I like the workers. And I very much approve of them being different from settlers now.

I can see arguments either way.

One of the things I like most about the Rise and Rule mod is that there are upgradable worker units, upgradable settler units, and upgradable settler units with some worker abilities, all of which have different costs as appropriate.

 

[Camikaze]

I have a Mac. It is getting old, but still does pretty much what I need it to do (browse intarweb, watch anime), except play CIV 4 well. But for some design discussions, I think it is designed fine. It's just slow, bloated, and crashes; and has an annoying visual bug which can't be fixed (map graphics go all wonky). Today I had to wait about a whole hour for one turn to pass so I could make decisions for my civ (huge map 14 cities, renaisance era)...I decided to turn off the game.

If it's the same problem I used to have, just zoom out and back in and it will be temporarily fixed. And reload the game every now and then and the problem (where some tiles go either black or purple, yes?), should not happen as often. Reloading also increases speed in between turns for some reason I can't remember.

 

[Sky Viper]

Camikaze ... the America thingy was a real life example Look at USA's military range in real life. They got tanks, modrn armors, marines, seals, mechs, planes, etc.
But in Civ IV they put Marines and Mechs as 1 thing. They should both units unique. Say Rifleman can be upgraded to a marine or a Mech. ( which ever 1 the player can afford)

 

[LeHam]

#1. A more comprehensive In-game Worldbuilder, or, at least, one that has its modding instructions in the Civilopedia so players don't have to look it up online.

#2. An option like the one for the RevolutionDCM mod that if selected allows for new civilizations to pop up in the middle of the game.

Those are the major things.

EDIT: I have been reading some other posts, and I am convinced that there should be a graphics option that allows for more toned-down graphics, along the lines of CivIII. CivIV graphics can really slow down big games but CivI and II graphics are downright ugly.

EDIT-EDIT: Economy is very simplified. It would be good to have managing the economy as a more distinct part of Civ. If some of you here do not like that idea (as I am sure some of you don't), why not make it another option to have?

 

[rysmiel]

Camikaze ... the America thingy was a real life example

That's precisely what's wrong with it.

Realism is secondary. A good game is primary. It is not a failure in a game to not be realistic; it is a failure in a game to not be good.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Diplomacy could be improved. For example, I'd like an option where you enter a military pact with another civ which entails going to war with a third civ if your ally decides to do so. The reward would be more friendliness from your ally than results from a merely defensive pact.

Also, Isabella and some other leaders hate those who don't share their religion. An option to offer free entry to your lands for that leader's missionaries (but no other units) could be useful in several ways. Would Isabella really say "No" to such an offer?

 

[Camikaze]

Camikaze ... the America thingy was a real life example Look at USA's military range in real life. They got tanks, modrn armors, marines, seals, mechs, planes, etc.
But in Civ IV they put Marines and Mechs as 1 thing. They should both units unique. Say Rifleman can be upgraded to a marine or a Mech. ( which ever 1 the player can afford)

I think Camikaze's point was that the modern USA does not actually have a range of units for different combat roles, just a bunch of un-upgraded units. In fact, Camikaze must think that "combat roles" is probably just a euphemism for "We don't have enough funds to turn all our soldiers into Mechanized Infantry!"

Yes, you can thank me for putting words in your mouth, Camikaze. It's the least I can do.

Thank you for putting words in my mouth, flyingchicken. That's pretty much right. My point was that in the game you can have Tanks and Modern Armor, Infantry and Mech Inf. at the same time. Building them is another thing, but for simplification purposes, I think it's no big loss.

 

[vinx98]

MY OTHER IDEA – and it’s just gives the game another thing to aim for. I love at the end of my game to check out my great cities, but there are only 5 of them to see… I want to extend this concept so that there is a hall of fame for cities, so one of the objectives of the game is to build the biggest, greatest city ever! For example, I made a city which ended up with a size of “26”, and I think it might be the greatest city I’ve ever created – but after that game is ended, I lose that city and the memory of that city forever – so it would be great if we could store the attributes of that city and admire it forever!

In addition to the above - it could be one of the "win" objectives - to build a great city of legendary status or certain type of size. The most important thing though is that the city should be re loadable and you should be able to have a look at it even after you have finished playing the game.

 

[vinx98]

I like your ideas: the point is twofold, in one hand each city already represents a whole region (its tiles of cultural influence) and military units are used to keep it from rioting and or seceding, as well as buildings. But it is quiet corny, so if we had municipalities (tribes, counties, states, federal territories, as well as colonies and then protectorates, each according to a new tech) then we could have a new dimension an also less micromanaging:

By having techs and or buildings that produce "Political Units" then one could create these municipalities and treat them as one city if you like. There will be sparsely populated areas treated as one municipality (meaning no more useless tiles) and as you pointed out one cities that are big enough to account for its own municipality.

The point is obvious: You don't spend the same time managing your top 3 cities, than your 8 farthest and least productive cities.

Each Region should or could have its official seat in one city, something intermediate between a Courthouse and a Forbidden Palace.

Vassal regions would probably be under military leadership and should not be able to build a courthouse-X-forbidden palace until certain % of "Native" Culture is achieved.

This brings me to my next point: Ethnicity and degree of National Unity:

Suppose at the beginning of the game a friendly tribe joins you. It doesn't mean its population has assimilated, the city resulting from it should be different (culturally) than a city resulting from a settler from your own tribe. In the latter game Techs such as Constitution would allow for fully multicultural states that would almost eliminate what I'd call "Cultural Corruption". During the mid game, religion could be another alternative to reduce this cultural corruption, assuring a united empire.

Linguistics would be the easier way to differentiate the different ethnicities as given by code (de natura).
Religion and techs would be the way in which ethnicities result in nations, as created by the user/s and AI (de praxis).

in addition to the above - another idea - at present you can choose to play against preset empires - like spain, england, USA, etc... but an idea that I had which could make things fun... is that you could select to play against empires that you CREATED IN PAST GAMES..

For example, say last week I created an empire called John Smith of the Smith Empire with the Smithson culture, etc called my Capital Smithton and second city Smith City, etc - this week I start a new game and as well as giving the option of playing the Mayas, USA, Spain, etc I can also play against the Smith Empire I created last week.. and the main cities of that empire will be the cities that I created within that empire, the capital of that competitor is Smithton, their second city Smithton, etc....

So basically you are playing against an empire which you already created...

I think it will be a fun addition..

 

[AugustuCeasar]

in addition to the above - another idea - at present you can choose to play against preset empires - like spain, england, usa, etc... But an idea that i had which could make things fun... Is that you could select to play against empires that you created in past games..

For example, say last week i created an empire called john smith of the smith empire with the smithson culture, etc called my capital smithton and second city smith city, etc - this week i start a new game and as well as giving the option of playing the mayas, usa, spain, etc i can also play against the smith empire i created last week.. And the main cities of that empire will be the cities that i created within that empire, the capital of that competitor is smithton, their second city smithton, etc....

So basically you are playing against an empire which you already created...

I think it will be a fun addition..

that would be awesome!!!!!!! =o

 

[AugustuCeasar]

Someone should make a game (or unofficial patch) of that.

Anyone have any programming skillz?

 

[GaelicMagyar]

The game looks and sounds great. However there is one little niggle I have had since Civ IV was released and that was that the citizens no longer appeared in the game. Starting in Civ IV there was no more changing of era's, the leaders no-longer changed their look as the times changed, and the citizens (the stuff of which empires are built) were effectively replaced by a silly little smilie (or angry, or sickie). Considering how much time and attention has been afforded the leaders and their grand new scenes (with authentic language), I find it sad that the Citizens are no more, or even the building of the palace. Maybe not a huge detail, but a pleasing one. The sensation of time passing has been significantly diminished by the lack of a human look to the now, almost purely, statistic look of the game.

Muchly appreciated all the same, Thomas.

 

[Skallagrimson]

I browsed the new features of the Civ5 game in development and I like what I see so far.

SOME of my long-standing wish list items (as a result of long hours playing Civ4) are included, it appears, but I'll still include them in my list below just to show some areas where Civ4 has always needed improvement:

1. Borders should be negotiated by treaty. This has throughout history always been the main topic of inter-civilization negotiations, quibbling over acres of land. Kings never sat down and argued over handing over technology secrets most of the time, it was about LAND. That's absent in Civs 1 through 4 and would be a remarkable coup to add it in Civ5 (if there's still time?)

2. Technology "leaks", not only through spies, but simply living next to a high-tech civ should at least give a neighbor some points or added bonus of research rate towards those techs. In reality that's how technology has always spread: guy shows up at a village with a new steel sword, and the locals say "gee that looks fine, how do you make a sword like that?" If they're lucky he's a blacksmith and "for a price" is willing to show them how. It spreads from that village to the next, and so on. I'd even go so far as to say that one half or more of a civilization's technology should get leaked into it via "general spread" rather than some leader decided "we need to research that".

3. Siege weapons are ranged weapons. They should behave the same as bombers do in BTS, just with a shorter range than bombers, and can only be "intercepted" by cavalry (when tech levels are compatible, that is, a primitive cavalry unit shouldn't be able to intercept a modern mobile artillery no matter how hard they charge!)

4. It would be super-fun to have a split between a campaign level screen (the traditional Civ map) and a tactical level screen that you go into when a battle takes place (similar concept to Medieval Total War). And on top of this have a fun little romp routine (not unlike Grand Theft Auto) when "sacking" a city (although in the modern era that would cost unhappy citizens due to "the world considers you a villain!", in which case you'd probably want to "treat the citizens professionally" or some such, no more rape-and-pillage, get that out of your system in medieval times!)

5. Players shouldn't have to design their own mods or learn Python to make realistic scenarios from times in actual earth history, e.g., the Norman Conquest of Britain. At the very least there should be a custom scenario that starts with the actual earth map and lets the player choose which civs start where on that map.

6. New resources:
a) Yarrow -- required for Longbowmen
b) Tobacco -- 2 happy, 1 unhealthy
c) (change) Sugar -- 2 happy, 1 unhealthy
d) Tin -- 1 hammer, required with copper (bronze) for Axemen; 1 happy with Forge (pewter ware)
e) Rubber (special plantation, requires Chemistry) -- 1 hammer, +100% road movement after Combustion
f) Natural Gas -- 1 hammer, removes unhealthy penalty from coal and oil in factories, etc. ("alternative" energy source)
g) Wood as a resource -- 1 hammer, required for all wood-based units (catapults, trebuchets, wood ships, etc.), requires forest and a road; as with other resources, can (must) be traded for by civs lacking any wood or that have chopped away all their forest.
h) "Recreational drugs" (coca, hashish, etc.) -- 1 happy, 2 unhealthy
i) "Psychedelic drugs" (mushrooms, etc.) --+3 GPPs for Great Prophet, increased risk of "accident" events (e.g., forge fires)
j) Tea (plantation) -- 1 happy
k) Cherries (plantation) -- general non-tropical fruit resource analogous to "bananas" in jungle areas, 1 healthy
j) Chickens (coop, req. Animal Husbandry) -- 1 healthy, food value similar to Sheep

7. Unique National Wonders (some examples):
a) Egyptian, The Great Pyramid (no longer "world" wonder), enables all ECONOMY civics (instead of government, which would be an imbalanced overpower for Egyptian civs)
b) English, London Bridge (2 free Engineers in city)
c) American, Route 66 (+100% road/rail travel on continent)
d) French, Arc de Triomphe (-75% war weariness)
e) Mongols, Tatu Aqueduct (+2 food, +2 healthy, all cities on continent)
f) Chinese, Great Wall (of course)
...etc.

In fact the concept of a "world" wonder shouldn't really be a named wonder from known earth history, but rather generic Wonders that open up with each new technology, e.g., Great Archery wonder at Archery, archery units +2 XP... etc. The named wonders should all be unique to a nation for a realistic feel (no more of this "Eiffel Tower of Moscow" crappola!)

8) Some more particularly "world war I" era units:
a) "Doughboy" (between Rifleman and Infantry in strength, etc., let them wear a "Smokey the Bear" style campaign hat or perhaps different graphics based on the nation)
b) "Machine Gun Tank" (Infantry strength + about 2, +100% versus Machine Guns, same movement as Doughboys)
c) "Heavy Cavalry" (like a mobile Doughboy)
d) workers can build "Trench" (like a fortress but more defensive bonus)
e) "Tank Trap" (stationary unit built by workers, tanks cannot pass)
f) "Combat Engineer" (can blow up Tank Traps, sap Trenches, etc.)
g) "Biplane" (half the range and strength of Fighter, similar in other respects, requires Flight; newer Fighters and Bombers both require Radio)

=============

Things I do like about Civ4 that I hope don't change (too much) are:
1) The economy engine in general, completely owns
2) AI predictability (lol, gotta give us weak-minded humans SOME advantage now!)
3) Movies for the wonders are generally stellar, like the style
4) Graphics in general are pretty good although I also like the Civ5 screenshots
5) LOVE those paratroopers!

(end on a positive note, right?)

 

[evirus]

Spoiler :

I browsed the new features of the Civ5 game in development and I like what I see so far.

SOME of my long-standing wish list items (as a result of long hours playing Civ4) are included, it appears, but I'll still include them in my list below just to show some areas where Civ4 has always needed improvement:

1. Borders should be negotiated by treaty. This has throughout history always been the main topic of inter-civilization negotiations, quibbling over acres of land. Kings never sat down and argued over handing over technology secrets most of the time, it was about LAND. That's absent in Civs 1 through 4 and would be a remarkable coup to add it in Civ5 (if there's still time?)

2. Technology "leaks", not only through spies, but simply living next to a high-tech civ should at least give a neighbor some points or added bonus of research rate towards those techs. In reality that's how technology has always spread: guy shows up at a village with a new steel sword, and the locals say "gee that looks fine, how do you make a sword like that?" If they're lucky he's a blacksmith and "for a price" is willing to show them how. It spreads from that village to the next, and so on. I'd even go so far as to say that one half or more of a civilization's technology should get leaked into it via "general spread" rather than some leader decided "we need to research that".

3. Siege weapons are ranged weapons. They should behave the same as bombers do in BTS, just with a shorter range than bombers, and can only be "intercepted" by cavalry (when tech levels are compatible, that is, a primitive cavalry unit shouldn't be able to intercept a modern mobile artillery no matter how hard they charge!)

4. It would be super-fun to have a split between a campaign level screen (the traditional Civ map) and a tactical level screen that you go into when a battle takes place (similar concept to Medieval Total War). And on top of this have a fun little romp routine (not unlike Grand Theft Auto) when "sacking" a city (although in the modern era that would cost unhappy citizens due to "the world considers you a villain!", in which case you'd probably want to "treat the citizens professionally" or some such, no more rape-and-pillage, get that out of your system in medieval times!)

5. Players shouldn't have to design their own mods or learn Python to make realistic scenarios from times in actual earth history, e.g., the Norman Conquest of Britain. At the very least there should be a custom scenario that starts with the actual earth map and lets the player choose which civs start where on that map.

6. New resources:
a) Yarrow -- required for Longbowmen
b) Tobacco -- 2 happy, 1 unhealthy
c) (change) Sugar -- 2 happy, 1 unhealthy
d) Tin -- 1 hammer, required with copper (bronze) for Axemen; 1 happy with Forge (pewter ware)
e) Rubber (special plantation, requires Chemistry) -- 1 hammer, +100% road movement after Combustion
f) Natural Gas -- 1 hammer, removes unhealthy penalty from coal and oil in factories, etc. ("alternative" energy source)
g) Wood as a resource -- 1 hammer, required for all wood-based units (catapults, trebuchets, wood ships, etc.), requires forest and a road; as with other resources, can (must) be traded for by civs lacking any wood or that have chopped away all their forest.
h) "Recreational drugs" (coca, hashish, etc.) -- 1 happy, 2 unhealthy
i) "Psychedelic drugs" (mushrooms, etc.) --+3 GPPs for Great Prophet, increased risk of "accident" events (e.g., forge fires)
j) Tea (plantation) -- 1 happy
k) Cherries (plantation) -- general non-tropical fruit resource analogous to "bananas" in jungle areas, 1 healthy
j) Chickens (coop, req. Animal Husbandry) -- 1 healthy, food value similar to Sheep

7. Unique National Wonders (some examples):
a) Egyptian, The Great Pyramid (no longer "world" wonder), enables all ECONOMY civics (instead of government, which would be an imbalanced overpower for Egyptian civs)
b) English, London Bridge (2 free Engineers in city)
c) American, Route 66 (+100% road/rail travel on continent)
d) French, Arc de Triomphe (-75% war weariness)
e) Mongols, Tatu Aqueduct (+2 food, +2 healthy, all cities on continent)
f) Chinese, Great Wall (of course)
...etc.

In fact the concept of a "world" wonder shouldn't really be a named wonder from known earth history, but rather generic Wonders that open up with each new technology, e.g., Great Archery wonder at Archery, archery units +2 XP... etc. The named wonders should all be unique to a nation for a realistic feel (no more of this "Eiffel Tower of Moscow" crappola!)

8) Some more particularly "world war I" era units:
a) "Doughboy" (between Rifleman and Infantry in strength, etc., let them wear a "Smokey the Bear" style campaign hat or perhaps different graphics based on the nation)
b) "Machine Gun Tank" (Infantry strength + about 2, +100% versus Machine Guns, same movement as Doughboys)
c) "Heavy Cavalry" (like a mobile Doughboy)
d) workers can build "Trench" (like a fortress but more defensive bonus)
e) "Tank Trap" (stationary unit built by workers, tanks cannot pass)
f) "Combat Engineer" (can blow up Tank Traps, sap Trenches, etc.)
g) "Biplane" (half the range and strength of Fighter, similar in other respects, requires Flight; newer Fighters and Bombers both require Radio)

=============

Things I do like about Civ4 that I hope don't change (too much) are:
1) The economy engine in general, completely owns
2) AI predictability (lol, gotta give us weak-minded humans SOME advantage now!)
3) Movies for the wonders are generally stellar, like the style
4) Graphics in general are pretty good although I also like the Civ5 screenshots
5) LOVE those paratroopers!

(end on a positive note, right?)

1 (boarder agreements) i think the only real way to make such agreements easy to make is have terratories extend way out from cities you you don't get choked out for resource by a neighboring civ's city.

2 (tech leaking) i think that can be handeled by either reduced research cost or pre paid amounts(like what the great persons did for techs in civ4) of course a way to "manage" the leaks would be nice, perhaps the more you use the technology close to forigeon populations the more bonuses they get towards that research, so just having stealh fighters doesn't mean everybodys going to get it in a few turns.

3 (ranged artillery and cavelery) i think the tech level difference could be more easily represented by an interception range, and artillery range.

4 (rape and pillage) link it to a civic/policy/technology, like in civ 4's emancipation civic which causes unhappiness in populations without that civic. have the effects be something like unhappiness from "palling around with terrorists"

5 (recreate history)i think the AI should strictly tend towards historical events when ever possible in such a scenario, but when playing a nation that losses land to revolution, if your playing that nation and built things different at least try to go for the most obvious parts of your land to lead a revolt, fro britian it should be either the cities on other land masses, or if there isn't any have it be those farthest from the capital(and give the player the option to switch over to controlling the rebels).

6 (unique resources) I'd rather have resource requirements act as discounts than "iron or no swords". have units cost considerably more without the resource and have a few turns where you can't build them yet so that most of the time it would be more cost effective to aquire the resource before building the unit.

7 (Wonders) the pyramids weren't economic structures, they were elaborite tombs, the fact that they made egypt a tourist destination is a side benefit better reproduced by delayed commerce (+50% gold after 50 turns) which would apply to all wonders. other than that, i don't agree with making these simply "national wonders" keep them as world wonder, for things like "the london bridge" have the name reflect the city, if you want to build it in Giza the name would be "The Giza Bridge"

8 more units are all well and good except when it comes to micromanagement. if research took longer though it could be worth it.

 

[Centurio]

As to point seven of Skallagrimson's list, I agree wholeheartedly. I'd love to see the Flavian Amphitheater become a wonder and exclusive to Rome; there are just so many inaccuracies with having multiple Colosseum buildings across nations; however, if Byzantium were to be added in an expansion, who would get to keep the Hagia Sofia?

 

[Huayna Capac357]

I don't think the wonders should be nation-specific; the whole point of civ is alternate, "make-your-own" history.

 

[Jafendel]

I'm with the idea about border-negotiations.

And splitting the civilization in half was a fun concept in CIV 2. (Sorry, might be a chewed-out topic already.) At least the underlying idea of a civilization being composed of several groups. How about conquering quarter or half your neighbor civ, then creating a puppet / buffer state for your benefit, and handling it as a new civilization altogether? We could use the CIV 2 system where the other half was predefined/some way picked from available "official" civilization. Or, this would be the place for some nations that never make into the game. For example, Scotland would pop out of England. These "semi-civilizations" could be treated as large barbarian entities.

Yep, the barbarians itself need more developing. Maybe a rival, distant part of YOUR civilization could split into barbarian nation. It could heal the modern tanks it inherited, but build only riflemen like today.

Hmm, maybe funnier would it be if they couldn't repair those tanks but let 'em rust