The Official Civ4 Ideas Thread

[timberwolf4545]

I was thinking about loaning units and there are a few more aspects to that. Units loaned and eventually returned would have gained experience they wouldn't have been able to get at home. So if a unit makes it back to the motherland, it'll be elite or at least veteran. Great leaders would also be able to be earned this way and sent back home. I think a risk could be that if a "guest" unit is defeated, than that enemy would know where it came from and possibly enact rough diplomacy. It might also be interesting to include a chance that the guest unit wouldn't want to come home and defects. That could work kind of like a cultural conversion depending on the living standards of either nation. Lasltly, if war occurs between the nations that have lent troops. Those troops should get a 3 turn head start to get home - as loyalty has developed between them and the other civs units.

 

[hahntsak]

Originally posted by timberwolf4545
I don't think the idea of naking features is silly at all. Named features can serve as destination points and can show up like cities when you when you use the go to feature. You could name sometime like "northern frontier hill" and be able to easly send units there.

it may sound ironic, but naming a point/tile may be easier than ange of tiles.... that is naming a single tile bordering a river than the river itself. it could work somewhat like a rally point but your idea hat names a hill or tile is workabe as to naming whole rivers or mountain chains, or broad plain. perhaps if another player [once contact with yoo was made and map recieved] would see your marks - that would make map trading more valuable.

 

[Korwyn]

Once a civ can build aqueducts allow an aqueduct to be built from a freshwater source to the city.

It should take at least two or three turns for the city bonuses to kick in. This will make destroying an aqueduct during a war, or possibly rebuilding it due to age (see pro/con below) not a simple matter.

Possibly there should be a max length of aqueduct as well, perhaps based on the size of the map. Transit through desert or mountains might shorten the max length. With the discovery of something (or possibly tied to another small wonder), the length could be extended.

Engineers should be able to build fortifications (reinforce) around aqueducts (in fact around most improvements) which would make them take longer to pillage. Perhaps three turns instead of one.

A single aqueduct can't feed more than two cities. Require engineering + something to connect more than one city to a single aqueduct.

A single water source (river/small lake/etc) can't feed more than four cities or a max population total. There should be a tiny, tiny chance that using an aqueduct to feed a total pop 17+ would cause the shrinkage of a lake, destruction of a flood plain, or even dissappearance of a river.

Pros:

• Irrigation around the city without having to irrigate to the city.
• Increased max population
• Additional increased pop growth if granary is present. Pyramids don't count towards this. This would also make building a granary more relevant, especially near the beginning of the middle ages. Affect expires with railroad.
• Decreased unhappiness to content only - won't make 'happy' citizens.
• Another (or alternate) great wonder: City of fountains - increased commerce, trade. Effect expires with railroad.

Cons:

• Only available to cities without a freshwater source immediately adjacent
• Cost is based on the length of the aqueduct starting .25 per tile, rounded up, minimum 1 gold. Cost increases with age. At some point it should be cheaper to tear down and rebuild an aqueduct than to maintain it.
• Destruction of the aqueduct causes loss of irrigation within two or three turns unless alternate irrigation source is available.
• Destruction of aqueduct removes the mood bonus (obviously)
• Destruction removes the pop growth bonus unless they have discovered refrigeration.
• Removes the max pop bonus unless they have discovered sanitation and railroads.

That's all I could come up with.

 

[one_hoop]

Originally posted by Wonder1
Rivers are a resource that never run dry in civ 3 and lower. I think that each city, canal and irrigated field takes a certain amount of water from the river. The amount of water that is supplied may depend on the length and type of terrain that feeds the river. So when populataions of cites become large this can become a limiting factor. If you are also able to build a Dam across river and prevent water from following to another Civ maybe allowing your Civ to exert a certain amount of influence over them maybe even to start a war.

Then, with the development of electricity, do you have to determine if a square is to be irrigated by a well or a river? Would we have dams to create reservoirs take up a whole square or just be a city improvement? Would the reservoir be within the city limits (untouchable by a seige?) Could aquifers run dry? Also, could reshaping rivers and creating reservoirs lead to drastic flooding?

As a citizen of the Western US (Colorado), this idea is intriguing, but many obstacles remain before it could be considered good for game play. Side note: Californians, you really need to start on those desalination plants...

M@

 

[Goober]

I have a question on Nuclear Meltdowns.

Do they happen just randomly, as in there is an X chance of them happening every turn, or do they only occur when your city is in Civil Disorder (rioting, I guess)?

 

[one_hoop]

WOW--that's a lot of reading.

First a RECAP:

_patrol_ orders. True, this would not need to be limited to just air/sea, but that is where I would find them most helpful. They would need to interrupt the patrol and show you if/when they saw an enemy unit.

_food-trade-routes_ between cities, not necessarily between countries (although they should be able to as well). While there are times that civilizations have had starvation in times of suprlus, there are many other examples of cities that do not produce their own food (but get it from California and Mexico for example).

Some AMENS:

_Provincial/puppet_Governments_ This may be the solution to empire building for those of us who are utterly against the current system of corruption.

_Set_Points_ Not so much for naming geographic locations, but for a new Goto command where you can create an ordered list rather than scrolling over to the actual points. These (in practice) would be used as pre-docking stations for units to await returning transports.

_Trade/Buy_Suprlus_Resources_ WOW this is a good idea. There's little enough rubber, oil, aluminum, urianium in the game, that this would be a great way to flex a little imperialistic muscle. In fact, this could be one stepping stone to creating another victory condition (apart from Cultural domination).

_More_diplomatic_options_ It's true that this is my least understood aspect of the game, but partly because it just doesn't seem real.

_Sliding_Scales_ For taxation rates (should not be limited to 10% intervals) and for diplomatic negotions...face it, I'm cheap and my advisor is going to tell me exactly what to give down to the last gold piece... why not save me some time and give a gold slider that he would react to more quickly.

_More/Better-Defined_Automate_Worker_ options: Oh, it was a happy day when I discovered the SHIFT-P automation (Clear Pollution) and I'm excited to try the clear Jungle automation (what was that one?), but I've always hated it when workers start mining my irrigation and vice versa.

While, I'm at it...It'd be nice if workers could also form settlements that were similar to colonies, but would allow a city worker work (slightly) outside the city limits. This would allow for bigger cities as well. There could be a requirement that they were not foreign workers, but I don't think that is necessary.

_Admirals/Armadas_ This is a great idea as well, but a little impractical as for the sub attack. Then again, subs should be able to designate which unit they are attacking (eg, Carrier rather than Battleship, unless there is an AEGIS Destroyer there as well). This problem could slightly be constrained if we had simple movement stacks (for land as well!). They could have group orders (Goto, Fortify, Movement) but not attack/defend together.

some NEW:
_Rotate-Map_ I hate it when my armies flag obscures the combat progress, or when a city banner makes me unsure whether I want to irrigate or mine a grassland. This would be a relatively easy (if process intensive)

_Air-Drop_Leaders_ A Great Leader can't take a plane, what?


I thought I had another new idea, and a good one at that, but I can't think of it right now. And, i've got to go home. SO, we'll leave it at this for now.

M@

 

[Ukraineboy]

I want Civilian planes... i.e. air lifting Workers....

I remember I was japan, and I spawned in USA.. I started colonizing Australia, but It would take forever to get workers there.. I want to b able to air lift them

 

[Trade-peror]

Wow! Congratulations to one_hoop for somehow reading the whole thread...!

I noticed that you found some features of my new vision of trade interesting, so here is the link to the thread that discusses it. Feel free to post more comments (there) or ask me for clarifications or elaborations on the subject!

Trade-peror

 

[immortals84]

I have an idea for the next civ3 expansion pack, INCLUDE ALL OF THE DOWNLOADS ON THIS CITE, SO THAT I DONT HAVE TO SUFFER WITH MY DIAL-UP?

Oh yeah and sometimes i have a really good city that produces alot of food, but the city next to it is at 2 because it cant feed its people, bring back the freights to help feed ourselves!

 

[immortals84]

Heres an idea for the next civ3 expansion pack! INCLUDE ALL OF THE DOWNLOADS ON THIS SITE! So that i wont have to suffer with dial-up.

Another thing that would help would be to bring back the old caravans and freight, for food purposes. I always have a city that produces so much food that it can grow to 20 before I discover medicine, but a small city next to me is at 2 because it cant feed itself.

 

[timberwolf4545]

I think a new worker action should be build dam. That would divert a river perpindicular in both directions to it's original flow. You would than be able to irrigate off in both directions. That could cut off a water supply to a neighbor causing possible tensions. It could add to a factor of diplomacy. "You must remove the dam or we'll invade you!" Controlling the resource of water has been somethat has been a factor between civilizations from the beginning of time and I think it would make a very interesting international environlmetal aspect to the game.

That also brings up the possibility of industrial/environmental factors effecting neighbors. Imagine polution affecting a neighbor and the diplomatic problems that would cause.

Thanks,

Faraxis, please hire me to think about this stuff full time.

Tom

Beavis - "Um, yeah, I just have a question.... um, is this a 'God
damn?'"

 

[fret]

1600 x 1200

 

[Comrade Pedro]

Another thing i think it will be fun its this:

When in any goverment a percentage of cities go to civil disorder, the whole country slipts in two or more factions and then it will fight a civil war for diferent govermental idelas again the former cities. If the player wins the goverment that he have before will be automatically restored. But the quantity of factions depends of the quantity of goverments alredy discovered.

In a different way, the player could do another thing: If his country was small, he could declare a civil war and take side to another goverment that is diferent from the former one. He then will "liberate" the rebel cities easily and the new goverment that the player desiered are now implanted in a few turns.

In another option (maybe i'm being a little boring.....) when the country enters a civil war, the player could change his mind, but only once, about the govement he wants: and then he take control of the partidaries of that goverment without knowing, of course, how much units and cities he will gain .

 

[Ukraineboy]

pssst... its not spelled "damn", its spelled "dam"... "damn" is a swear word ;-)

 

[Mr. Cackle]

Wars should be costlier.

Traditionally, leaders have viewed wars as ways to expand the power of a civilization only when all other ways have failed. I think that it should be expensive to maintain an army, especially if it were fighting. This idea goes hand in hand with the "supply line" idea that was talked about earlier.

Basically, for every X units you pay 1 gold per turn. This represents wages, food, etc. Battles would use up "fight points" or whatever you want to call them. To replenish a unit's fight points, you would have to spend X gold to represent the cost of recuperating. This amount would be rather small, if not nil, in the ancient age (because they just needed a trusty sword), but in the Industrial and especially the Modern Age it costs more money to heal the wounded, replace spent ammo, replace jammed/faulty weapons/materials, etc. that are damaged or used in battle. If you don't replenish the "fight points" and the percent of points gets to below like 25% or something, then your units start to fight worse, to represent bad morale, poorly equipped, etc. N.B: This is the same for ALL governments.

The upkeep sounds hard, I know. However, you can have a "reserve force" Basically, once you "build" a reservist (it would be built in the "unit production box" as we discussed earlier as well, but can only be built as a Regular) it becomes dormant in the city it was built in, to represent how he goes back home. It requires no upkeep UNTIL you right click on a city and select "call reserves from _____ city" OR if you want ALL the reserves then go to the domestic advisor and press a button called "call all the reserves" Then, all the reserves pop up and they act like normal units, requiring upkeep and the like.

As for govs. and units: Certain govs would get a certain number of "free" units, but this number would be relatively low. There would be no "units per town" and stuff like that.

Also, what's up with the "gold" for currency? The amount of gold really doesn't relate to anything in reality, so why not have "gold pounds" or something like that and actually have realistic numbers for money.

 

[Ukraineboy]

I like this idea, but Militaristic Governments shouldnt pay at all as a bonus.

 

[fififan]

My Ideas
1.Civil War:Say a city is in civil disorder for more then 4 turns then that citie will seperate {maybe a few cities around it too} and become a new civ. You could let it be independent or crush it. Other ideas for why a city would seperate high corruption your capital is taken and maybe if you launch a revolution.
2.Vassal states:You can create your own nations!

 

[SirBois]

Automate taxsettings:
I would like to be able to set the taxrate at 'just enough to cover costs', without having to check regularly.

Monetary Economics (prereq Economics and Capitalism)
With ME, you could run up National Dept, without immediately losing improvements. Off course, this costs money (interest) and possibly happiness. Although you could compensate for the loss of happiness by using some of the money for improvements your people will like. This mimics the political decisions about taxes and budgets from the inductrial age, after countries left the gold-standard for their currency.

I believe you shouldn't take this any further (inflation, tradebalances etc.), because IMHO Civ is always a game that combines several aspects of nationbuilding without going too deeply into any one of them.

 

[SirBois]

Re: Aquaducts
I think the current practice of irrigating all tiles from watersource to your city suffices as as basis for long-distance watertransport. It needs tuning however:
- pillaging one tile in the row should stop the waterflow to the dependant tiles. With a 'memory' off course, so it is restored when you re-irrigate the missing link.
- mountains and hills can be irrigated/piped to bring water to the other side. The irrigation terrainimprovement has no effecton the mountain itself, it just lets the water pass to the other side.

 

[Grotius]

My wishlist includes:

1. An "iron man" mode, as in Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, in which you can't save-and-reload. Maybe we'd even get a little reward for playing in this mode -- I'd settle for a notation in the Hall of Fame.

2. Variable tech trees in the Epic Game. C3C has different tech trees for each of the Conquests; I'd like to see this incorporated into the Epic Game.

3. All diplomats' faces on one screen. At least an option for this, for those of us running the game at higher resolutions.

4. Some greater incentive to do our own research, and to build at least one early Wonder, at the highest difficulty levels. Right now, the optimal strategy is to tech-broker and avoid building Wonders.

5. Built-in support for the Game of the Month. (This is really a variant of my first suggestion, for an "iron man" mode.)

6. Different scoring options, or at least a scoring system that takes into account more than is accounted for now.

7. A more detailed breakdown of our Culture and Power scores on the histogram.

8. Unique Civ buildings. Romans get a bigger Colliseum. Greeks get a better temple. Americans get baseball stadiums.

9. Two or more unique units, perhaps combined with an option (or requirement) that you choose only one UU for a particular game.

10. Put space-race tech at the end of the Modern Age, so that we get to see all the modern tech first.

11. A Happiness Victory?

12. More Conquests-style scenarios. I love these.