No heroes, zombies and vampires etc and stick to the basics.
I don't mind them getting added in a optional, "for fun" game modes. IIRC, in 6, they got added only after the game had had its two full expansions to get the major game systems in, so they weren't taking development time from the real game. No one was ever forced to play them. They were entirely opt-in in nature. I'm ok with that, late in the development cycle when you start thinking of fun mutators to the rules to spice up a ... mature, I won't say old... game and keep it feeling fresh and fun to play.
I think the is issue is that the overcomplication is already present by the inherent nature of 1upt. It complicates movement in a way the AI struggles mightily with.
The more I play of some of the older 4X games in my library while waiting for 7 to come out, the more I appreciate this. Being able to stack up an army and move it as a single unit really simplifies movement around the map. Strict 1UPT becomes a micromanagement nightmare, especially as you add more units and get later into the game. One of things I've been thinking about a lot is how to streamline the late game so you don't get bogged down with meaningless micromanagement and still have enough to do each turn that you're not just mindlessly clicking "next turn" waiting for a VC to complete. Details on that are probably for another, more dedicated thread, but for unit movement, I've found I like:
- Letting the tech tree open up new unit classes (ie infantry, ranged, cavalry, air, support, etc)
- Allowing players to stack multiple units into a single army and move them as a unit
- Letting the tech tree or age transitions allow larger limits on how large an army may be
The big design choice here is whether to stick with Civ's very simple combat model, where everything's on the same layer of the same map, and combat is a matter of single unit interactions and a single, simple damage calculation or to transition to a more complex one where the battle occurs in its own layer and players conduct each battle in its own turn-based approach. This preserves the strategic complexity and fixes the crowding issues on the map, but can end up being incredibly time-consuming and tedious, especially late in the game with very one-sided battles. In 6, they chose to compromise a little bit by allowing formation of corps and armies, which did preserve that quick and simple interface, but it was too late in the game and not nearly enough to get the problem really under control for the AI to navigate. It didn't stop the "carpet of doom" problem.
I think they ultimately have to allow units to stack up into proper armies. People like that. I'd like to see the game embrace having great generals commanding armies as a complete army, rather than moving everything piecemeal like you did in 5 and 6. I do like the strategic layer of having different unit types and various counters and supports. I also think having a specific point where you do have large armies come together and duke it out either on open fields or over a besieged city is a lot of fun. I have enjoyed what Amplitude did in Endless Legend:
- You build up armies under a general
- You besiege a city to slowly lower its defenses, which allows the defender some time to react and move forces to defend
- The tech tree controls access to new unit types and to larger army checkpoints
- No city ranged auto-attacks, everything comes from the units
- Cities get a default set of militia (weaker melee units) as a baseline defense and a weak set of walls as baseline, which can be improved with buildings.
I don't think Civ needs to be customizing units or equipping items on heroes like an RPG. That's more complexity than Civ needs. To the extent you get custom units that can be done in the baseline unit design and UUs like Civ has classically done. Ultimately the goal here is to preserve the simple, responsive play Civ fans are used to, give combat enough complexity that strategic decisions are involved and do matter, and still leave the model in a state that the AI can use it effectively.
