What exactly do YOU want?

[Rinnero]

What do you think Firaxis should do FIRST ?


I think it will be a nice idea to ask what exactly players want. (obvious, eh?)

A bit hard to make a poll about what people want, but I tried to put all possible wishes in 9 poll options. Read what each mean and vote. You also can post top3 things you want Devs to fix. Or add yours. Or mark out some exact problem that is part of one of 9 blocks I made.


Improve Multiplayer Stability. Three simple things: lag, crash/freeze, faster in between turns processing. Right now acceptable only in duels (or maybe 4ppl games)

Improve Multiplayer Convenience. A lot of different things that are not necessary for online play, but make it better: lobby, pitboss, easy saves, joining to started games, and up to replays like in any other RTS, or stats (why not?).

Improve Tactical (combat) AI. I believe its hardest to fix. But it is also the greatest reason not to play SP. So, either significantly improve it, or make MP playable.

Improve Diplomatic AI. Some people are complaining, though I think its decent (compared to tactical). There are still things to improve.

Minor balance changes. Changing minor things in buildings, units, wonders, civs, policies, etc... (costs, bonuses, etc…) 80% of last patch’s changes were these. It improved game to some extent but I think there are a lot of much more important REAL issues.

Major balance changes. Major changes such as total rework of diplo victory, RAs, balancing Great People (example: http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread.php?109825-Balancing-Great-People ), changes in quests (add some, remove “kill” quests or make them expire), creating more variety in unit types, so that melee are not the best choice. (example: http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread.php?108061-Unit-types-and-their-roles ) Or other such things that you want to change.

Fix things that can break fair MP play. This one is a little tricky. When you are at war with strong player, loss of even one unit (or one extra unit) can decide the outcome of war. The hardest to fix and the most annoying are Double Turn and Click Fest. These things can be partly solved with ‘allowing to move units after ‘end turn’ is clicked’ and ‘enabling unit animations’ (!) (because it will be impossible to attack one unit 3-4 times in less than 1 second). Because animations are not only for aesthetic reasons, but also improve gameplay, I think animations are worth adding (and that is why it is in this poll option). Other things include removing Eldorado, instant heal promotion, stealing worker from CSs (make it at least harder), balancing AI trade (200g per luxury is way too much) and so on. (I can explain why these things harm MP matches)

Add content. New civs, or even wonders, policies, buildings, units and so on.

Add new mechanics. Such major things as espionage, religion, vassalage and so on.


As for me, I’m MP player, so Im concerned about stability, balance and fair play. Though I think minor things are already balanced, and we need to do something with CSs and dominance of melee units. Infinite GS spam is not good either.

Also I think that its too early to add new things, but some people think Civ V is already good as it is, and Firaxis still makes DLCs, so I added “add new” to poll options.

 

[Man vs Civ AI]

Improve Tactical (combat) AI - there's always wars going on in CiV, and some people call it a war game, so combat is very important and definitely can be improved. Diplomatic AI is a close second to need fixing, or just as important!

 

[apocalypse105]

Improve Diplomatic AI.

Dont let it make his decissions by numbers So you get random decleration of wars...

 

[spider1]

Improve Diplomatic AI

I've been complaining about this for a while now. Not enough diplomacy options, no real way to understand your neighbor unless you are comfortable with the fact the AI civs might do anything at anytime whether it makes sense or not. It's one thing to have an AI that wants to win, it's quite another when want to win but don't try correctly or intelligently.

 

[Redox]

I have chosen "Other" because I'd like graphics and animations fixed first. Aside from a ton of graphics glitches, there are things like bomber animation disappearing if you tell another bomber to attack a target. C'mon, a modern game can't handle graphics for 2 bombers at a time?

Also, I'd like the game to allow several units to attack the target at once, not wait until previous attack is over. The engine knows the outcome of attack once the animation starts, so there should be no problem with allowing several units to attack at once.

Edit: other things mentioned here are more important for gameplay, but some of them could be improved by modding. Animations can't, that's why I picked it.

 

[Kerosene31]

Diplo AI for me.

It is the #1 thing holding back the offline game.

 

[Adrenaline15]

diplo and tac AI. loyal friends compared to so many backstabbers. tac AI just need to learn how to seige cities, heal up during seiges and make a concious attempt to preserve units

 

[Fabiano79]

I lost my faith on AI improvement.

So, what I want is new content (or new mechanics). I want that the Eras last longer and I can actually use the medieval units.

Also, I would glad recieve more complex sistems for economy and production. I miss the old empire management and building options.

 

[apocalypse105]

I have chosen "Other" because I'd like graphics and animations fixed first. Aside from a ton of graphics glitches, there are things like bomber animation disappearing if you tell another bomber to attack a target. C'mon, a modern game can't handle graphics for 2 bombers at a time?

Also, I'd like the game to allow several units to attack the target at once, not wait until previous attack is over. The engine knows the outcome of attack once the animation starts, so there should be no problem with allowing several units to attack at once.

Edit: other things mentioned here are more important for gameplay, but some of them could be improved by modding. Animations can't, that's why I picked it.

Atacking Siam elephant with pikeman allways looks wierd It stabs stabs and then the battle is over and you see the result

 

[Becephalus]

New content is second...blegh. Exactly what is wrong with the computer game industry.

People want "more more more" instead of "better". Then they whine when things aren't very good quality despite the fact they don't demand good quality.

People will buy a civ expansion based on how much content is in it, but they will enjoy it based on how much balancing and AI improvement is in it. Companies care A LOT more about your dollars than your enjoyment so until you realign your buying habits you will keep being disappointed.

Hell I would give back half the civs if the remaining civs had a little more diversity and were better balanced.

 

[civnoob13]

New content is second...blegh. Exactly what is wrong with the computer game industry.

People want "more more more" instead of "better". Then they whine when things aren't very good quality despite the fact they don't demand good quality.

People will buy a civ expansion based on how much content is in it, but they will enjoy it based on how much balancing and AI improvement is in it. Companies care A LOT more about your dollars than your enjoyment so until you realign your buying habits you will keep being disappointed.

Hell I would give back half the civs if the remaining civs had a little more diversity and were better balanced.

Ever considered that those who voted for content are more or less satisfied with the game as is, but want more? Why do you just assume that everybody is as dissatisfied with the game as you are?

 

[Optional]

Improve Diplomatic AI.

What's in the game is not so bad, but it's too thin for a Civilization game. Negotiating alliances is missing, for one thing. Too many things, like tech deals, are just stand-alone things that haven't been integrated in a broader sense of diplomacy.
Too many things appear to have no consequences. A declaration of friendship? Who cares. A tech deal? Mwah, we'll attack you anyway, and again there are no consequences. It's all loose sand.
Some games would be okay with this, but not Civilization. This game needs a higher complexity, things need to be hingeing together more.

The tribes could be a bit more different from each other in the way they act. There are XML sheets with numbers on a scale from 1 to 10 that define their behaviour in different aspects of their play, but it are all 4s, 5s, 6s, and 7s, where in each game the actual number used could end up 2 higher or lower than that number, so they all end up being similar.
Okay, if you've played the game a 100 times and kept track, you'll probably have seen subtle differences, but I think more 1s, 2s, 9s and 10s could have been used. Whoever chose the numbers sat way too much on the fence and was afraid to make decisions. Yeah, Ghandi got a 12 for likelihood to use nuclear weapons, that's bold, but in average gameplay too much grey has been used. Make those civs a bit more different from each other, enough to affect the way you would approach them in diplomacy.

 

[Becomedeath]

How come hot woman and tequila isn't an option?

Seriously though, I'd like to see the tactical AI sorted, nothing more really. Very happy with the game as it stands, I'd just like the AI to make slightly more intelligent decisions when it's picks a fight.

I completely accept it "just making do" when I start a fight, but when the AI starts a war, it could at least have planned out what it wants, how it's going to get it and not try and send a frontline of ranged units at me.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Algorithmic competition worth outsmarting; AI tactics in any areas you'd want to split apart.

 

[Brichals]

Funny I voted tactical AI bcs at this stage I am too scared to even ever have tried multiplayer, but I would love it if we could do that.

A nice menu for multiplayer so you can arrange quick games late starts like in Bering Straits with Russia, Japan, US and Mongolia for example. for an evening fun game. That would be awesome.

 

[seasnake]

Diplo and Tactical AI. I just won a game as Babylon, and for the first time ever I managed to keep friends til the end of the game. I did this by NEVER declaring war and only signing one DOF. This was the key. If you sign a DOF, that bonus fades, but if you refuse a request while DOF then that penalty remains all game. Case in point, I signed one with Suleiman very early in the game, and the next tern he asked for 400 gold (my treasury, essentially) and I was saving up to buy a Settler. I said no, and the rest of the game he was constantly denouncing me, and the only red mark (Other than "They denounced us!", which is sillly, because it's like "They're angry because they denounced us, and they denounced us because they're angry.") was that refused request. It lasted more than 5000 years.

Good things fade, bad things stay forever not matter how small. This is a big obstacle. The only solution is to avoid all bad modifiers by not engaging in diplomacy whenever possible outside of trade goods. Otherwise you just make enemies, and your friends 1) won't help you out, ever, and you'll get a penalty for asking and 2) will be your enemies forever if you refuse one request and 3) 50 percent of the time will try a sneak attack.

On tactics, please teach the AI to launch amphibious assaults. I built a wall of forts and a citadel between me and my neighbors overland, but other than a garrisoned unit in each city all of my army was on the border. Now I had a nice road/rail network so I could have gotten to another side of my country fairly quickly, but an amphibuous assault and a few frigates pounding one of my cities would have been the most sensible thing possible and Suleiman, whose big power is this sprawling navy he can create, never once tried it.

 

[apocalypse105]

Diplo and Tactical AI. I just won a game as Babylon, and for the first time ever I managed to keep friends til the end of the game. I did this by NEVER declaring war and only signing one DOF. This was the key. If you sign a DOF, that bonus fades, but if you refuse a request while DOF then that penalty remains all game. Case in point, I signed one with Suleiman very early in the game, and the next tern he asked for 400 gold (my treasury, essentially) and I was saving up to buy a Settler. I said no, and the rest of the game he was constantly denouncing me, and the only red mark (Other than "They denounced us!", which is sillly, because it's like "They're angry because they denounced us, and they denounced us because they're angry.") was that refused request. It lasted more than 5000 years.

Good things fade, bad things stay forever not matter how small. This is a big obstacle. The only solution is to avoid all bad modifiers by not engaging in diplomacy whenever possible outside of trade goods. Otherwise you just make enemies, and your friends 1) won't help you out, ever, and you'll get a penalty for asking and 2) will be your enemies forever if you refuse one request and 3) 50 percent of the time will try a sneak attack.

On tactics, please teach the AI to launch amphibious assaults. I built a wall of forts and a citadel between me and my neighbors overland, but other than a garrisoned unit in each city all of my army was on the border. Now I had a nice road/rail network so I could have gotten to another side of my country fairly quickly, but an amphibuous assault and a few frigates pounding one of my cities would have been the most sensible thing possible and Suleiman, whose big power is this sprawling navy he can create, never once tried it.

They should really reprogramme the i thinx you are a warmonger penalty You get it to soon it looks like you can't get a war without getting this penalty with combat so important you should be able to go to war 2 times without having diplomatic penalties with everybody

Like if you declare more then 3 times you are a warmonger Not just when you declare once or second thats just ridicoulous and you can't have a decent game

and like its now: if you kill a civilizaton, or burn down cities you will get olso diplomatic hit makes more sence.. Or if you take a capital then you get a warmonger hit...

And about friendships those requests are ridicoulous and the timing of it each time you just got a new luxury resources by settlign a citie they come asking for it really???? Or like you said you have a lot of money they ask for all of it really??? This things needs to be fixed

 

[seasnake]

They should really reprogramme the i thinx you are a warmonger penalty You get it to soon it looks like you can't get a war without getting this penalty with combat so important you should be able to go to war 2 times without having diplomatic penalties with everybody

Like if you declare more then 3 times you are a warmonger Not just when you declare once or second thats just ridicoulous and you can't have a decent game

and like its now: if you kill a civilizaton, or burn down cities you will get olso diplomatic hit makes more sence.. Or if you take a capital then you get a warmonger hit...

And about friendships those requests are ridicoulous and the timing of it each time you just got a new luxury resources by settlign a citie they come asking for it really???? Or like you said you have a lot of money they ask for all of it really??? This things needs to be fixed

I don't mind the current "You're a warmonger" penalty, but I hate that it lasts for 5000 years. I think it should be stronger and last longer the more you declare wars within a certain period, but it should fade eventually if you keep your nose clean. So if I declare war on 3 civs in 5 years that's different than declaring war on two civs in 25 years, maybe the first scenario creats a penalty that lasts 60 turns and the other lasts 40 turns. Or something.

Also, each leader should deal with that differently. Genghis should just say "good for you" if I'm fighting all the time, Gandhi should really dislike me, someone like Elizabeth should be cautious. These kind of details would make take ciV from a good game to a great game, make dealing with different leaders really neat.

 

[JWAT44]

i like the ideas on diplomacy from this thread and i want international trade routes (over land, water, and maybe in later eras over the air)

 

[apocalypse105]

I don't mind the current "You're a warmonger" penalty, but I hate that it lasts for 5000 years. I think it should be stronger and last longer the more you declare wars within a certain period, but it should fade eventually if you keep your nose clean. So if I declare war on 3 civs in 5 years that's different than declaring war on two civs in 25 years, maybe the first scenario creats a penalty that lasts 60 turns and the other lasts 40 turns. Or something.

Also, each leader should deal with that differently. Genghis should just say "good for you" if I'm fighting all the time, Gandhi should really dislike me, someone like Elizabeth should be cautious. These kind of details would make take ciV from a good game to a great game, make dealing with different leaders really neat.

Yes indead...

If someone declares one time war in the medieval and one time in the modern era you aren't a wrmonger.. You only are a warmonger if you declare wars short after each other...

Yeah I allways laugh that ghenghis kalls me a warmonger menace of the world but he killed like 4 citie states whos saying?