What science fiction features would you like to see in a future Civ game?

[Optimizer]

Long ago I posted a similar poll at Apolyton.

The classical Civilization series has mostly been about technology and society already existent in the real world, with some obvious exceptions, most notably the Spaceship.

Call to Power stepped far into the future - too far, according to some.

What future/science fiction features would you like to see in a future civ game?

 

[Lord David]

Future Techs eh? Here's something started a while back...

Though there could be some improvement room around here...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=4733024&postcount=48

Modified from someone else's tree... red and dashed lines indicate that you can have one or the other technology researched to advance to the target technology.
View attachment 142013

 

[Optimizer]

Seems like no-one likes hovertanks...

 

[Infantry#14]

How about an invisible army? Only troops with infrared senor promotion can see them. Invisible units gets 50% bonus against units that cant detect them.

 

[dh_epic]

None of the above. The game does on too long as it is. Seriously, why keep playing after 1500 AD? You've usually basically won the game by then.

A sci-fi only game would be fun. But that's what SMAC is for.

 

[rysmiel]

None of the above. The game does on too long as it is. Seriously, why keep playing after 1500 AD? You've usually basically won the game by then.

A game that had the option of going on longer and presenting more and different challenges would be more fun, for me anyway, and you could always switch them off if you don't like them. I'm not sure what you have in mind by "goes on too long" in playing-time terms; if I'm playing for a couple of hours every night, I'd far rather have one epic game that lasted three months than a dozen that lasted a week each.

 

[Lord David]

How about an invisible army? Only troops with infrared senor promotion can see them. Invisible units gets 50% bonus against units that cant detect them.

Sounds interesting, considering that it is a technology that could appear in the near future. It would a complimentary to spies in that they would be like great spies and truly invisible, though can be detected if units in the tile have such a promotion. As for attacking cities, they should be able to see them even without such a promotion.

 

[dh_epic]

It goes on too long in the sense that the competition ends between 1200 and 1700 AD, but the game goes on for another 200 turns or so. I see no value to adding even more turns to the end of the game. There really isn't room for a future era, IMO.

 

[evirus]

for the nay sayers i think you are being to unimagniative. there are ways for a devloper to increase the "fun length" of a game or put it in control of the player via a "sand box" menu that allows the player to give AI opponents a sudden advance to bring them up to your level at no cost other than an obvious increase in difficulty.

Some of these i like but id rather discuss them that simply vote on them

colonization of space obviously space colonies should come before planetary colonies due to distance but it would be nice to have random planets similar to how you get a random earth.

seafloor and surface cities, might add to micro managing but could also open up a whole new layer of play(think 3D grid for ocean squares)

robots, rather have pilot'd mechs than litteral robots(also western nations like europe and america should get the lumbering tank like mechs while eastern nations like japan and china should get the more flexable agile anime style mechs.)

Hovering units, aside from helicopters i would like to see some airships, think hovering aircraft carriers or transports, maybe even hovering cities?

genetically altered units can be handeled most simply buy a city side structure that increases starting rank, similar to the barracks.

Bio and Nano should be options for spy type units

exotic governments, id rather have the government types be set by slider bars rather than clearly defined civics.

anything i havent mentioned is too basic or simple of a request that dosn't really require discussion.

 

[rysmiel]

It goes on too long in the sense that the competition ends between 1200 and 1700 AD

I'm still unsure what you are actually saying here.

If you mean that you actually win the game between 1200 and 1700 AD, I'd say the solution to that is tougher difficulty levels it takes longer to win. I'm not sure any Civ game yet has managed to balance the difficulty levels well enough to be really challenging at modern levels without being impossible at ancient levels. I'd like to be able to play something where I could be sure of a struggle right up to the end without risking being exterminated for the tiniest error of judgement or bit of bad luck with the RNG in the first six turns, which I think boils down to yet another request for better AI.

If your complaint is that you are finished doing everything meaningful the game allows you to do by 1200 or 1700, have run out of techs and new strategies arising from those techs and so forth, I think that's an argument for additional content. I'd think it was plainly a good thing if you get to a point which in an existing version of CIv with an existing victory condition by 1700 was an unarguable win, but where you then had a bunch of other colonising space (for example) things to do, and new challenges to face to make that work, and new risks to your empire in the mean time.

 

[dh_epic]

I don't think you can extend the real competition in the game any longer without getting into problems.

One way they've managed to make competition last longer in Civ 4 is by making the expansion phase of the game take a lot longer. Settling cities is slowed down, so the map doesn't fill up as quick, meaning big wars over borders don't really occur in full force until the middle ages. They really can't push this back any further without getting unrealistic.

Another problem with making the game competitive up until even 1900 is that it would make conquest victory basically impossible. Conquest victory works because a player can get into a strong first place by 1200 AD, and spend the rest of the game killing the weaklings. If another player is giving you a run for your money in 1900 AD, then a conquest victory is impossible. I don't think players are ready or willing to give up conquest victory. (Although I'd say that I am, at least the way it's built now.)

There's really no point to extending the game any further. Not until they make the existing game more competitive. Easier said than done, I'm afraid.

 

[Spitefire]

mebey the fact that a big empire has so many upsides and no downsides and yet in the real world large empires have been seen to fall apart quite alot, as far as i can tell the larger an empire is the harder it becomes to be a dictator in the empire without the consent of the populace, you can be a dictator in any size nation so long as the populace thinks you are doing what is best.

if some would pay attention invisability like that of prediter is actully already in testing/demonstration phases now.

 

[Optimizer]

One method to make the endgame more competitive would be political separatism in the renaissance-industrial ages.

With nationalism and other discoveries, distant cities in large civilizations would after a while adopt a separate nationality (à la USA). This would force a strong player to give autonomy to distant cities. Domination victory would be possible only with a modern police state.

 

[Onionsoilder]

Antimatter.

I want it. So much better then nuclear plants/weapons.

 

[bestbrian]

Bring back the Offshore Platforms from Civ II, and start harvesting hammers from the sea tiles.

 

[squid1111]

Voted all, except robots.

 

[Optimizer]

Seems like new weapons are most popular.

 

[Deep Thought]

Conclusion is that player's rather want conquest victory than a sci-fi era. Me, on the other hand, wants to make a detailed history book, from dawn of civilization to the final frontier. That is my point of playing the game.

You should be able to fertilize the deserts, meaning turning it to a forest.

 

[Infinite Monkey]

The only way I can see genetically modified or nano tech mlitary working is you would have to upgrade your units once the tech is learned. Maybe once you've learned a specific tech that allows increased strength, you can upgrade your units like promotions. For example, paying to turn a SAM Infantry to an SAM Infantry +1, or perhaps paying 1 gold per experience point per unit to level them up. Otherwise, it would be either an arbitry ability the mysterious they comes up with, or you'd have to spend time designing your soldiers.

One thing I think might work is a space laser. It has an infinite bombardment range, and once you launch it, you're ground unit is mission control, and you order them to blast a city/improvement.

I'd also like targeted bombardment, so I can destroy a city building I choose, not one randomly chosen, so I can bring my enemies' economy to a grinding hault. A counter to that may be an energy shield that reduces damange received, but can be sabotaged with a spy.

 

[rysmiel]

The only way I can see genetically modified or nano tech mlitary working is you would have to upgrade your units once the tech is learned. Maybe once you've learned a specific tech that allows increased strength, you can upgrade your units like promotions. For example, paying to turn a SAM Infantry to an SAM Infantry +1, or perhaps paying 1 gold per experience point per unit to level them up. Otherwise, it would be either an arbitry ability the mysterious they comes up with, or you'd have to spend time designing your soldiers.

I don't see why a new round of units with a new tech for human genetic engineering, cyborgs, or nanotech is actually a problem, they would just add on to the end of the relevant upgrade paths, no ?

One thing I think might work is a space laser. It has an infinite bombardment range, and once you launch it, you're ground unit is mission control, and you order them to blast a city/improvement.

I prefer the notion of a space layer to space weapons implemented as ground units or improvements or whatever, myself.

I'd also like targeted bombardment, so I can destroy a city building I choose, not one randomly chosen, so I can bring my enemies' economy to a grinding hault..

That's a good thought, but I am not inclined to see it needing a future tech; really that would be appropriate for cruise missiles, no ?