What We Must Need In Civ 5

[Culture Bomb]

I agree with the posts saying that we need a better combat system than "units attack one at a time with maybe some collateral damage thrown in."

You may laugh at me for even mentioning this game, but I firmly believe that the combat system in Civ: Call to Power was a big step in the right direction. (A group of units fought all together, in ranks. Those with ranged attacks could shoot from the rear rank, while those with assault fought at the front.)

There should be some way that more than one city can work together to build a wonder, without a return of the "caravan bombing" abuse of Civ II. To talk about the Great Wall being built "in" one particular city is silly; building a wonder should be something the whole civilization contributes to.
The same should apply to some buildings - hydro plants are generally not built in cities but near the appropriate sources of power.

 

[kiwitt]

I wish you could put together field units more like real life armies - made up of strategic units that combine arms. Even in ancient times, nobody went to war with just swordsmen or just artillary. Armies were made up of collections of units that fought (from a strategic point of view) as one.

You really need to try Dales Combat Mod, if nothing else. Not sure if it works with 3.19. It is also incorporated into Dales "The Road to War"

 

[zarakand]

I'm sure many devs at firaxis have played RoM, just as many have played FFH2. Your assessment however is way off base.

First nearly all the novel concepts and gameplay improvements in RoM are not intrisic to RoM, they are ported over from the RevolutionDCM gamecore. Secondly the majority of civ4 players would find RoM far too esoteric and complex to make it commercially viable. Due to it's excess complexicity, and stability issues I myself find it unplayable.

What RoM is, is a modpack that is geared toward users who are looking for a massive content driven game, not for those interested in concrete and concise strategy game. If firaxis went the way of RoM, Civ's development would parallel that of the Flight Simulator.

Now don't get me wrong, I think RoM is a great mod, for what it is (and it's why I recommend it to a user a couple posts above, because I think that user would enjoy it). It's also the second most popular modpack available for civ4, as there is quite a bit of demand for a huge MEGA-modpack. But RoM fanboys fail to realize that this isn't what the majority of civ players are looking for, most of us want a concise and professionally built game, and demand one that is stable. In the market place those two considerations are straight up essential. Reviewers and consumers are not going to respond very well to a product they pay for that crashes on them, and has a bunch of units that overlap, as well as a tech tree that's so overbuilt it's 5 times the size of BtS's. Such a design is only viable, and in fact excels, as a free publicly available modpack for hard core civ fans that want 5 times the tech and unit choices, and don't mind a crash here or there breaking up their gaming.

I could not agree more! I have been playing Civ for years, and have a monthly LAN party with it. However, as much as I want more content if it is a pain to install or crashes forget about it. Like most of us real life gets in the way, and I don't have the patience for the mods that don't work near flawlessly like Legends of Revolution, FFH2, etc.

Heck, if Firaxis ever opened up a CIV 4 "app/mod" store where they verified that Mods worked as promised, I would be more than happy to pay $5-15 for Mods.

 

[Willem]

But there was a dark side - micromanagement. One had to build dozens of caravans and have a very clear vision of the destinations. One caravan too many, and the supplying city would go into deficit food - and cut all food exports, if I remember correctly.

Not only that, but the AI didn't know how to use it so it was nothing more than an exploit for the human player.

 

[EsaKo]

Not only that, but the AI didn't know how to use it so it was nothing more than an exploit for the human player.

Not only that, the AI built them anyway, wasting a lot of production!

I hated the CIv II regular trade route system, having to search for cities with matching import/exports. And the rewards were nice enough to make me do it.

 

[ConsoleCowboy]

Hello,

yes there are things (air combat, navy and espionage) that should be fixed. But I would also like to see new features for us to enable/disable:

1. Internal struggle: Every empire in history had it's internal struggles, civil wars, splits and unifications. That should be part of the game. Great Persons or Generals should challenge you, if you have too much unhappiness and march on your capital.
1.b (Partial)Anarchy should break out, if everybody hates you or internal rivals arise .

2. Weird Science events: Imagine Aliens, Dr. No, Fu Manchu or your favorite Secret Society spying, sabotaging or attacking your Civ.

3. Neo-Barbarians: There should be a new form of Barbs after the World has been completly split in Nations. Terrorists, Natives, Aliens, Zombies (joke) uprisings or stuff.

4. You should need more than one ressource, if your civ/army is too big. One Oil ressorce won't be enough for a super power, meaning resource rush will get more fierce. 30 Pretorians with just one iron? Ressources should cap #units with the prerequisite, making your army more diverse. Only one oil: Only ten tanks/plains - the rest will have to be infantry. Just an example.

5. Cities should be "uniquier", so that they really stand out more.

6. You should have a "command center" for military operations, especially in the late game. A wonder maybe? There you should be able to plan nuclear counterstrikes and strategies.

7. Wonders/Buildings like Scotland Yard, Great Library and such should open new Advisor Windows and give you access to new information or options.

8. "Heroes" should be able to undergo quests that help your civ (for a while). Imagine having a Great Spy (Mata Hari Style) really questing out enemy plans while you war them. Upon completion, you will see all enemy Troops/Movements for 1 or 2 turns. (cause she broke their "enigma" code or whatever)

9. I wont the Throne Room back. With a ton of customizations.

 

[EsaKo]

1. Internal struggle: Every empire in history had it's internal struggles, civil wars, splits and unifications. That should be part of the game. Great Persons or Generals should challenge you, if you have too much unhappiness and march on your capital.
1.b (Partial)Anarchy should break out, if everybody hates you or internal rivals arise .

Legends of Revolution already has this, but the system is quite nasty until you figure it out. Large empires need to be kept together quite actively.

3. Neo-Barbarians: There should be a new form of Barbs after the World has been completly split in Nations. Terrorists, Natives, Aliens, Zombies (joke) uprisings or stuff

This sounds fun but also potentially unfun. No one wants to spend time dealing with frequent terrorist uprisings or whatever. Perhaps terrorist groups should rise as a side-effect of rebellions and such?

4. You should need more than one ressource, if your civ/army is too big. One Oil ressorce won't be enough for a super power, meaning resource rush will get more fierce. 30 Pretorians with just one iron? Ressources should cap #units with the prerequisite, making your army more diverse. Only one oil: Only ten tanks/plains - the rest will have to be infantry. Just an example.

Possibly a good idea, but I am pretty sure that the developers left this out on purpose, as this is something that people always talk about, and wouldn't have been impossible to implement.

I don't like the idea on its own - that would just make the earlier warfare even more gamebreaking by limiting the armies of some nation to x tanks because of only 1 oil while some other one that had luck with resources and took a fair amount of territory in an early war can build 3-4 times the amount. The smaller nations are already disadvantaged in the raw production - limiting their armies seems pretty unfun. Not good if you ask me. Not good at all, but possibly an increased cost after a certain number would be more balanced.

6. You should have a "command center" for military operations, especially in the late game. A wonder maybe? There you should be able to plan nuclear counterstrikes and strategies.

Not necessary but if some real function is attached to it, why not?

7. Wonders/Buildings like Scotland Yard, Great Library and such should open new Advisor Windows and give you access to new information or options.

I don't get what you mean by this. Could you clarify a bit?

8. "Heroes" should be able to undergo quests that help your civ (for a while). Imagine having a Great Spy (Mata Hari Style) really questing out enemy plans while you war them. Upon completion, you will see all enemy Troops/Movements for 1 or 2 turns. (cause she broke their "enigma" code or whatever)

I don't like the particular example but yes, some a bit more interesting uses wouldn't hurt, if planned properly.

9. I wont the Throne Room back. With a ton of customizations.

I don't want it, it was just a flavor thingie. Of course, some people like empty flavor, but I don't, at least that much. It was nice in Civ II because it made up for the game's primitive look, but in Civ IV I wouldn't need it. Or Civ V.

 

[Dave Hartwick]

I'd really like to see an army approach rather than a stack approach, but not the Civ III model where you needed a GP to make an army (that went obsolete). Maybe like:

Units in a stack are treated as a single army and will all defend or attack together
Bonuses for stack size, unit diversity, balance and fit (strength via combined arms-- but cavalry isn't a big help in sieges other than a couple units)
The number of units you can stack is dependent on technology level and maybe civ trait. However, you can have as many stacks as you can manage

I'd suggest getting rid of the RPG-ish unit promotions and focus on armies, maybe just go back to the old veteran system.

One thing I hadn't thought about until recently, but now I realize is a big gaping flaw in the whole series is how exploration works. Sure, there are limits if you're surrounded by ocean tiles. But there's nothing to prevent circumnavigating the world with a fishing boat or a galley in BC times if coastal tiles permit.

For instance, say you're playing an Earth map and you're European or in the Far East. So long as you're not land locked and don't run into a jerk that refuses to open borders, you should be able to easily explore the other end of Eurasia by 0 AD with Africa thrown in for good measure.

The Portuguese didn't manage to get around Africa to Asia until after the discovery of the New World. We're talking 1500 or something before they managed to even get around Africa.

I don't know the solution to how to represent the age of exploration. Are there mods that attempt it?

I'd suggest getting rid of whipping. I'm not a big micromanager, but there's the temptation for me to go through every dang city and scratch my head and wonder if now is the best time to whip. I find it really slows things down.

I'd like to see Civ 5-- or some offshoot of the series-- take a radical new direction where maybe you don't even have a city screen. I like the attempts at streamlining that went into Civ 4, but I also feel like the game held onto some fairly ridiculous mechanics that you wouldn't include in a new game.

Other things I'd like to see are balance of power politics, ideologies (a trait, basically, chosen by or inflicted upon the player) in the later game, and, yes, I'd like to be able to supply cities somehow. Thinking of the US East coast, for instance, it imports food from all over the world. Sure it exports some, but modern overlapping metropolises import chow from a much bigger area than the BFC.

 

[Blahblahman123]

I think it needs more technolgies (about 100) and some extra UU`s and some few more civs would be good

 

[EsaKo]

I think it needs more technolgies (about 100) and some extra UU`s and some few more civs would be good

Haven't you heard the saying "less is more"?

If you have and you think it's bollocks, see the Rise of Mankind mod. Only that it adds about 300 techs, not just a measly 100.

 

[Willem]

2. Weird Science events: Imagine Aliens, Dr. No, Fu Manchu or your favorite Secret Society spying, sabotaging or attacking your Civ.

That would be just dumb enough to stop me from ever buying the game.

9. I wont the Throne Room back. With a ton of customizations.

No thanks, it was nothing but a useless distraction from the real game.

 

[Willem]

I'd suggest getting rid of whipping. I'm not a big micromanager, but there's the temptation for me to go through every dang city and scratch my head and wonder if now is the best time to whip. I find it really slows things down.

That's your problem, not the fault of the mechanics.

 

[-FC-Commando]

You may laugh at me for even mentioning this game, but I firmly believe that the combat system in Civ: Call to Power was a big step in the right direction. (A group of units fought all together, in ranks. Those with ranged attacks could shoot from the rear rank, while those with assault fought at the front.)

I'm a big Call to Power fan. Thats why i hated .. yes hated Civ 3. The coolness of Civ 4 made up a lot even if it still uses the same battle system. Civ 4 gave back the joy i had playing Civ 2.

After more than 1000 games of Civ 4 i really need Civ 5.

 

[Dave Hartwick]

Considering that there was a lot of talk about getting rid of micromanagement in Civ IV, I'd say that leaving whipping in as it currently works may have been an oversight.

 

[Willem]

Considering that there was a lot of talk about getting rid of micromanagement in Civ IV, I'd say that leaving whipping in as it currently works may have been an oversight.

I don't see whipping as micromanagement at all, it's just the approach you're using towards it. Like I said, it's your problem not the game mechanic's.

 

[Kullervo]

I know that very many people have said this before but...

BETTER MUSIC! seriously, the modern age music is annoying as 8 cats of various genders on your roof at night (and believe me, I know what I am talking about. It's only funny the first 30 seconds.) Most of it seems to be random violin scratchings and an extremely un-original chorale. Make some things like Stravinsky, or Mahler's later symphonies, or even the early days of rock (And Led Zeppelin, because I like LZ). And the medieval sound track gets annoying as well, especially since there's what, 3 different pieces there?

More leaders. Create some for, say, the Hittites, like in Civ 3, the Irish, because I like Ireland, the Finns, because I like Finland, the Swedes, because they were important in the late 1500's up to the early 1700's or so. Good enough for me. And also, throw in an extra AI trait for each leader... Cyrus could be Cre/Imp/Chm, Roosevelt I would classify as Fin/Ind/Org... I would maybe like a Ind/Phi leader, but that would be overkill.

Change the Earth maps a little bit. In the Scandinavian peninsula, around Sweden, there should be a LOT of iron. That's how Sweden rose in importance in Europe: they were arms dealers and manufacturers, rich in Iron. Ireland should have at least 1 horse or cattle source. Patagonia should have a few cattle and horse sources... Australia's eastern plains should have cattle and sheep... fish off the coast of Norway... Stone source in China... the list can go on. What they have now is good, it's just that it could be better.

Lastly, they should change around map scripts more. Create options where you could have un-standard resource placement, such as resources being right next to one another outside the capital, and resources in different places, like dye on grassland hills up North, deer on plains and grassland forests, banana in forests, Ivory on hills and on non-jungle grassland, stone in Jungle, iron, stone, wine, horses on flood plains, etc... They only have something similar the scenarios and starting places, but never on a normal, random world map.

 

[Dave Hartwick]

I don't see whipping as micromanagement at all, it's just the approach you're using towards it. Like I said, it's your problem not the game mechanic's.

I guess we all have our personal problems. For instance, there's the personality quirk that leads some people to just have to take a crap on threads about what people would like to see in Civ V.

That would be just dumb enough to stop me from ever buying the game.

Gosh, it sure would suck if such a thoughtful, constructive guy didn't buy the sequel.

 

[EsaKo]

I don't see whipping as micromanagement at all, it's just the approach you're using towards it. Like I said, it's your problem not the game mechanic's.

Whipping is not micromanagement by itself - it is a feature that rewards micromanagement. Overflow abusing is a good example, and so is the fact that whipping becomes a lot powerful if timed correctly.

Another feature that rewards micromanagement is workers. Sure, you can automate them, but you're rewarded for not doing it, since automated workers aren't that smart at improving. If we had optimated worker automation or a quick "what-improvement-goes-where" system which would automate the workers to fulfill the improvement plan created by the player, no one would bother ordering their worker armies every other turn. And then there are citizens. In my opinion Civ IV's citizens automate pretty well but still from time to time one has to micro them to fulfill one's plans.

So you're not forced to micromanage but you're rewarded for micromanaging. That's equally bad if you ask me. Perhaps they'll cut those from Civ V if it's ever made.

If you think that Civ IV is free of micromanagement, try playing with all possible units automated, city production automated, researching the suggested options always and trying to keep alive. After all, it's just our play style that makes ordering around workers and citizens micromanagement.

 

[GravityWave]

If we had optimated worker automation or a quick "what-improvement-goes-where" system which would automate the workers to fulfill the improvement plan created by the player, no one would bother ordering their worker armies every other turn.

Gets my vote. Being able to right click on a tile and say "always build improvement x here" would be great also, as then you could design your cities and leave the workers to get on with it... an added bonus would also be that it would make replacing improvements that get destroyed by events and espionage less tedious (being able to instruct a group of workers to only replace destroyed improvements would be great too).

 

[Wodan]

I guess we all have our personal problems. For instance, there's the personality quirk that leads some people to just have to take a crap on threads about what people would like to see in Civ V.

Gosh, it sure would suck if such a thoughtful, constructive guy didn't buy the sequel.

I think the proper follow up is "Oh snap!"

No offense Willem.