-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
What We Must Need In Civ 5
- Thread starter Ahovking
- Start date
Kullervo
Mahler/Sibelius Freak
can you clarify that? Do you mean more detailed combat animations, or more combat options, more promotions, multiple-units attacks... hat do you mean?
Err, that's [double-u]hat... my [double-u] does not [double-u]ork.
Err, that's [double-u]hat... my [double-u] does not [double-u]ork.
If you mean tactical combat like in Total War games, that's about the last thing I want in Civ games. Reason: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_Action#The_Covert_Action_Rule . Perhaps a roughly simulated alternative to deal damage more realistically.
If you mean more detailed combat animations, who needs them? I play with quick combat on, and I think most other players do so too.
More units/promotions could be very good... or extremely detrimental. Adding badly planned new units will hurt game balance and add a serious amount of the dreaded unfun. If new units are to be added, they should be planned carefully.
Drunk Link
Chieftain
I say we should definetly have alot more combat units. Maybe even some more non-combatant units. Also there needs to be more civs. Tons more civs! 
I say we should definetly have alot more combat units. Maybe even some more non-combatant units. Also there needs to be more civs. Tons more civs!
Adding more civs can't upset the game balance that much, but I must disagree with unconditional "more units". As I said before, new units need to be planned carefully so they aren't ridiculously over- or underpowered and can be countered by something other than large masses. I also dislike the idea of cramming a lot of units in the same era - the end result is always that one of the units is stacked, throw in one each of the other units to counter enemy attacks and get the stack rolling. Doesn't add to the fun factor if you ask me. More units also has the capability to add micromanagement.
Non-combatants are a whole different story. They could add more flavor in the game. Caravans and such would be nice if it wasn't for the micromanagement and if they had some function apart from producing wealth (why not just build "Wealth" instead). I've been thinking that sappers or something could be added too. Supply units could also add an important strategic element. But three rules to mind here - 1. it must be balanced 2. no micromanagement and most importantly 3. IT HAS TO BE FUN!.
Drunk Link
Chieftain
I kinda see what your saying, but a little micromanagment makes the game fun. Of course the game would be balanced. I don't see how adding more units would change that. I didn't say special units or anything (but that is an option).
Non-comatants could include more varieties of "Great People" or something like that.
Non-comatants could include more varieties of "Great People" or something like that.
beaunerslavje
Chieftain
I hate how every single civilization game has our ancient leaders of egypt on their games.
its not that i dont like them its just that that original culture of egypt has been washed out by greek, roman, english, turkish, and arabic culture. we have a new identity now, not that of ramses the second or tut ankamen.
...
all i am saying is we should have more modern egyptian leaders like
Gamal Abdelnasser (nasser), 
Anwar Sadat (saddat), and 
King Farouk if we were to be tagged to a single identity throughout the game.
please reply on what you think.
its not that i dont like them its just that that original culture of egypt has been washed out by greek, roman, english, turkish, and arabic culture. we have a new identity now, not that of ramses the second or tut ankamen.
...
all i am saying is we should have more modern egyptian leaders like
Gamal Abdelnasser (nasser), Anwar Sadat (saddat), and King Farouk if we were to be tagged to a single identity throughout the game.please reply on what you think.
Blahblahman123
Chieftain
There should be improved espionage so you can do more missions with your spy
Blahblahman123
Chieftain
Like declaring independence from that who has vassaled you?i think it could be like civ 4 colonization when AI gets vassalized after time he can make liberty bells and declare independence
Wodan
Deity
Wodan
Deity
That's correct. That's what vassalizing yourself to another player amounts to.
Make it more gradual movement. Instead of engineering giving you a +1 movement it should give you the bridge bonus from construction and paved roads give you the +1 movement.
All units in Civ IV are more or less special. Even in vanilla. You have axemen as your counter-melee units, swordsman as a city raiding force and later on, riflemen to take and hold cities weakened by cannons, cavalry to take enemy workers and pillage their iron mines and a grenadier or two to pick off enemy riflemen.
Let's concentrate on the pre-gunpowder eras. You have basically the following units:
Axemen and crossbowmen for countering melee
Spearmen, pikemen for countering mounted units
Mounted units for stealing workers, pillaging and mobile attacks
Archers and longbowmen for holding cities
Swordsmen (and macemen) to take cities
Catapults and trebuchets for smashing enemy stacks and cities
Basically, your warfare goes like this - you raise a stack of your grunt unit: swordsmen (or macemen if you have them already), then you give most of them city raider promotions to maximise their strength against enemy cities, give them some siege weapons and put a couple of spears/pikes, anti-melee units unless you use macemen, and archers to protect the captured cities. And then you just roll over your enemy.
Should we add a new unit, it would be either a grunt unit that is the main force of the invasion (high strength units), or a specialist unit that excels against a certain unit type(lower strength but bonuses good for stack defense). New grunt units aren't needed, as people already whine about some of them being too short lived. Also, they're the least interesting of all units. But we can't eliminate the grunt units, simply because that would make the game play like rock-paper-scissors and nobody wants that. New specialist stack defender units would add nothing (as everything already has a counter) but the unfun element of building a couple of additional units in your offensive stack.
Kullervo
Mahler/Sibelius Freak
About Egypt:
What there is in Civ is the Egyptian Empire. I don't know what you mean by cultural identity being wiped out, we have a fairly precise view of their culture today, what with the relics left behind, the Rosetta Stone, the Pyramids... as for Nasser and others, I guess they could be just... Egypt... but that would make games quite confusing, and besides, I don't know that many deeds done by modern Egypt except for a few military scandals in the first half of the century, and then a recent Time magazine report on poverty. I doubt that a lot of people know past that. Sure, modern Egypt is a single national identity, but then again, culture and the way we define it has changed a lot in the modern age. What is Egypt's culture today?
There is always the distinct possibility that I have no clue what I am talking about... it's been a long day and a short night.
What there is in Civ is the Egyptian Empire. I don't know what you mean by cultural identity being wiped out, we have a fairly precise view of their culture today, what with the relics left behind, the Rosetta Stone, the Pyramids... as for Nasser and others, I guess they could be just... Egypt... but that would make games quite confusing, and besides, I don't know that many deeds done by modern Egypt except for a few military scandals in the first half of the century, and then a recent Time magazine report on poverty. I doubt that a lot of people know past that. Sure, modern Egypt is a single national identity, but then again, culture and the way we define it has changed a lot in the modern age. What is Egypt's culture today?
There is always the distinct possibility that I have no clue what I am talking about... it's been a long day and a short night.
I basically agree with this - civilizations and their leaders are chosen because they are historically significant. Of course, modern leaders may be modded in, but they are not likely to be interesting to most of the players.
Well terribly sorry if you can't recognize obsessive/compulsive behavior in yourself. Most people just wait until a city has passed it's happy cap before deciding to whip. No micromanagement required for that. Maybe they should just shut off whipping until then for people like you who can't control themselves. It would really suck to lose such a well used and useful feature because a small minority of players have no restraint.
Ahovking
Cyber Nations
>Gday
>
>What I Want is the ability to get into debt so you can borrow and get interest and then if you cant get pay of the Interest or the debt your empire would divide or collapse and become a failed state.
>
>
>What I Want is the ability to get into debt so you can borrow and get interest and then if you cant get pay of the Interest or the debt your empire would divide or collapse and become a failed state.
>
Why not just have a game where the player's actions are completely eliminated and we can just sit back and watch as an AI plays the game for us? It looks like Firaxis has finally got a handle on micromanagemt by your logic, they're not producing a game at all. That eliminates it completely.