Your top two things that would make Civ 5 better

[Lord Monkey]

This thread should probably go in the suggestions forum. That said..

1. More intelligent tactical AI.

2. Less manic overall AI.

 

[charon2112]

(2) Ask Sid Meier to publish a letter explaining to all the haters here that this is Civ V and not CivIV part II. He's sorry if you hate it. Truly. He was trying to do something new with the series (God forbid) and wasn't intentionally trying to piss you off. He will redouble his efforts to allow all you Civ IV pros to spam infinite stacks of Jaguar Warriors and conquer all opposing civs in the ancient era on the next patch. Because ONLY combat it fun in Civ. Building stuff / empires is for "the general public". Sheesh.

This is good. Although Sid had little to do with designing this game (or IV)...

 

[r_rolo1]

Maybe he should also ask to Sid to add in that letter for people stop equaling critics to civ V to love to Civ IV. Jeez, fanboyism is really irking.

As long as he cared for posting here, he might had given some kind of constructive criticism as well ... you know, that thing that the devs say they like, called ... feedback This is not a civ V bashing thread, it is a thread asking for sugestions for making the game better ... and his sugestion 2) does not fulfill that requirement.

 

[milk steak]

Moderator Action: <snip>
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

(Or 1. Better AI, 2. Better diplomacy)

 

[Paeanblack]

My list: (apart from the AI improvements)

Minor:
Puppet states increasing the Social Policy cost
Improved Mines (+1P with Dynamite?)
Mounted unit penalty for attacking cities
Two non-combat units per tile (only-one-can-work is fine)

Major:
Rampant unhappiness causing puppet states to become new city-states. (With initial diplomatic relations based on how much unhappiness)

The last one is a big deal: it's what I've wanted in all of my Civ games, and Civ 5 comes the closest to implementing it. The history of the world is full of large empires fracturing and splintering. I want to see colonies revolting and civil wars occurring, without it feeling like I'm 'losing' when it happens.

If my people are minorly unhappy, then a fringe city splitting off into an friendly city-state doesn't seem that horrible. It helps fix my unhappiness problem, and seems like a reasonable trade-off. I can ally with them, or conquer them, or ignore them. I lose some science/income/control, but that's fair...I didn't have means to manage it.

If my people are majorly unhappy, then a fringe city splitting off into a city-state that is at war with me also seems appropriate. If my leadership is that awful, I should be expecting civil wars.

 

[greggbert]

* More diplomacy information
* AI use terrain and formations a little smarter. At least not wander powerful units into grasslands that are flanked by 4 enemies.

 

[Eddogegr3]

How about we wait for the expansion packs and then see...?

I am fine with Civ 5 as it is. Just fix the bugs. Maybe add more customization options in the menu. But for the actual game play? I am fine and willing to see what they do.

 

[zarik]

Puppet Cities
- should not be allowed to build unit improvement buildings such as a barracks. puppets can't build units thus they don't need unit experience points
- they are my puppet. they should have to request permission before they can build any building that requires a resource. for example - factories and coal

 

[Adam7Eight]

Your top two things that would make Civ 5 better

1. Less bugs
2. Better AI

 

[JudgeDeath]

1) Combat AI.
2) Fix overpowered maritime city states.

Quoted for truth.

 

[Drawmeus]

Combat AI and foreign diplomacy UI.

I agree with a lot of the points made here, but those two win, I think.

 

[Dusk]

1) A correct Civlopedia with links

2) More tooltip info ala Civ IV

 

[pennjersey83]

1) Make the time between turns quicker

2) satellite tech should reveal map

 

[zonk]

He will redouble his efforts to allow all you Civ IV pros to spam infinite stacks of Jaguar Warriors and conquer all opposing civs in the ancient era on the next patch. Because ONLY combat it fun in Civ. Building stuff / empires is for "the general public". Sheesh.
This is good. Although Sid had little to do with designing this game (or IV)...

Boy, I still don't get this counterpoint.... I was a terrible IV player who never warmongered and I find the "building stuff/empires" the best part about Civilization generally -- and I am sorely disappointed in V.

It should have been perfect for me because I always suffered from killer stacks overruning my peaceful empire which wanted little more than to be left alone to build wonders.... but it's as if they gave me that (no more stacks), but made the part I wanted (more builder focused gameplay) LESS fun.

It's turned me into a warmonger just to avoid the Next Turn clickfest!

Anyway....

1)Fix the AI... all else is secondary

2)Bring back more city-centric focus

 

[tharg]

Bring back CivIV Diplomacy UI.

 

[andrewlt]

1. Rebalance pacing (production speed vs tech speed, buildings benefit vs cost/maintenance, ramping up costs to purchase tiles, usefulness of hills/grasslands/mines/bonus tiles). This game has tons of pacing issues.
2. Let us expand.

 

[Polycrates]

AI and general tuning up aside, the one thing that I want to see is foreign trade routes. It's the one thing that feels like it's missing rather than a deliberate omission.

 

[MadRat]

1) Better military and diplomatic AI (use combined arms and diplomacy that is based on actual game reality)
2) More interesting effects for building and wonders - they are so utterly blah and 75% identical (+x to great leader)

 

[drachasor]

1. Better AI is the most important.

2. Buildings adjusted to be less heavily specialized and make more sense. For example, Coliseums should have a maintenance cost, but then should also produce gold based on population. Hence, in a large city they'd make a little money, whereas if you were having happiness problems and put them in a small city, it would cost you money. That's interesting AND makes more sense.

3. (Continuing the tradition of some of us not counting well). I'd like to see some sort of adjustment to how culture towards social policies are calculated. It seems overly harsh to even modest-sized empires of perhaps 8 cities. It is crazy-harsh if you place a city down just to grab some resources and don't plan on it becoming huge due to location (but do plan on it paying for its happiness issues). I'm not sure exactly how to do this though, but there are a few vague options in my head. I'm sure there's something a bit more elegant than what we have now.


One thing I don't want to see is Civ IV religions where you have to rush to a belief system. That's crazy. All civs should have some sort of religion naturally, perhaps further shaped by what social policies you pick (and perhaps by what techs you pick).

 

[jpsdrum]

1. Expanded and Improved Tech Tree
2. 1upt is okay, but have the option for armies (like civ3)