Resources are an important part of Civ. It was a big addition to Civ3. But how can it become better in Civ4?
Resources were not the most debated subject when making this list, but all participants seem to agree that it should stay. The general meaning seems to be that it should be expanded. The radical ideas was the most debated subject.
The term Region will represent the terms region and state in this thread.
1 - General
2 - Food
3 - Syntetics
4 - Radical ideas
5 - Trade and stockpiling
Conclusion
Coffee
Tobacco
Sugar
Vineager
Copper (needed for some ancient and modern units
Stone (Strategic - for wonders/improvements : eg. Pyramids, Hanging Gardens)
-Mongoloid Cow
Luxury:
Resin
Slaves
Marble
-Wernazuma III
Cotton
-DaleC76
Horses (for mounted units)
Iron (for many things)
Coal (for RR's & PP's)
KNO3 (Saltpeter) I prefer Sulfur instead (same use though)
Rubber (many uses) - replaced later with component Synthetic Rubber
Oil - replaced MUCH later with Synthetic Fuels
Uranium - replaced MUCH later with a product of Fusion Power (MAYBE)
Aluminum
Timber (for building WOODEN larger ships) - available in any forest - if timber is added, then timber/stone would be needed for many buildings?
Stone (for building structures) - available from any mountain/hill
Spears (no resource) - spearmen
Pikes (Iron) - pikemen
Muskets (Iron+KNO3) - musketmen
Rifles (Iron+KNO3 or none) - riflemen
Light Machine Guns(no resouce) -guerilla
Machine Guns (Iron+rubber) - infantry
Mech Inf (Rubber+Iron+Oil) -mech inf unit
Swords (Iron) - swordsmen + med inf
(sidenote: horsemen would be horse+spear, knights would be swords+horses, cavalry muskets/rifles+horses...)
Tanks (Iron+Rubber+Oil)
Fighter (Oil+Iron/Aluminum?)
Galley (none)
Frigate (Timber+Iron+KNO3)
etc...
-piratebrun
Cameleers require desert terrain in the city to build. If you arent fighting in a desert, they have no particular advantage anyway.
Elephants require the ivory spcial resource in your empire, and a jungle tile in the city (for a local habitat). Again, elephants, while good, arent essential.
'Large wooden ships' require a forest tile in the city radius. If you dont have forest, with the right tech, your terraformers can transform plaisn to forest, and even so, the earliest, lightest ships dont require forest (a cludge so you can always leave even the smallest island), and modern ships arent wooden.
-lajzar
It would be nice if the Earth map had its fish ressources in the right place. I'm saying this because I remember it was quite something to make it on the "Marla's Earth map" for Civ3
-Trifna
-there should be some way to share food resources, there should be no reason to have two cities near each other, linked via road with one overflowing with food and the other starving.
-Bleyn
- "Rice" tiles : can't produce anything else than food, but lots of it, say five or six, and more with irrigation / railroad / farmland.
-Spiffor
-Rubber should be able to be synthetically produced in certain factories ...
A big part of playing Civ games has always been the city screen. This is traditionally where you set production for your cities. Where you check on a city's status, etc. What could we envision for Civ IV? Perhaps new features. New ways to make cities interact with the rest of the game. Perhaps divide the nation into regions, each with their own screen. Post your ideas here
A lot that is suggested here will be new to the game "and hopefully added". Help think of the ways these changes should look, what information is needed on the screen. If all possible, add screen shots.
The term Region will represent the terms region and state in this thread
Game Atmosphere
Recommend City Pollution Managers
1.0.0 Regional Menus
2.0.0 City Menus
Conclusion
1.1 Have a big ...
Movement and supply? How do troops move? How do railroads function, and do units lose hitpoints when they're beyond national borders? All this and more is addressed in this thread.
Railroad infinite movement was a major issue, occupying over 90 posts of arguments in the main thread between a mulititude of posters. Other issues were how to implement supply with borders and whether naval units should have variable movement rates due to oceanic weather.
1.0.0 Supply
2.0.0 Speed of Units
2.1.0 RR Infinite Movement
2.2.0 Different transport infrastructures
2.3.0 Naval Units
2.3.1 Speeds of Naval Units and Other Issues
2.3.13 Landing Troops from a Transport
2.4.0 Speed on Land (Roads, Railroads, etc.)
2.5.0 Air Units: Movement and Speed
2.6.0 Speed, All Units
2.7.0 Limiting Expansion and Ligtning-Speed Discovery
3.0.0 Tactical Movement (Flanking, Between Mountains, Etc.)
4.0.0 Coordinate System, Tiles, Movement System
5.0.0 Other Issues
Conclusion
Use C3's movement and supply (or the lack thereof) system. It's simple and it works.
-Kuciwalker
supply rules can fix the to-easy-to-conquer problem while leaving RR at no movement cost.
-Straybow
military equipment and troops stationed in enemy territory cost 1 extra gold! The cost of resupplying these troops!
-Tiberius
There are basically two major groups in military (Iraq, Vietnam...): armed troops and support troops. Troops may also support themselves on the field, pillaging or else. But it is often better to support the troops. Without the player touching anything, some AI-directed support troops could relay between your territory and your troops in another territory. The player should place units to protect those from enemy interference. It would solve: War making more sense economically (pillage/support, cost) and tactically (difficulty of invading would make more sense, protecting could be useful...). Some factors could have an effect on the capacity to support or pillage: technology, money, terrain...
-Trifna
To go over my earlier suggestion, "supply" would be a simple % bonus that radiates from a supply unit. Units are still effective without supply, but they are better with it. The supply unit is also the 1st defender, and the 1st receiver of artillery bombard. This causes the player to always try to keep his supply unit 2 tiles behind his main stack.
-wrylachlan
Every turn a ship is outside your waters, there is a percentage chance it looses a hp. [...] You can use the exact same mechanism on land.
-wrylachlan
Let's say we use CTP- combat stacks for Civ4... Ok, some special units might not need supply at all, but there could be a supply unit as mentioned a forehead or HQ in the army stack in which regular units disengaging from the stack could trace supply from. Or the army commander could just be that tracing HQ unit. You know... as a HQ unit in board games. The same should go with ships, but a flagship could be selected within the stack or they just use a supply ship. Such naval stacks should also work as a supply source for armies so that an expeditionary corps will have a supply source to trace from.
-ThePlagueRat
Many options... Reduced movement and/or attack efficiency, reinforcement (healing) in enemy territory reduced. Therefore you as a player would go into the field with a stack, and perhaps disengage units into the terrain when appropriate. Like we did in Ctp, without this supply system though. How to use stacks should be pretty much up to each player, IMO. Supply could even be reduced by the HQ (supply unit) not having a road/railroad going back home in adjacent square. Then friendly cities must work as HQ with a decent range of supply. That brings us to levels of supply:
...Government is not only the leader's primary tool, It's the supreme organization in every nation. Society is the human network of personal connections, and the norms that can hold a civilization together, or break it. This is the place for suggestions for the implementation of both of these in the game.
1. Government ( Government choices, new governments, change of existing government forms. )
2. Society ( similar to SMAC's Social Engineering models)
3. Federalism vs. Centralization
4. SE Proposals and Government Models
5. Other (Misc)
Conclusion
Bring back Fundamentalism, and several of the Civ3:Conquests governments.
-Brent.
New governments for the ancient age, like "City state", which would be similar to a republic, but more primitive, and "Empire", which would allow you to control large territories.
-skywalker
An assembly with a mind of it's own in democratic governments, that could make some decisions on it's own. (but not complicate the game too much)
-Stefu
The ability to fully customize the government, Describing the internal political system of it, and then, if needed, answering the government's democratic institutions, etc.
-Cras
The changes of government, should be mostly left for the society itself, and not for the player, while the player could have means dealing with such things, such as supressing it with police, or changing the government's priorities. If all fails, you'll be either be able to peacefully, and automatically, and peacefully switch to the government of the people's desire, or fall into anarchy. You'll also be able to try and push governmental change yourself, but that will have to have popular support, as well.
-Lorizael
Having government departments, instead of mini-wonders, to describe the functions of one's government. Those will also evolve, and appear over time, and technology.
-Mr. Nice Guy
A Libertarian government, that would have no conscription, little taxes, more pollution, but more efficiency, and more happiness.
-Lawrence of Arabia
The choices made by the government ( perhaps in the Social Engineering model - Az ) will be used to 'calculate' to what sort of government does a certain government belong.
-Mr. Orange
A system of different factors as in SMAC where each factor is on part of governments: like "social values" (religion - science - nobility [goes from European nobles to Confucius] - individualistic freedom - nationalism), "statecraft" (from totalitarian to total demnocracy), "power structure (from centralized to tribal), "economics" (from communism to complete capitalism), "justification of power" and "justice system" (theocratic to complete far west).
See this post for the complete model.
-Trifna
Traits having having a limited lifetime, and being changed either through gradual change, or revolution
-Sandman
Having ...
Here's the section for General Ideas, Ideas that either transcend all the other categories, or just don't quite fit under any of the other topics.
Thanks for reading,
-List Threadmaster DarkCloud
Well, the best way to read this section is to read the titles, as varied as they are because they’ll give you some idea of what you’re up against. The ideas are so varied that it’s hard to give a summary to this section. This is where everything that did not quite fit went to ‘fit’ itself.
Growth - Should it be Related to Food, frenzyfol
Terrorism, grap 1705
Advisors and Magistrates, skycommando
Get Rid of Building Every Improvement Everywhere, polypheus
1.0.0- Radical Ideas; Game Structure
2.0.0- Animation/Theming/Graphics
3.0.0- Automation/Programming
4.0.0- Characterization/Historical/Realistic
5.0.0- Maps/Display
Conclusion
*From another thread, the first time you play Civ4, only a few large, major civs are available to start with, such as Chinese, Semites, Indoeuropeans. To keep from having the same exact group of civs for the whole game, there would be breakoffs. Indoeuropeans can split into Romans, Celts, Germans, Slavs, Indians, etc. The idea for winning the game would be to have the culture group created by you and your breakoffs control the world. On your next game, either the first generation of breakoffs or all breakoffs for that last game are available to start with. The civs you identify with would tend to be created because of the civs you previously chose. Ingame, give the player a message when a minor civ breaks off, asking if you want it to become a playable civ for future games. When this happens, give the player a readout of the civ's stats to edit if desired, or stats could be filled out later in the editor.
*Traits chosen for your political party become standard traits for breakoff civs. Maybe combine and balance political traits with civ traits.
*Semites can split into Hebrews, Egyptians, Hyksos, Berbers, Babylonians. Hebrews split into Israelites, Arabs, Midianites, Edomites. Judah can split off from Israel. Maybe Israel splits into a separate civ for each of Jacob's wives. Maybe Rachel and Leah start as one splitoff. Leah splits into Judah, Simeon, Reuben, etc. Judah splits into Zarah, Phares, and Shelah, or Sephards and Ashkenazi. Arabs split into Libyans, Saudis, Iraqis.
*There can be confederacies, such as Switzerland, and the Philipines can be treated as one too. A confederacy is a group of minor tribes that start near each other. It is assumed that they will use diplomacy to merge eventually. The Philipines would only show up on a large Far East or random map. They could also have their own scenario. The Swiss could be a cohesive civ on any map or a confederacy on a large random map. They could have their own scenario or be part of a German scenario.
*Using a similar system to GalCiv, have standard traits for each civ plus the player chooses extra traits for a political party or a specific leader, and these bonus traits could be lost with a change of politics. The player can set a number of points for all civs in the game.
Macroculturegroups: Africa, Asia, America, Europe.
Africa: East, North, West, Central.
Asia: Arab, Mesopotamia, Central, Far East, Caucasus, Southeast, India, Himilayas, Palestine.
America: Eastern Woodlands, Great Plains, Southwest, California, Mesoamerica, South America
Europe: Iberia, German, Celtic, British Isles, Scandinavia, Slavic, Italic, Balkan, Alps.
Independant medium- level culture groups: Pacific, Arctic, Siberia (with overlap).
Currently I say anywhere from 8 to 64 Major civs and about 200 minors. I don't care if the civs I like have uniqueness, but I want most of them to have plenty of city names.
(Ed: This idea would work as a special scenario for civ and would really change the game mechanics. Personally, I don't think it would ...
I don't have much time to discuss this in detail, but I feel that there should be more to diplomacy than in previous Civ games. In Civ3 right now you are basically either at peace or at war. Granted there is 'feelings' towards each Civ, but they simply don't play a big enough role. I believe that there should be levels of engagement, such as cease-fire, allied peace, neutral, etc.. I'll go into detail later on.
-TechWins
I couldn't agree with this more. There definitely needs to be something beyond merely "allied" for instance. Historically, allies could change sides pretty easily (hello, Italy!), but there needs to be something the signifies a deep and resounding friendship and trust between two Civs.
For instance, American and Britain wouldn't go to war together, not even if Britain could take on America. Why? The Americans and Britains are friends and allies, and largely see many basic things the same. Something like this would make it so that you can have some allies you are certain of, and othes you are wary of. I think it would be fair to penalize players that break such alliances with the universal loathing and mistrust of all other Civs, though you should be able to back out of it bit by bit.
I am sure you can see many other levels of interest there could be.
-Drachasor
Unit trading is a must, as the below illustrates. Civvers really want a lot more in terms of diplomacy options. They want to be able to coordinate with allies, and to trade territory itself. Also, they want computer players to consider massing armies near their borders to be a sign of agression.
Diplomacy (CyberShy aka Robert Plomp)
Occupied Territories (skycommando)
1.0.0 International Diplomacy
2.0.0 Land Control
3.0.0 Treaty Rules
4.0.0 Graphics/Mechanics of Diplomatic Negotiations
5.0.0 Diplomatic Options
6.0.0 Terrorism
7.0.0 General Diplomacy
Conclusion
Since the world wars are difficult, if not impossible, to end, there should be a possibility to call international congresses (by clicking a button in the diplomacy / shift-D screen).
(See this site for how it should look: )
The central proposition (such as "peace treaty with any other, right of passage with any other"...) must be accepted by all so that the congress is a success. The proposition would make the leaders react, and you can see with their faces if they agree or not. If they don't agree, what to do Bribe them! By double clicking on their face, a specialized diplomacy screen should pop up, where you make propositions only to make them accept the treaty (private diplomacy can be held anywhere else during the game). Naturally, you don't want to pay for the whole world peace. In such a situation, there should be a button when you're speaking to "give to..." an other :
(See this site)
Once you click it, the concessions you ask from your partner don't go to you, they go to another civ. Here's an example:
Let's say the Aztecs have won against the Iroquois, capturing Salamanca, but due to intricated MPPs, this war cannot cease. As the neighbours of the peaceful Iroquois, you don't want the balance to be broken by an unfinishable war. Then, you call a congress between Iroquois, Aztecs, all of their allies. The Aztecs will accept the peace treaty for 20 gold per turn, but you feel the Iroquois must pay: On the congress screen you double click on Hiawatha, choose "give to..." -> "the Aztecs". And then, as you would do in a normal diplomacy screen "gold"-> "per turn" -> "20".
(See this site: )
When you return on the congress screen, you see Moctezuma accepting, because he knows he recieves a compensation. If you definately cannot have everyone accept, you could kick the "rebels" out the congress.Well, I admit managing the other's diplomacy is not easy, so I think such a tool should be completely optional.But useful if you want to influence more directly the others. These multilateral bargainings could be used to make solid alliances too, by asking all those who are MPPed with you to MPP between themselves as well. (or to ask everyone to reduce his nuclear weapons, and so on...)
International congresses should be available once nationalism is discovered, or once UN is built. I don't think the AI could manage such a thing, so only the player could call for one. If the negociations succeed, due to your great diplomatic skill, the invited civs would be a bit more likely to vote for you.
-Spiffor
Declare atrocities, sanctions, nuclear arms reductions, pollution reductions
-David Murray
Your spies should know the vote intentions of infiltrated civs (POSSIBLE SPY OPTION??? INFILTRATE PLANNED COUNCIL VOTE???). There should be a way to bribe the other civ to vote for you (HIGLY expensive, and impossible if their spies know you're going to win)
-Spiffor
In the UN: anyone can ask someone to stop fighting another- useful if you have two potential allies but when you side with one it pisses the other off...
-Cian McGuire
If the UN is built and other nations have agreed to vote in favour of one of your competitors you have the option to say "F**k the UN!" and go on with your bussiness. This decision would result in all other nations having a casus belli for war with you for a period of 40 turns.
-Mannamagnus
There should be proper alliances that states can join (like NATO)
-builderchad
Trade blocks (like EU and FTA) that basically equate to increased income for the states involved and better/cheaper access to other members resources etc.
-builderchad
Establishing claims for various tiles or areas
-gopher
This would be a bit tricky. There are claims and there are claims. This might be hard to fit into bargaining algorithms too. It is a nice idea, but I have trouble seeing a clean interface for it (which I think is important).
-Drachasor
Again and again I ask for EU type of diplomacy. It is much clearer; you can understand why somebody does not like you (religion, or you made a war with its friend). EU type of alliances rocks! Negotiations to make peace and decisions who gets what after the war are great! Ability to look at the map how any country treats other countries is very welcome. There are many other aspects that I want to see in CIV game that are in EU diplomacy model.
-MxM
I do agree with the occupied territory concept also. One reason of course is to improve the bug in MPP. You lose a city to an invader. Then you retake your lost city which activates any MPPs the ...
1.0.0 Types of Civs
2.0.0 Rulers
3.0.0 Colonies
4.0.0 Immigration
5.0.0 Nations' Compositions
6.0.0 Proposed Civ Lists
7.0.0 Civ Traits
8.0.0 Civ Placement
9.0.0 Unique Units
10.0.0 Other
Conclusion
*Colonies should be counted as air bases. You own them, they're outside of your territory and they are semi cities...so why can't you land planes there?
-Jer8m8
*If the colonies, for example, contribuited toward corruption costs but couldn't grow beyond certain sizes or produce certain items, and yet proved useful to the player in harvesting resources in certain areas, then they would fit a nice civ-game niche.
-DarkCloud
-You can only build it on top of a resource. However, you can build one on the coast as long as it's on an island, across a sea, ocean, etc, and connected to a resource (with a colony on it).
-You can only build one colony per resource tile, and you must declare which resource it is connected to (any of them not already claimed by another colony).
-You can only station (and build) smaller boats there (galleys, privateers, caravels, galleons, transports, destroyers).
-You can station up to two air units there, but only if you have an airstrip (same functions as an airport).
-You can station as many ground units as you want until you hit tanks (you can only station 5 or so).
-You can build a barracks, so that you don't have to transport back obsolete units to upgrade them.
-A colony only has influence on the square that it is located on.
-Colonies act as population 1, and may fall into civil disorder (which may eventually force the disbading of the colony). There is always a specialist, however, and it may be any of the normal kind (so as to make it specialized in some sort of way).
-A colony will disband if captured or if someone elses boundaries encircle it.
-Bob Rulz
*Immigration/ Emigration.I once sent a post on another pre-CIV3 forum somewhere where I wanted this issue debated. CIV3 already has parts of it: if you conquer an enemy city, e.g the Greeks its inhabitants will still be greek for some while, happy or not. Now what would happen if the greeks could actually send people into your cities as workers whenever you're not at war, for example if your city is close to the greek borders. What if any civilization could do that? The city status window could show a diagram of the city population demographics, saying "90% Romans, 5% Greek, 2% Babylonians" or so. Those cities with more than, say, 20% foreign inhabitants could likely fall into disorder when a war erputs, or anytime on higher difficulty levels... restrictive/repressive governments (Communism? Despotism?) might throw out "unwanted" foreigners, thus decreasing city sizes... of course, YOU (the player) could send your own people to foreign cities... they would leave anyway if they don't like the way you govern the country, adding up to your competitor's city sizes... spies could only plant propaganda in cities holding inhabitants of your civilization (they can barely hide with people which language they don't speak or so)...
-Cozy_22303
*Migration between cities of the same Civ
-Brent
*Allow some sort of ethnic purging, or allow some ability to expel ethnic groups from your civ if they grow too rowdy.
-Shogun Gunner
*You should be able to set up specific policies concerning how you treat your minority populations - do you tolerate them, promote a multicultural society, try to assimilate them or persecute them?
*Perhaps you should only be able to set policies about minority groups comprising 20% of any individual city's population or 5% of your civilization's population, just so that this system does not become too unweildly.
-Stefu
*As for citizens, they should be able to have at least a dual heritage that affects the relative levels of happiness and corruption in the cities you conquer... and also, this could introduce problems of immigration- for example: if too many Assyrians come into Babylonian cities- then perhaps the city will 'culture flop' into Assyrian when the next war occurs.
*I would also like to see nationality levels for all citizens.
-Drachasor/DarkCloud
*I think that generally every conquered civilization should maintain its ethnic heritage. There should be some way to deal with the various ethnic values/wants/disagreements when managing your civilization. Therefore, if you want to conquer the world you'll have to find some way to appease those you are conquering, otherwise they might revolt and refound their civilization (perhaps this would allow you to exceed the max number of civs in the game). This would make it so that as you take over more groups it becomes more difficult to manage them all which means that conquering the world would not become a cake walk after a certain point. (Ed: Note, much like Europa Universalis’ religion-slider, except adapted into an Ethnic-slider)
-Drachasor
6.1.0 More Balanced (Asian, Africans Included) (37 civs)
Americans
Iroquois
Aztecs
Mayans
Incas
French
Germans
English
Celts
Spanish
Romans
Greeks
Russians
Norsemen
Dutch
Portuguese
Hungarians
Turks
Arabs
Hebrews
Babylonians
Assyrians
Persians
Egyptians
Carthagians
Ethiopians
Mali (or possibly some other West African civ of the era - Songhay, Dahomey etc.)
Zulus
Mongols
Indians
Vietnamese
Siamese
Koreans
Chinese
Khitai
Japanese
Javans
-Stefu
*Besides the civs that are in Conquests, I strongly agree on including the Hebrews and Ethiopians. Many small ancient Middle Eastern civilizations can be added.
-Brent
*The first thing period should be: every civ in civ3+ptw+conquests should carry over.
-Q Cubed
The Americas (11)
Iroquois
Americans
*Sioux/Lakota
Mayas
Aztecs
Incas
*Nazca (maybe)
*Inuit (maybe)
*Utes (maybe)
*Anasazi (maybe)
*Mississippians/Mound Builders (maybe)
West Europe: (11)
English
France
Spain
Portugal
Germany
Netherlands/Dutch
Vikings
*Sweden
*Ireland (maybe)
*Italy (maybe) (ed: We already have Rome)
Celts
Eastern Europe: (3)
Russia
*Poland (maybe)
*Austria (since they had alot of slavs) (maybe)
Mediterranean: (4)
Rome
Greece
Carthage
Egypt
Byzantine (maybe)
Africa: (7)
*Shonghai
*Ashanti
*Mali
*Ethiopia
Zulu
*Xhosa (maybe)
*Bantu or Kenya or Tanzania (maybe)
Middle East: (9)
Arabs
Turkey/Ottoman Empire
Persia
*Israel/Hebrew (maybe)
*Numbia (maybe)
Babylon
*Assyria
Sumeria
Hittite
South/Southeast Asia (6)
India
...
Here's the section for Civilizations, dealing with all the data about how Tribes, Civilizations, Special Rulers and Special Bonuses and options for civilizations.
Thanks for reading,
-List Administrator DarkCloud
Basically, most of the discussion centered around civ-customizability, civil war nation-splitting and, minor civs.
There was a large debate on the merits of the inclusion of Israel as a major civilization with some people citing Israel's contributions to civilization and linking it with the ancient Judea of the past, and some people arguing that since Israel has not been around very long contiguously that it is different from Judea, and cannot stand as an empire of its own.
However trivial that debate seems, it did open discussion about what constitutes a Major Tribe (a Civilization). Some suggested that only "Imperial" empires could be considered Civilizations. Others suggested that a Civilization was only game worthy if it had "expanded and controlled an extended area of land and exerted its culture and influence upon disparate groups." Nowadays, of course, with today's faster communication and globalization, communications are affected faster and culture is spread over a more varied region, therefore this debate is close to becoming moot- however, personally, I support this definition of a Civilization.
Nevertheless, as you will read below and in the conclusion, there were several suggestion to the relative proliferations of civilizations, ranging from people's suggestions of a "Create-A-Civ" Machine, to Extensive Minor Tribes, to "Dynamic Civilizations" as well as tangentially related suggestions such as Civil-War Empire splitting.
{The List} Civilization traits, Nuclear Master
{The List}Civilizations, civilleader
{The List}Civilizations, DarkCloud
{The List}Civilizations Version II , DarkCloud
Barbarians become civilized? , Mojotronica
Civilization specific golden ages, Tripledoc
{The List} Nomads and Chiefdoms, Spiffor
Civ IV fit for minors, Fosse
Barbarians, Master Zen
Civil Wars, Metaliturtle
1.0.0 Types of Civs
2.0.0 Rulers
3.0.0 Colonies
4.0.0 Immigration
5.0.0 Nations' Compositions
6.0.0 Proposed Civ Lists
7.0.0 Civ Traits
8.0.0 Civ Placement
9.0.0 Unique Units
10.0.0 Other
Conclusion
*Barbarians, through capturing cities, could become civilizations themselves, over time. Thus we start with 8-10 civs on the map at the beginning and can end with 16 simultaneous civilizations.
-narmox
*Barbarians should be able to capture cities like they did in Civ II and start churning out their own units.
-Rasputin
*Barbarians should be able to trade
-Azazel
*Barbarians can be hired as mercenaries (Perhaps without a nationality [Like Privateers])
*Barbarians can rent/loan/sell units
*And if they are mercs there should be a chance (perhaps modified by your cultural strength and/or how much you paid for them (minimum, moderate, or high)or somethn) that they go independent or even turn against you since they are mercs after all (such as what german mercs did to the Romans occasionally)
-Kramerman
*If Barbarian civs don't generate Culture, then perhaps they could gain special Generals (Like Attila the Hun) or a "golden age" which will give them some culture. If they then conquer enough cities they can become a powerful military civ. Then again, if their golden age ends, or the leader dies this empire will likely fall apart.
-ixnay
*Instead of giving the Barbarians no culture, don't give them any Civ Attributes... Therefore they'd be weeded out through normal attrition after a short time
*And if that wasn't enough of a handicap and barbs started overrunning actual Civ's you could give them a slight production handicap.
-wrylachlan
*New civs (like nomadic barbarians with strong armies) should appear at times to destroy weak civs because not only the Mongols, but a great variety of civs came out of nowhere. Those civs could be allowed to receive techs when conquering cities, so they can soon cope with their foes and not continue to live in the Stone Age...
-Wernazuma III
*I think that Barbarian 'civs' entering the industrial age should be given status as a regular civilization.
-Panzeh
*What if the barbs had their own research pool, a small number added to it each turn per settlement on the map.
When the number adds up to a certain amount (average approx every 40 or 50 turns) one barbarian settlement somewhere in the world (determined at random) becomes a full-fledged Civ (using one of the unused Civs -- if all are used, it doesn't happen.) (Thanks to player's use of Barbarian settlements as Worker farms using Conquest's enslavement rules, this would be much more likely to occur.) Then the barb research pool drops back to zero again.
The new civ starts at a tech level determined by the units the barbs are using at the time (Warriors, Horsemen etc...)
-Mojotronica
*In addition, some civilizations (ex: USSR) can split apart (like in Civ II), through a peaceful coup, or a civil war.
-narmox
*Which Civs are prone to splitting should be balanced with other characteristics.
-Brent
*Could be triggered with a certain chance by certain tech advances like Monotheism, Printing Press, Democracy or Abolishment etc. or by changing government.
-Wernazuma III
*During a Civil war two halves of the civ would be generated ...
When I was young(er) I loved the CIV II cheat menu- got a pesky civ? Drop some tanks and stealth bombers on them. Need more movement? Add it in. Out of cash? Not anymore! Cheats were totally taken out of vanilla CIV III. Should they make a comeback in cIV? How should they manifest?
Thanks for reading,
-MattH
Consensus:
Cheats are needed as scenario editing tools.
Disputed: Cheats are needed to balance multiplayer games.
1.0.0 The Function of Cheats
2.0.0 List of Proposed Cheats
3.0.0 Appearance of the Cheat Menus
Conclusion
Perspective 1: Strict View Brent and others suggest that cheating should be implemented ...
The AI. What often makes a computer game playable, if it's made properly. This is the place to read for finding ideas relating to this concept.
-List Threadmaster Nikolai
All in all, the thing people are most interested in, is a more "intelligent" AI. An AI that can defend itself, attack in a smart way, recognize a good deal when it sees it etc. People clearly think the AI isn't nearly as good as it should be.
1 - AI Madness
2 - Automation
3 - Treatment of Civs
4 - AI Performance
5 - Treatment of military matters
6 - Diplomacy
7 - Modability
Conclusion
Currently, the game is too prone to AI madness.
For example, one AI will suggest- "EVERYONE DECLARE WAR ON PLAYER!”
and the others will automatically agree. Or perhaps the player will utilize this exploit, as is shown in this example and screw the other computer players:
"Everyone please declare war on Russia. Remember, Russia is going to nuke all of your cities since you’re a lot closer to it than I am" - Player.
Instead, the computer should see this and realize it and decide-
"Uh, no. How about we declare war on you instead? - AI" (Posted By Comrade Tassadar; Heavily Edited by DarkCloud)
One thing: the AI should NOT move its units all over the place for no reason. It's really completely silly to see the AI constantly move its stuff for no reason... (ed (darkcloud): and in addition to wasting player time; it’s bad coding left over from Civ II. Can’t the AI make a decision and stick with it- thereby completing a task? The GOTO commands do seem to work quite well in this regard. Instead of being scrapped completely, this should be heavily revamped because if the AI doesn’t have a plan for each unit- then it would become much easier for the player to win while also making for a more tedious game.)
(Posted by Trifna)
I want to be able to automate settlers to build cities in good spots without worrying about them, but I don't want those cities to automatically ...
Dear Firaxis,
What you see before you is the compilation of over a years work on a list of ideas that the players wish to see included in Civilization IV. We thank you dearly for the attention you have lavished upon the Civilization community for over four years with your constant presence on the Apolyton Civilization Site forums and your acknowledgement of “The List” for Civ III.
We can only hope that our ideas provided here will allow Civ IV to both be better and sell better than Civ III, benefiting both the customer and your fine corporation.
Thank You,
DarkCloud
-List Administrator
PURPLE font is used for editorial comments
BLUE font is used for editor’s choice
RED font is used for radical idea that could add a lot to the game
-Italics (Contributor of idea)
The AI
Cheats
Civilizations Part 1
Civilizations Part 2
Diplomacy
General Ideas
Government & Social Engineering
Movement & Supply
Regional & City Menus
Resources
Scenario / Map Editor
Space
Terrain & Terrain Improvements Part 1
Terrain & Terrain Improvements Part 2
Units
User Friendliness/ The Manual / Help Files
Wonders
The Polls
Closing Remarks
The Threadmasters
Thanks to the brilliant insight of some of Activision's (former) game developers, the most distinctive feature about the Call to Power games is without a doubt their customizability. Of course, now that the source code has been released, this has feature has become infinitely stronger than it already was. The community that has been modmaking and customizing these two games and that has lobbied for the release of the code has a history going back 5 years. But only a handful of people have been regulars at Apolyton since the site's inception, so many people are probably not aware of some or most of this history. In this article I will dive into the deepest corners of my mind to try and tell the tale of the CtP modmaking community, and how the release of the source code came to be. (I apologize in advance for leaving out any important people, mods, events, etc -- my memory has more holes than Swiss cheese, so I probably didn't mean to.)
...IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY: USE OF THE CALL TO POWER II SOURCE CODE IS SUBJECT TO THE SOURCE CODE SOFTWARE END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT TERMS SET FORTH BELOW. “CALL TO POWER II SOURCE CODE” INCLUDES THE SOFTWARE INCLUDED WITH THIS AGREEMENT, THE ASSOCIATED MEDIA, ANY PRINTED MATERIALS, AND ANY ON-LINE OR ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTATION, AND ANY AND ALL COPIES OF SUCH SOFTWARE AND MATERIALS. BY INSTALLING, AND/OR USING THE CALL TO POWER II SOURCE CODE, YOU ACCEPT THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE WITH ACTIVISION PUBLISHING, INC. (“ACTIVISION”).
On 28 October 2003, Activision released the source code for Call to Power II. This part of our CtP2 section is dedicated to the CtP2 Source Code Project: The collective effort by the Apolyton CtP2 community to document and improve the source code of the game.
Recruitment
We are always looking for new people to join the team and help us out with this project. Want to join? Sign up!
Downloads
Get your own copy of the source code and other files related to the project.
| CtP2 Apolyton Edition | The latest Apolyton Edition Revision 1055 from 20-Feb-2010 compiled and ready for playtesting. For installation, just follow the notes in the readme inside of the rar-archieve. |
| CTP2 source code repository | The lasted version of the CTP2 source code can be anonymously downloaded from the CTP2 source repository. It is hosted by Apolyton forum user DarkDust. |
| Directory | The Apolyton dowload section devoted to the CtP2 Source Code Project. Get all your (other) downloads here, including the original source code. |
| EULA | The End User License Agreement that anyone who wants to access and/or modify the source code must agree to. |
| Readme | The Readme file with some info on what is required to get the code to compile and run. |
| FAQ | Frequently Asked Questions about the source code and the CtP2 Source Code Project. |
Order Civ5:G&K Now!26% Discount on Civ5: Gods & Kings now at DLGamer.com
Civilization 5 Info Center
Advertisement
Links/Downloads/ImagesWhat's New...
01a Cradle IV Scenario and Maps Pack
(32 Hits)
01 Cradle IV (v4.0)
(87 Hits)
Slic Template PRocessor
(44 Hits)
UnitCSV
(48 Hits)
Forever Future 1.7
(4287 Hits)
What's Hot...
Patch: English Updater 1.2
(53553 Hits)
CTP2 Patch v1.11
(46867 Hits)
Apolyton CTP2 Edition: Revision 1111 (12-Jun-2011)
(25922 Hits)
CTP1 Apolyton Pack
(25672 Hits)
Civ3MultiTool (C3MT)
(23451 Hits)
SMAC 4.0 Patch/English
(22525 Hits)
Celestial Dawn's Mod v4.22
(21073 Hits)
Take Your Chance...
India Training Drill
(408 Hits)
Iranian Persepolis
(10 Hits)
imperia.zip
(165 Hits)
Empire Screen Policies (Regional Zoning (Natural))
(17 Hits)
Islamic City Close-up
(48 Hits)
MOO3 2002 Screen (02jun8)
(71 Hits)
Advertisement Official Civ Twitter
