Civ 4 - the list of ideas for Firaxis

[Torkkeli]

Not sure if this has been stated before but railroads need to have limited movement. I'd propose the following:
On the discovery of railroad giving tech railroads give your units 2x movement of roads. When some additional tech is researched movement on railroads would be 3x road. Maybe for another tech (very late in the game) it would go to 4x.
This would reflect the evolution of railroads through out the ages.

[Nimrod]

What about barbarian cities. When the game is first started, there could be 1 in the most isolated place on the map. As the game progresses the number of barbarians cities could increase. But they only appear in unsettled lands at least 30 tiles from the nearest non barbarian city.

[Fosse]

And what about old school barbs that could take over cities and build things? The Civ 3 way is much less cool.

How about a timer on such Barbarian Civs? If they manage to take over a city and hold it for 5-10 turns they become a full fledged Civ?

Others have had this idea before, I'm posting it because it's a good one.

[Strider_479]

Hmm.....1st of all, i wonder whether the Firaxis guys read all this fabulous ideas....
Ok......here are my recomendations

The minor things 1st, better cityview graphics. i for 1 like 2 ad mire my cities in all their glory. But wat i get in Civ3 is a few skyscrapers & houses for a megalopolis. And Firaxis should also allow ppl 2 add new graphics for new wonders.

The Bigger things: Fear & domination. I find it wierd when a 2 city Civ right at my doorstep refuses my demands. The AI should be adjusted so that these weak Civs can be "controlled" & manipulated by larger one's without losing their independence.

Crime: Currently the only crime in Civ3 is corruption. I feel that crime & corruption should be incorporated together & each city have a crime meter. Crime should only affect city income but also cost the lives of citizens, cause damage & affect citizen happiness. Crime can be controlled thru llarge military garrisons, police stations. courthouses.......( lol maybe even a new unit called the policeman! :P )

Assimilation: Cities close 2 the border of other countries should have mixed populations as it is in real life. This should be more prevalent among friendly civilizations or in a prosperous civilization is next to a weaker 1. Such migration & emigration should also cause problems 2 both sides.

Food: One thing i hate in Civ3 is that u cant transfer food between cities. Maybe they should make in civ4 that cities with roads or railroad connections should be allowed to send food among each other. This would allow cities in remote locations 2 develop better. Food should also become a tradable source of income between civs.

Well.....dats my wishes for Civ4. I know some are a little far-fetched....but hey, they're all just suggestions & i might as well have sum fun givin em

[Skanky Burns]

Crime: Currently the only crime in Civ3 is corruption.

I tend to think this is covered by the happiness levels and trade corruption. Small towns tend to have lower levels of crime and therefor lower levels of unhappy people. Larger cities have higher uncontrolled crime and therefore a higher proportion of people unhappy. Interesting idea that Military garrison help reduce corruption as well as unhappiness, though.

[Sarxis]

Cities that actually sprawl the map as they get bigger/more infrastructure.

[Urban Ranger]

I haven't read through this thread.

Has anybody suggested that we dig out the list we have for Civ 3 and see how many of those ideas have they implemented, and perhaps start from there?

[chequita guevara]

SupplyUnits can only move a certain distance from their source of supply before they must start pillaging or be "out of supply."

Units must be able to trace a line of supply back to their supply source or be considered "out of supply."

"Out of supply" units lose their ablity to move and lose hit points for each turn out of supply, until they die.

Partisans and explorers don't need supply.

Nationalism
Unassimilated citizens shouldn't become unruly until the nationalism advance. At that point, assimilation ceases. Increase possibility of cities rejoining original civ or revolting and brings dead civs back to life.

Minor Combat
Not all combat should immediately result in war. You should be able to attack units in your own civ without automatically starting a war.

Abstract navy
Make the navy more like air units now. Base them and send them on missions and give them ranges.

Revolutions
Don't make revolution an option. It's something that happens to you, and it's bad.

When in revolution, you can be attacked without a declaration of war. Neighbors could take cities.

Your cities can revolt and start new civs.

Maybe you have to pick a side in the revolution and make sure it wins. Your neighbers might declare war on your side or on the other side.

[Fosse]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Minor Combat
Not all combat should immediately result in war. You should be able to attack units in your own civ without automatically starting a war.

YES!! Declaring war should be strictly diplomatic!! Combat should be combat.

Why would you ever fight without declaring war? Disputed territory on another continent perhaps. Worth fighting for, but not warring for. Tresspassing units, of course.

Why would you ever want to declare war?
When you're at war, you don't lose face in the international arena. Take over a province without declaring war, and you are the bully and hated one.

[chequita guevara]

It would be useful for taking out those pesky settlers who keep invading your claimed areas.

[chequita guevara]

Mid-game starts
Not all civiliazations have lasted 6,000 years. Somce only started a little while ago, historically. Some sprang from the ashes of former empires.

Along these lines, if you get conquered, the game could play itself along quickly to see if your civ revolts and comes back to life again.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Fosse
I'd like a map that has more in common with the one from X-Com than the ones from Civ games.

I don't want gratuitious 3D... but a true sphere map like that with coordinates instead of tiles.... would be a dream come true.

If there is a spherical map, I want it to be an option for map design. I don't want all maps to be spherical. Moreover, I want to be able to have both wraparound 2D maps and "flat" 2D maps.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Torkkeli
Not sure if this has been stated before but railroads need to have limited movement. I'd propose the following:
On the discovery of railroad giving tech railroads give your units 2x movement of roads. When some additional tech is researched movement on railroads would be 3x road. Maybe for another tech (very late in the game) it would go to 4x.
This would reflect the evolution of railroads through out the ages.

As an option, maybe. Giving railroad unlimited movement (at least as an option in the editor) is good for scenarios

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
SupplyUnits can only move a certain distance from their source of supply before they must start pillaging or be "out of supply."

Units must be able to trace a line of supply back to their supply source or be considered "out of supply."

"Out of supply" units lose their ablity to move and lose hit points for each turn out of supply, until they die.

Partisans and explorers don't need supply.

Two objections: bad for AI, and MM-heavy.

Nationalism
Unassimilated citizens shouldn't become unruly until the nationalism advance. At that point, assimilation ceases. Increase possibility of cities rejoining original civ or revolting and brings dead civs back to life.

No way. Revolts happened all the time before Nationalism. Look at the Romans in Israel.

Minor Combat
Not all combat should immediately result in war. You should be able to attack units in your own civ without automatically starting a war.

It's called "hidden nationality".

Abstract navy
Make the navy more like air units now. Base them and send them on missions and give them ranges.

NO!

This is WAY too abstract, and it's bad for scenarios.

Revolutions
Don't make revolution an option. It's something that happens to you, and it's bad.

When in revolution, you can be attacked without a declaration of war. Neighbors could take cities.

Your cities can revolt and start new civs.

Maybe you have to pick a side in the revolution and make sure it wins. Your neighbers might declare war on your side or on the other side.

A bit harsh.

[Fosse]

Originally posted by skywalker


If there is a spherical map, I want it to be an option for map design. I don't want all maps to be spherical. Moreover, I want to be able to have both wraparound 2D maps and "flat" 2D maps.

Why not just have scenario maps be a section of a sphere's surface? You'll get more accurate maps, and they'll certainly feel flat.

Regarding 2d wraparound? Why? What advantages do you feel that this brings to any map that aren't trumped by spherical ones?