To 2000AD or beyond?

[Fosse]

Yeah, just a few years, to the point that we can look forward and say, "Yeah, that's almost certainly what's going to be going on."

But if it's far enough into the future to actually be calling it "Sci-Fi," then I don't think we can honestly call it "human history."

[Seeker]

2050 AD is good.

No Cyberninjas or Battlemechs.

But we should have some futuristic stuff that is like, Popular Mechanics futuristic, like scramjet aircraft, war satellites, HAARP like ion weapons (EMP) Rumsfeldts LandWarrior infantry (like the marines from Aliens 2).

[Gramphos]

Somewhere between 2050 AD and 2150 AD (maybe let the number of total turns depend on the difficultylevel)

But definately allow adding more eras.

What I really would like to see is that you would have to walk around for say 10-20 turns before you learn how to settle. And add time for these turns before the current starting point.

The time it takes could depend on difficulty level, allowing the AI to start building earlier on higher levels.

[filix]

Originally posted by Seeker
2050 AD is good.

No Cyberninjas or Battlemechs.

But we should have some futuristic stuff that is like, Popular Mechanics futuristic, like scramjet aircraft, war satellites, HAARP like ion weapons (EMP) Rumsfeldts LandWarrior infantry (like the marines from Aliens 2).

Cyberninjas and Mechs please
I play ctp and i cant play at multiplayer till diamond age the game always ends before because someone win. So for me ctp is a historical game
I think its fun to play in the futur with the ai. So i would like to have the possibility to play till 3000AD.
I like your idea of the futuristic stuff that really sonds good.

[Dis]

2000!!!!!!!!!!!!

2020 at the latest.

I do not want a future game for the regular game.

Though I would like a good enough editor so that futuristic games could be created by enterprising designers.

[Kuciwalker]

Hopefully, Firaxis will take one look at the votes going on in these forums and decide to abandon Apolyton as a source of inspiration, because I don't want to see C4 really be CtP3, and I doubt Firaxis does either.

[Shogun Gunner]

Originally posted by Sandman
The Stealth Bomber and Fighter should not be in the game either. They have about as much military significance as the Zeppelin.

Is that a sarcastic comment? I mean, how is stealth not as revolutionary as the longbow, rifle or tank?

If we have Archer and Longbow...
If we have Musket, Rifle, Infantry, MI...

why not Bomber to Stealth bomber?
why not Fighter to Stealth fighter?

and yes, the zeppelin was close to a zero for military significance, but how can you compare that to the stealth bomber and fighter? They have radically changed aerial combat.

[Kuciwalker]

Stealth is possibly the most revolutionary technology wrt air warfare, second only to the jet engine.

[Shogun Gunner]

Okay, I'm late to this thread, but I'm with everyone who doesn't want Call to Power 3 masqurading as Civ4.

You know why I didn't buy Call to Power 2 - despite liking the improved combat system -- it was those silly, silly techs. Actually the game seems less mature with those futuristic techs. I agree with the next generation of techs that are in research today...those can be in the game because they will become a reality, but not teleporting, matrix-like computers, and cities under the ocean.... blah.

So 2030 or 2050...something like that.

[Unspeakable Horror]

I also support 2050AD Although I liked CtP, I never liked the future techs part.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
Is that a sarcastic comment? I mean, how is stealth not as revolutionary as the longbow, rifle or tank?

If we have Archer and Longbow...
If we have Musket, Rifle, Infantry, MI...

why not Bomber to Stealth bomber?
why not Fighter to Stealth fighter?

and yes, the zeppelin was close to a zero for military significance, but how can you compare that to the stealth bomber and fighter? They have radically changed aerial combat.

It's not as revolutionary because:

Stealth planes are slow.
Stealth planes are fantastically expensive.
Stealth planes have a poor weapons payload.
Any technologically-advanced country can detect them for a fraction of the cost of making them.
Apart from stealth, they are totally defenceless.

Most tellingly, they have not superseded jet fighters or jet bombers in the way that guns replaced bows or tanks replaced cavalry.

It's silly to have the stealth bomber instead of a more conventional jet bomber like the B-52. It's a travesty to have the stealth fighter (which is really another bomber) AS WELL.

[Nikolai]

I'd support an end between 2050 and 2100. BTW, didn't Civ1 end in 2100? Or am I remembering wrong?

EDIT: Voted 2000 because I think 3000 is waaaay off.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by Nikolai
I'd support an end between 2050 and 2100. BTW, didn't Civ1 end in 2100? Or am I remembering wrong?

In Civ1 it depended on the diffiulty level.
I think Cheitean were 2100 and Emperor 2050. But I might be wrong on the numbers, but I'm 95.7% sure that they varied by the level.

[Nikolai]

Okay. Would that be an idea now too, perhaps?

[asleepathewheel]

ugh must be a 2050 or earlier ending. no new crap. Keep sci fi era for modders and geeks to implement.