Some sort of unit design allowed?

[MORON]

While Civ don't allow unit design, instead limits players to a few predefined units with very few traits that really can not cover all the minor differences between units. In SMAC the unit workshop worked fine, but thats a sci-fi game.

I don't see why something like that can't work in Civ though. For example we can have:

Warrior 1-1-1

Basic melee weapons Atk2 Firepower 1
No Armor Def 1 10hp
No doctrine
On foot: Movement 1

Phalanx 1-2-1

Basic melee Weapons Atk1 Firepower 1
Bronze Armor Def: 1 10hp
Block Formation: x2 defense. Must have armor
On foot: movement 1

Legion 3-2-1
Iron Weapons Atk2 Firepower 1
Iron Armor Def 2 10hp
Shock Attack: +1 attack
On foot movement 1

Mech infantry: 6-6-3
Small Arms: atk 5 firepower 1
Tank Armor: def 5 30hp
Modern infantry +1 attack, +1 defense
Mechanized movement 3

............and such. Of course everything have to be balanced, but this allows fun custom units even in earier eras.

Even if that is too radical, a system where one can add traits to preset units might be fine. For example if one discover radio one can add "organic AA" to modern armor that gives +10% defense bounse against air units or something like that.

[Apocalypse]

It's kinda hard not to have predefined units. SMAC took some hits from people because most of the units looked incredibly similar. Mainstream gamers like the varied units of Civ2 and Civ3.

[Tall_Walt]

I disagree. I really liked the SMAC(X) custom units, and it applies quite well to Civ: do you use normal bowmen or pay the extra cost for longbowmen, or alternatively bowmen also trained with a melee weapon?

As far as appearance, look at Dungeon Siege for example: you outfit your character with custom armor and weapons. I think the results look very good; they just need to be reduced down to Civ size--or not if we've got full 3D zoom.

Looking at bigger weapons, an armored vehicle is built on a chassis with different weapon systems mounted on top. The family resemblance among the various Bradleys or huge number of Hum-Vs is apparent. Even tanks get their tops ripped off and become APCs, SAM carriers, combat engineering vehicles, or mobile artillery.

When it comes to naval weapons, refitting is SOP (standard operating procedure): When US Battleships were refitted in the 1980s, the aft turret was removed to plug in VLS missiles (Vertical Launch System). Earlier, Los Angeles class submarines had a VLS hull section grafted in to make the Improved LA class sub. The newest USN ships are planning on replacing the 5" naval gun with the 155mm Army cannon.

Even in aircraft it's almost universal. A WWII case was the B-25 Mitchell, the bomber of 30 Seconds over Tokyo. Later versions were configured as attack planes instead of bombers, with anything from eight machine guns in place of the bombadier's clear nose to a small tank cannon; and also side modules holding a pair of machine guns on each side. Modern examples include tankers or AWACS planes from cargo planes, or the AC-130 Spooky/Spectre gunship from the C-130 or the altering of the F-15 "Not a pound for air to ground" Eagle to the F-15E (E?) Strike Eagle. "Wild Weasal" anti radar attack planes and reconnaisance planes are always variants of more numerous aircraft.

In addition to unit design, and even failing unit design, loading different munitions should be allowed. Aircraft to subs carry different munitions for different missions. While some of these will fall below Civ's radar, cruise missiles and nukes are munitions, not units: they can go on almost any bomber or ship, even subs, launched from VLS or torpedo tubes.

[Kuciwalker]

The SMAC unit workshop only makes sense in a SF setting. And preset units is easier for modders.

[Apocalypse]

But still, Tall_Walt, it's hard to immediately tell what the until is. People don't really like that too much. There wre enough units in after the x-packs, and as long as it's easy to add more through editors everything is fine.

[MORON]

Aside from the joys of unit design (I've been playing moo2 lately) there is also the ability to build truely specialized units without paying extra and that units progress linearly in this case.

I just want my clean drop singularity rovers...or something like that.

[Aramis]

At this late date, I wonder if any new ideas at Poly (or anywhere else) will be considered.

[Kuciwalker]

Probably not,

I just want my clean drop singularity rovers...or something like that.

Then play SMAC. Lego units have no place in real-world civ.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Aramis
At this late date, I wonder if any new ideas at Poly (or anywhere else) will be considered.

Since I haven't even SEEN any new ideas yet, of course not.

[Aramis]

Kuciwalker--what's that latest on a Civ IV release date?

[Apocalypse]

Kuci is not a Firaxian. He's just some little punk.

[Aramis]

Kuciwalker--
I want to elaborate:
I have some fears about CivIV, mostly connected to a thread I saw a few weeks ago that quoted a privte foum at CFC in which Soren Johnson said, regarding marketing the Civ franchise, "Civ: complete."
As it was a private forum I cannot, of course, read it.
There was a thread here at Apolyton (I don't want to search for it now, it's late--I can do it tomorrow) about what "Civ: Complete" would include. I don't think "Civ: compltet" meant a new packaging of C3C.
It is my opinion that people misinterpreted what SJ was implying. I hope I am wrong, but I think he meant Civ has gone as far as it will go. He implied (if the quote was correct) that pollution and corruption (if I remember correctly) would no longer be a part of the game (as an example).
I may be paranoid here, but I have extreme fears that CivIV will be a dumbed downed version of the game and in about a year Apolyton will have a a forum called "Civ: Nostalgia."
I really hope I am just being paranoid.

[Kuciwalker]

I don't think they've misinterpreted at all. I think Soren is going to add some new stuff, but also remove or remake the unfun things.

[Tattila the Hun]

Originally posted by Aramis
There was a thread here at Apolyton (I don't want to search for it now, it's late--I can do it tomorrow) about what "Civ: Complete" would include. I don't think "Civ: compltet" meant a new packaging of C3C.

There is a civ: complete, though:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/08/06/news_6104334.html

Assuming the main apolyton page might have had that news, too...

[Kuciwalker]

Oh, Civ:Complete is just all of C3 in one, with maybe some bonus stuff, and bugfixes.