What would you put in an expansion?

[MightyTiny]

Re: Re: What would you put in an expansion?

Originally posted by Shaka II

Yes. That is required, but also the ability to change previous resolutions. In the highlands game I was playing, I'm the new UN secretary, but I can't change the previous resolutions passed to allow police state. Fighting wars in the modern era without police state is the pits.

I think that that's already possible - if you're the new UN secretary, you can simply put the same (already passed) election up to a vote again. I think that the resolution is canceled if it fails then.

[Shaka II]

Re: Re: Re: What would you put in an expansion?

Originally posted by MightyTiny


I think that that's already possible - if you're the new UN secretary, you can simply put the same (already passed) election up to a vote again. I think that the resolution is canceled if it fails then.

Really? I'll have to try it. I temporarily abandoned that game, because it was getting to war weary. Mind you, I wasn't war weary a bit, but my people were.

[Shaka II]

Re: Regarding Trebuchets

Originally posted by Blademun
I also think trebs would be a great idea (even if it does provoke more CIV4=AoE rants), however I think it should be implemented differently from other siege craft. Trebs should have a attack of 5. However!! They should have a city attacking bonus of 100%. That would effectively give them a attack of 10 against citys. Why? In the late middle ages Trebs were used with extremely good effect at breaking sieges. They could launch stones, firery coals, even diseased cows, over the walls into citys and castles. They had a long range and powerfull launching ability. However, they were utterly useless for any form of field combat, as they are not accurate at all.

This would make them less then effective in field combat, but would put them in just under cannons in terms of siege warfare.

For that matter, catapults were used for collateral damage too, yet they have a city attack function as well. Seems to me that upgrading both city attack and collateral damage might be appropriate, mostly from a game play perspective.

One thing is clear, there's a need for something between a catapult and a cannon, both in strength and to split the immense time period in two. Engineering and trebuchets seems to fit both requirements, the strength and collateral damage being details to work out.

[Sandman]

I'm mightily impressed by Civ IV as it is. Some ideas:

Swamp terrain: I liked this in civ 1 and 2. Pity they got rid of it, although the current irrigation system would be difficult to justify if it was in. Solution: change the irrigation system. Somehow. Maybe have drainage as an opposite of irrigation. Or just put swampland next to freshwater sites.

Ship/artillery duels: There should be a way to fight ships with shore based defences - maybe even a set of promotions dealing with this.

A free explorer with the first caravel built. Would be a nice touch.

Colonist: An advanced settler, for the later game. Creates a pop-3 city with several pre-built buildings.

Sea settlers: A ship that can found a city on any coastal spot. Later game, could be combined with the colonist. One cargo space for a garrison unit.

British civ: Having England instead of Britain is like having Prussia instead of Germany, or Mughals instead of India.

Homeland map: A tradeable revealing your cultural area. Useful if you want to hide recent explorations.

Open borders (excluding settlers): Does what it says on the tin. Handy if you want to prevent the AI settling poor lands on the margins of your empire.

[LordShiva]

[Willem]

Originally posted by Sandman

Swamp terrain: I liked this in civ 1 and 2. Pity they got rid of it, although the current irrigation system would be difficult to justify if it was in. Solution: change the irrigation system. Somehow. Maybe have drainage as an opposite of irrigation. Or just put swampland next to freshwater sites.

Or just allow irrigation from swamp, they are mostly water after all. The exception being swamp along the coast, too salty.

Ship/artillery duels: There should be a way to fight ships with shore based defences - maybe even a set of promotions dealing with this.

There should at least be some sort of fortification you can build, like the Coastal Fortress in Civ 3. Except one that actually works.

[ilike2]

resource supply line

I would like to sea a late game change that changes the functionality of the oil resource. Inotherwords, Just because you, or AI, built a tank, doesn't mean we should automatically have enough fuel for it, for the rest of the game, even after an oil resource has been lost or is on the otherside of the world and the owner is in the middle of a war. I want to have to protect my resources and their supply line, or should I say, destroy the enemy's.
I recently played the desert mod. I don't think I'll finish it WWII was really all about access to resources especially in Africa. No such dynamics in this MOD, just all the tanks and fighters we can build. Must be using "pine root oil".

[Singewulf]

>A free explorer with the first caravel built. Would be a nice touch.

Expanding on that idea, how about an option to convert a caravel to an explorer unit, permanently. The ship lands and the crew decides to stay, abandoning the boat. This way, no wasted caravels if you don't feel like exploring with them.

[scottingim]

Re: What would you put in an expansion?

Originally posted by Simplicity
If I were to make an expansion, here's what I'd do.

I would like to see something which would allow us to work with deserts and mountains. CivIV removed the capability of mining these, which is unrealistic to me.

Also, limited irrigation of desert tile is not unrealistic. In the game I am currently playing, I have 5 tiles, which are impossible to get irrigation to.

These could be modern era changes, but I think they should be in the game. There are WAY too many tiles that nothing can be done with.

[Possibility]

Be able to add settlers to an existing city to increase its pop by 1, but only for cities of size 1 or 2. So a city size 1 could be immediately increased to size 3 (but not larger) with the addition of 2 more settlers.

Maybe make this feature of the settler require a certain tech so it cant be used right away.

Possibility

[Willem]

Originally posted by Possibility
Be able to add settlers to an existing city to increase its pop by 1, but only for cities of size 1 or 2. So a city size 1 could be immediately increased to size 3 (but not larger) with the addition of 2 more settlers.

Maybe make this feature of the settler require a certain tech so it cant be used right away.

Possibility

That wouldn't make any sense. You stop the growth of one city to help another city grow? Why?

I'd certainly never use it, it's like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[Aro]

But what if Paul is a nice person who did something great and deserves to be paid, and Peter is a shameless SOB who doesn’t even deserve to breathe?

Seriously, I can see some merit. In fact, Possibility has a point here. There are situations where I would prefer stop the growth of one city to help another city grow. I can think one strategic reason immediately: better use of tiles. I’m sure, this would be very useful. Not to mention, there are historical precedents.

[LordShiva]

Another reason: Peter is getting fat, and consequently unhappy and unhealthy.

[johnmcd]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Another reason: Peter is getting fat, and consequently unhappy and unhealthy.

Might Peter live in a large and beautiful house but due to an understocked fridge be unable to have all his friends round for parties unless Paul gives up some of the snacks he doesn't need anyway?

[Elias]

I think that civ4 needs some serious interface overhaul. the most talked about thing was the interface and personally I cant stand it. you can only see a few units at a time above the action bar if you have more it requires tedious clicking to fine the proper unit. as well as if you highlight an enemy group it shows every improvement they have off to the left but only lists a few units as there is no room for all of them. in civ 3 had a 100+ unit armies I cant imagnie the horror of tyring to manage that many in civ4. there isnt nearly enough round dots on top of the flag showing how many units are in that square. maby with twice as many it would be ok. the grouping is also hard to deal with, although that could just be me having problems constantly clicking on the wrong unit.

I would also love to see them bring back civ3 sytle artillary. although it will never happen but its still a dream.

land trading would be nice but doubtfull. and at the very least mods are always there to add new units in. they could use some more diplomatic features like close borders with said nation. had that thought the otherday when I was being invaded through another nation I couldnt get though.

well maby next year they will realease civ4 conquests! well its got lots of good reviews im sure firaxis wouldent mind getting a few extra bucks out of it.