Civ4: Omega Expansion

[padillah]

Originally posted by eris


Any video game can be considered a waste of time. ...

... And if our form of entertainment is anthropomorphising or role playing or whatever, then it is no longer a waste of time for us.
...

You may want to look up "anthropomorphising". Your statements lead me to believe you don't know what it means.

From Dictionary.com:
v : ascribe human features to something

What I was saying was I don't turn them into real people. In other words, I don't think Montezuma actually "hates" me. I fully understand that his "persona" has no regard for anyone or anything and is simply the result of a program running. I would have no problem renaming Mansa Musa as Shaka and rename the Malanese as the Zulu and take it from there.

I have no problem understanding that civ's are nothing more than a collection of traits. There is no reason to have any more than enough to fill the map. Alexander wants the Babs so bad, rename the Persians. Poof, Babs.

I also don't care what kinds of units are added. Str 7 is str 7 regardless of what the thing is called. A unit is simply a collection of strength and promotions. If you took a swordsman and gave them Guerilla I promo they'd be exactly the same as a Gealic Swordsman.

We don't need more civs or units. We need nukes that work and a better UN and better AI and ....

(Unless you count posting on these forums instead of actually playing. That could be a grey area. Hmmm. I think I will go play some Civ now.)

Here... you may have a point.

Tom P.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Alexander01
You know, something inside me says we can expect:

Dutch - Willem

Well I'm flattered, but I hardly consider myself worthy of being included as a leader in the game.

[padillah]

Originally posted by Adagio


I dont care about more civs either, but I do want more traits, and you cant have more traits without more civs

I don't see why not. There's nothing to keep any of us from editing the XML to assign traits to whomever we want.

Actually, if Firaxis wants to open up modding they can give us a front end that allows us to assign traits to the leaders apart from the combos they have come up with.

Split the AI into modules, each module knows about a certain trait. Work out some kind of "voting" or "weight" system for decisions. Then we could combine whichever modules we want and assign them to the leader we want to play against.

That would be a much better X-Pack than 3 new civs.

Tom P.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by padillah
I don't see why not

The reason why not is because if we add new traits without new civs, that means that most civs would have to change which traits they have, which I'm not interested it (a few civs ok, but it's not ok to change traits for all civs)

[Alexander I]

My issue is that I'm not really interested in modding. (And I can't animate). And, let's face it, Firaxis has the best stuff anyway. All I want from expansions is good quality material.

[Alexander I]

Note:

Anybody posting new expansion ideas, I'd appreciate it if you could give me a short description of your idea that I can stick in the petition.

Examples:

Better Trade
Knights Templar Wonder
Hammurabi Leaderhead
Nukes that Work
Civ2 City Council

[Will9]

Here are some of my ideas from another thread.

This is how I see a food surplus system working. First you build 5 granaries. Then you can build a national granary (NW). Then you can have some cities send food and others take away. In the city you make your National Granary in there will be a bar telling you if it is losing food or gaining food. If the National Granary is full all shipments to it will stop, but will resume when it is no longer full. If it is empty you will be told by one of your advisors and all shipments going out will will stop until there is enough food to send to all of the cities that were taking from the granary. For a city to use the National Granary it must be connected and have a granary.

I don't know what the tech requirment for a National Granary will be, but it could be Mathamatics or Civil Service

What about Coast Gaurd as a natioal wonder. It increases your naval units strength within your borders, and lets your coastal borders extend 4 squares. It would require Combustion.

For that maybe Radio could increase it to five squares.

[Addled Platypus]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Alexander01
Note:

Nukes that Work


and the severe damage they cause


Until the right research is found, workers just cant go in and clean



thank you for your time

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Alexander01
Note:

Anybody posting new expansion ideas, I'd appreciate it if you could give me a short description of your idea that I can stick in the petition.

Examples:

Better Trade
Knights Templar Wonder
Hammurabi Leaderhead
Nukes that Work
Civ2 City Council

Us, to Firaxis: "Hey, here's our petition. We want 'better trade'"
Firaxis: "Umm, OK. We'll get right on it (not)."

[Brael]

No idea if this has been mentioned but something I would like to see is improved unit control to lessen the micromanagement of controlling a military. Some examples would be the ability to set a waypoint that units created by a city will goto once built (build a unit and send it to the front line essentially), and another one I would like to see is the ability to make a unit patrol. Either in a circle (set some waypoints that eventually circle back to the first one which tells it to follow that path in a loop) or in a specific path it would go back and forth between. Also, with patrols you wouldn't have your units stop in the middle of autopathing if they run into an enemy (though they would inform you they spotted something and ask if you want them to continue or not)

Another thing that would be nice to see (but less likely to be implemented I'm sure) is improved naval combat. Unless I've completly missed the point of boats, it seems to me that navies in Civ 4 are entirely defensive with no real redeeming qualities to using them as anything other than bodyguards for transport ships. The way I see ships right now is:

Submarine - Scout, it's far too weak to actually defeat a full strength ship. At 24 strength even a Transport can give it a decent fight, this isn't good. The transport ability is fairly weak too.

Battleship - The king. It's slower than a Destroyer but absolutely destroys all other ships. Your best bet for defense. Make a chain of them across an ocean while fortified and you can send transports across the seas at no danger. With the fortify bonus it's the strongest unit on the ocean as well. Of course it can't move then but naval power is more defensive in Civ 4, aside from landing transports or a very minor amount of bombardment.

Destroyer - Pointless, it's fast but you don't really need the speed, so it's simply a 30 str 400 hammer unit, doesn't even begin to compare to a 40 str 450 hammer battleship.

Carrier - Can be useful for minor bombardment to create a foothold on a continent, not much other use though.

As for what I would like to see:
Submarine - A submarine should be your biggest fear on the seas. If a sub can attack a ship and get away that ship should be heavily crippled or destroyed, with that sub out there unharmed. I guess I see them as ship killers, VERY strong offense but incredibly fragile. 12 strength, +450% when attacking ships other than destroyers, +150% when attacking destroyers, 75% retreat chance, and 2 first strikes for example plus it's current effects (and the ability to carry missles if non ICBM missles are ever added). Maybe thats a bit much but it makes the point... should be the goal, if it finds you... you should be dead.

Battleship - Leave it as it is.

Destroyer - Emphasize it's speed. With less armor and smaller guns it should build faster than a Battleship but be more efficent to give it an advantage to using the weaker ship. It would be good for getting weakened ships, outrunning enemies, quickly getting units to the front lines, and using its excellent movement ability defensively to find/destroy submarines. It would be nice if it got 1 first strike as well (so it does some damage hopefully even against a Battleship) and +2 additional first strikes vs a sub (to cancel the subs 2). Keep its existing abilities too with intercepting aircraft and detecting subs.

Carrier - Increase the number of planes that can be carried to 4 fighters (and maybe allow 1 bomber on in place of 2 fighters). Increase the speed by 1. Finally, give fighters (even if bombers could be carried) launched from a carrier a bonus against other ships.

That would give everything a counter. Subs destroy battleships/carriers, battleships destroy destroyers/carriers, destroyers destroy subs/wounded battleships, carriers wound battleships. On further thought maybe one additional ship type would be good to add as well which would exist only for defense (like ironclads do in earlier eras... they annhiliate other ships but are very slow and limited in where they travel).

[Will9]

Originally posted by Brael
No idea if this has been mentioned but something I would like to see is improved unit control to lessen the micromanagement of controlling a military. Some examples would be the ability to set a waypoint that units created by a city will goto once built (build a unit and send it to the front line essentially), and another one I would like to see is the ability to make a unit patrol. Either in a circle (set some waypoints that eventually circle back to the first one which tells it to follow that path in a loop) or in a specific path it would go back and forth between. Also, with patrols you wouldn't have your units stop in the middle of autopathing if they run into an enemy (though they would inform you they spotted something and ask if you want them to continue or not)

Another thing that would be nice to see (but less likely to be implemented I'm sure) is improved naval combat. Unless I've completly missed the point of boats, it seems to me that navies in Civ 4 are entirely defensive with no real redeeming qualities to using them as anything other than bodyguards for transport ships. The way I see ships right now is:

Submarine - Scout, it's far too weak to actually defeat a full strength ship. At 24 strength even a Transport can give it a decent fight, this isn't good. The transport ability is fairly weak too.

Battleship - The king. It's slower than a Destroyer but absolutely destroys all other ships. Your best bet for defense. Make a chain of them across an ocean while fortified and you can send transports across the seas at no danger. With the fortify bonus it's the strongest unit on the ocean as well. Of course it can't move then but naval power is more defensive in Civ 4, aside from landing transports or a very minor amount of bombardment.

Destroyer - Pointless, it's fast but you don't really need the speed, so it's simply a 30 str 400 hammer unit, doesn't even begin to compare to a 40 str 450 hammer battleship.

Carrier - Can be useful for minor bombardment to create a foothold on a continent, not much other use though.

As for what I would like to see:
Submarine - A submarine should be your biggest fear on the seas. If a sub can attack a ship and get away that ship should be heavily crippled or destroyed, with that sub out there unharmed. I guess I see them as ship killers, VERY strong offense but incredibly fragile. 12 strength, +450% when attacking ships other than destroyers, +150% when attacking destroyers, 75% retreat chance, and 2 first strikes for example plus it's current effects (and the ability to carry missles if non ICBM missles are ever added). Maybe thats a bit much but it makes the point... should be the goal, if it finds you... you should be dead.

Battleship - Leave it as it is.

Destroyer - Emphasize it's speed. With less armor and smaller guns it should build faster than a Battleship but be more efficent to give it an advantage to using the weaker ship. It would be good for getting weakened ships, outrunning enemies, quickly getting units to the front lines, and using its excellent movement ability defensively to find/destroy submarines. It would be nice if it got 1 first strike as well (so it does some damage hopefully even against a Battleship) and +2 additional first strikes vs a sub (to cancel the subs 2). Keep its existing abilities too with intercepting aircraft and detecting subs.

Carrier - Increase the number of planes that can be carried to 4 fighters (and maybe allow 1 bomber on in place of 2 fighters). Increase the speed by 1. Finally, give fighters (even if bombers could be carried) launched from a carrier a bonus against other ships.

That would give everything a counter. Subs destroy battleships/carriers, battleships destroy destroyers/carriers, destroyers destroy subs/wounded battleships, carriers wound battleships. On further thought maybe one additional ship type would be good to add as well which would exist only for defense (like ironclads do in earlier eras... they annhiliate other ships but are very slow and limited in where they travel).

I would like to add continues recon for fighters and bombers to new comands. I get tired of sending my fighters to the exact same spot every turn scouting for enemy fleets. Also what about giving Civ3's stealth attack to Subs. If a destroyer is the stack the sub will be weakened before attacking, or it may end up facing the destroyer instead of the unit you picked.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Brael
Some examples would be the ability to set a waypoint that units created by a city will goto once built (build a unit and send it to the front line essentially),

This already exists in the game. Select the city you want the waypoint for, then Shift-right click on the destination point. I think that's how it works anyway, I don't use it myself.

[DrSpike]

I don't use it anymore, but it's there, and it definitely works.

[Brael]

Originally posted by Willem


This already exists in the game. Select the city you want the waypoint for, then Shift-right click on the destination point. I think that's how it works anyway, I don't use it myself.

Oh, nice. Would still like the ability to have units patrol however.

[LordShiva]

Waypoints are silly for a TBS game, IMO. I'd say the same about patrol, but now that I think about it, I could actually use it.