Civ4: Omega Expansion

[Alexander I]

Well, now that we have a whole slew-ful of ideas, lets flesh them out some more.

Anybody have any ideas for how some of these would work?

[dregor]

I'd like to see a Native American civ added in like the Iroquois. I miss them from Civ3.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by dregor
I'd like to see a Native American civ added in like the Iroquois. I miss them from Civ3.

Okay. What did you have in mind? Leader, stats, UU, UB, etc.? Tell me and I'll put it in.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by nugog
But I agree that cIV needs more of the in game stuff, rather than the (IMO) window dressing of more leaders and more "CIVs".

I would like to see more units (not just military), more techs, and a more diverse tech tree.

Well new Civs and leaders are the "sexy" parts of an XP. I'm sure a lot of sales involve people who want to play a new Civ.

Though yes, they should slide some new concepts in them as well. I'm glad Warlords is doing so with the military (and unique buildings). I agree with the poster who said the next XP should focus on TRADE! And then, of course, Civs who were known for trade (for example, the Dutch) should be included. Or focus on religion (though it may be a very touchy subject) and include religious civs. Or both and make an uber 2nd XP .

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I agree with the poster who said the next XP should focus on TRADE! And then, of course, Civs who were known for trade (for example, the Dutch) should be included. Or focus on religion (though it may be a very touchy subject) and include religious civs. Or both and make an uber 2nd XP .

Do you mean like new leader traits? Or some other game feature?

[dregor]

Hmm, ok. Iroquois, leader Hiawatha - Agg/Org. UU, I'm seeing some kind of scout replacement that makes it a more military unit, or a Horse Archer replacement unit. UB I see several options; Long House that replaces Granary and would boost growth, Totem Pole that replaces Monument (that's gonna take some getting used to). The problem with new civs is there's gonna be overlap in terms of units replaced, buildings replaced, but that can't be helped. Even the trait of Agg/Org isn't my ideal choice, but pickings are slim.

edit.
I just realized I might get grief for even suggesting them as Aggressive, and if so I apologize. I'm not an expert on how Hiawatha was as a leader.
edit off.

And of course Canada. John A. McDonald as leader, perhaps Exp/Cre (don't think that ones taken!). Mounted Police replacing Cavalry. UB, hmm.. Fur Trading Post or something, replacing market, +% income from traderoutes or +happiness with furs or whatever. Hell, the game also needs the CN Tower as a wonder ;P

One day my dream of an official Canadian civ will become a reality!

[LordShiva]

"Trade," huh? You mean something to do for those few turns when I'm not warmongering?

Sounds interesting.

[dregor]

Trade has always felt a little back-burnered to me in civ games. It's been a very long time, but I vaguely remember how big trade was in Colonization and really digging it.

I'd love to see a good Colonization mod for civ4, or even a remake of the original which seems to be a trend nowadays.

[Son of David]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Well new Civs and leaders are the "sexy" parts of an XP. I'm sure a lot of sales involve people who want to play a new Civ.

Yep. I don't particularly want more units and technologies in my standard game, and I think that I represent the gaming majority (non-hardcore) in this respect.

The best place to change basic gameplay mechanics is in the new scenarios. The standard CIV mechanics are already well-honed and just about perfect with just the right level of abstraction IMHO.

I mean, the designers obviously wanted to emphasize choice, more options in choosing one's gameplay and they've already achieved that. If they added new techs, new building choices over what's already there the game would simply become overwhelming.

Now on the other hand, if they included the Hebrews as a new civ - oh, I should think something as awesome as that would shift a few units.

[Thedrin]

A way of enhancing trade? Off the top of my head:

Military control of trade routes. If a road passes through wilderness or a closed border no trade routes can exist.

In the case of wilderness routes, give military units some form of zone of control so that surrounding squares (possibly the squares not afflicted by the fog of war) become "safe" trade routes. For oceanic trade routes a navy should be required to protect the route.

Alternate routes between different cities should be available, of course, but as a route becomes longer than the optimal route it becomes less profitable.

Friendly, allied or "open bordered" civs would provide the same military protection to your trade routes but the protector of the route should get first pick of the most profitable routes.

When calculating trade route lengths:
a) A trade route can only move between land and sea at a city.
a) Coastal squares should count for a shorter distance than land squares. The bonus could be constant, introduced with Sailing or introduced when both of the coastal cities along the trade route have a lighthouse.
b) Ocean squares should get an even better bonus. Similarly to coastal squares the bonus could be constant, introduced with Astronomy or introduced when both of the coastal cities along the trade route have a harbour.

Interesting consequence: Builders would be forced to either build up a navy (something I rarely do even when playing a militaristic game) or rely on more militaristic civs to provide them with an income (less profitable since the militaristic civ would get first choice of routes).

[Qwertqwert]

How about, (this one would have to be only enabled when paired with Warloards) when you take a city with a different civilization's unique building, you get the ability to build that unique building.

[Nugog]

Originally posted by johnmcd
I'd like to see trade and exploration overhauled in any further expansion.

And more techs, more detailed steps between the rather large jumps that exist particularly in the modern era.

I really do not need to see any more civ's or leaders - it's just window dressing, and does not add depth to the game.

Oh - and the Super praetorian I mentioned before would be nice

[zeace]

My vote for a XP would be to flesh out the modern era a bit. Maybe even extend it in to the forseeable future. Basically the game year/game turn would continue to slow down, maybe as low as months/turn. There would be a lot more techs in between the existing ones so the extra time would be spent researching them. The extra turns would allow more modern units (e.g. bi-plane, prop-plane, jet fighter, supersonic-jet).

The tech tree would extend a little farther into the future, and there would be a lot more focus on contemporary techs. We're currently missing things like TV, telephone, cell-phone, Search-engine, non-invasive surgery. These are all incredibly important parts of our lives, but are neglected in cIV. Techs like Fusion would be pushed much farther down the tech tree, maybe even into a new era ("Space Era"?). The international space station, moon base, mars base, supercollider would all be good wonders.

Internet should not be a wonder, but should be treated more like power. Once you build an internet connection in a city, various buildings (all the way back to the library) generate extra research based on how many other cities have connections. Open borders would allow you to count a rivals cities. The first few cities that build the internet would see a very limited effect, but as more and more cities build it the effect on each becomes huge.

A new resource might be computer chips. Unlike other resources found in the ground, chips would be provided by a National Wonder, the Electrionics Foundry. All space-age buildings and units would require it. Maybe you can build up to 3 foundries so losing one doesn't cripple you, and you can trade the extras to allies who don't have their own.

United Nations would be re-vamped to be more like SMAC diplomacy. You should be able to defy the UN with nothing more than a bit of a reputation hit, but getting UN sanctioning for your war would elliminate the reputation hit and substantially reduce your war-weariness. Getting voted as supreme commander of everything should be harder.

Finally the space race would still the end of the tech tree, though it would now be much farther out. You shouldn't even be able to start building the final shuttle until someone has built the Mars Base. A couple of uber-late techs (maybe self-aware AI or fusion propulsion) would be needed for the last pieces to keep the techs important until the end.

---

The biggest problem I see with this XP is that most of the warmongers never see the modern age, and would feel totally ripped off if the new XP had nothing for them. But they could always play scenarios, or better yet play on super-ultra-mega-huge levels where even conquering full out can't take over the world before the modern age (these huge levels would be supported in the XP of course).

Or just screw 'em. This XP is called warlords after all

[Smellycowsquid]

Originally posted by zeace


United Nations would be re-vamped to be more like SMAC diplomacy. You should be able to defy the UN with nothing more than a bit of a reputation hit, but getting UN sanctioning for your war would elliminate the reputation hit and substantially reduce your war-weariness. Getting voted as supreme commander of everything should be harder.

Usually, my "Diplomatic" Victories are just me electing myself Supreme Commander, so I think this would be good.

[Will9]

I would very much to make cities of the map. Mabye their could be a limited number of space stations and bases so their would be a race to get as many as can.