Civ4: Omega Expansion

[Thedrin]

If an idea seems like something you'd hate just assume I'm suggesting it as an option in the custom menu which is preset to off. If it's not workable or would make terrible gameplay feel free to bite my head off.

Other ideas I would be curious to see introduced into the game.

1) Military promotions on the technology tree. Why should antitank promotions be available in the ancient era?

2) Military resources. Allow axemen and spearmen to be built without copper - but all of these pre-hooking-up-copper units would take a penalty. Say, -25%. Similarly, when iron working is discovered give all axemen and spearmen units built post-hooking-up-iron a 25% bonus. Do something simlar for swordsmen (and pretty much every post iron melee unit) - available with copper but recieve a negative penalty unless built after iron is discovered.

Hopeful result: Civs without important resources will not be as restricted as they currently are but still would face a large uphill battle against more fortunately placed opponents.

3) Expand the technology tree by reducing the time it takes to research every technology. Then set it so that most advantages gained from researching a particular technology have to be researched individually so that the sum cost of the research is greater than it was originally. E.g. If you've just researched Metal Working in order that you can get to Macemen and have no intention of building the Colossus, just select your next research to be Machinery leaving no immeadiate option to build the wonder.

This could be further diversified. In order to research Stonehenge you must first know how to built monuments (obelisks) - same with the Eiffel Tower and broadcast towers. Researching horse pastures would be a prerequisite for researching the stable. If military promotions are added to the tree then armour would have to be developed before anti-armour promotions.

4) Technology Leakage. Small amounts of research to be recieved from another civ proportional to:
a) how many of your nationals live within their borders,
b) if there is an open borders agreement,
c) how many of your cities trade with the other civ.

Other factors could include the type of technology - technologies such as drama, philosophy or mysticism would be far more likely to leak than military technologies such as iron working or nuclear weapons.

5) Technology Homes. When a technology is researched the final city that added beakers to the project could be percieved as the home of the technology. Completely pointless? Yes, but combine it with:

6) Technology Spoils. When at war if you capture a city you can earn beakers off of technologies that you don't already have. When combined with the above, capturing the home of a technology would get an extra boost.

Edit:

I'll hold judgement till after Warlords but I kinda hope there wont be another expansion. I'm just not sure what they can add that is worthwhile without changing the game substantially. And changing gameplay elements substantially can wait till Civ5. I wouldn't like to see a repeat of the "C3C break a decent game with the x-pack" phenomenon.

This stuff would be on my wishlist and most of it is stuff I wouldn't hope to see until CivV. I'm quite afraid that the expansions could break the game. My main hope is that all expansion pack work goes into well developed ideas rather than packaging. Put another way, it'd be worth not having the Babylonians in the game if the new gameplay elements work.

[MightyTiny]

I would like to see more custom game options. Mainly two ideas:

An expansion of what I suggested in the ideas for CiV thread:
We already have the one city challenge, so how about having an X city challenge option, where you could set the X yourself, and you'd be limited to having max that number of cities? AND a checkbox for togling "the same limitation for all civs" on or off - that way you could have an X-city challenge with ALL civs restricted similarly.

I think this would add great variety to the game - on larger maps, with civs being restricted to say, 3 cities, you'd have barbs to contend with barbs throughout the game, war would be very interesting, with better defended cities on average, and more intense battles. Then there'd be the option of having a 3-city challenge with all parties restricted to 3 cities, with the only available victory condition being a cultural victory, and things would get really interesting... balancing between defence, disrupting others, and gaining culture ASAP!

Another new custom game option that I'd like to see is a "restricted expansion" mode, where all new cities would have to be founded so close to each other that their "city crosses" must always touch, or overlap. This would force a more gradual expansion of the influence of nations over territory, and make it impossible for civs to set up silly outposts in the fringes of another civ's territory, in some arctic wasteland, or in a spot where the city is sure to flip through culture at some point.

[johnmcd]

Promotions should be linked to technology, but I'd say that as soon as anyone invented a tank everyone should be able to promote anti-tank abilities.

Totally agree on the XCC, I've wanted that for ages.

[Nikolai]

Good thread idea Alex. Including elements from Civ2 is a great idea btw.

Civil wars and some kind of more active resistance after nationalism is discovered(only for the civs which has discovered it, so that if civ A has it and civ B don't, civ B will have a harder time conquering A, but not the other way around) would be high on my list. Then comes trade(but not a return of the caravan, too easy to exploit and too MM heavy) and an expanded religion aspect.

[Badtz Maru]

Originally posted by MightyTiny
Another new custom game option that I'd like to see is a "restricted expansion" mode, where all new cities would have to be founded so close to each other that their "city crosses" must always touch, or overlap. This would force a more gradual expansion of the influence of nations over territory, and make it impossible for civs to set up silly outposts in the fringes of another civ's territory, in some arctic wasteland, or in a spot where the city is sure to flip through culture at some point.

Funnily enough, this is how I played my first couple of games of CivIV - I hadn't played a Civ game since 2001 and had played lots of Rise of Nations in the interim, where you can only build new cities inside your borders. I was frustrated with how slow I could expand because I was working on the assumption that I had to build cities within my cultural boundaries.

[monkspider]

Looks pretty good, I would leave the Hebrews out though and add the Sumerians!

[Nikolai]

I'd have nothing against having the Hebrews included, but it's not among the most important subjects for the XP.

[Adagio]

What I want to see added in another expansion:

1) Advisors from Civ II

2) Some kind of civil war (maybe giving both sides of this war an extra bonus, to avoid them becoming too weak)

3) Most units that requires resources should also exist in a "cheaper" version (like giving the cheaper axemen a strength of 4 and only giving it a 25% bonus against melee units). This way civs without access to copper/iron wont get beaten up that bad. When gaining access to the resource the "cheaper" units can get upgraded

4) An "auto-upgrade" for all units. In some cases when you invent a tech that changes a lot for military (like going from archery to gunpowder) all old units will over time (5-20 turns) auto-upgrade into a "cheaper" version of the new unit. This will mostly just be a graphical upgrade (maybe also giving these units a +1 strength over the old units, without giving them the special powers this new unit has). A longbowman will get a strength of 7 and get some kind of muskets (graphically), when gunpowder is invented
This is to avoid having archers in the modern age, and will probably help the AI a great deal

[Nikolai]

Adagio:

1) is not important for me, but would be a nice touch for atmosphere.

2) as said, I'd love to have that.

3) good idea! This could simulate that which iron is good for weapons for example, it's not the only metal useable.

4) great idea!

[Will9]

Originally posted by Thedrin


Being a permanent vassel would mean taking more abuse, not less, than a non permanent vassel.

Since regular vassals have been defeted militarily they will fear you, and therefor give you more. Also, regular vassals know they won't have to take the beating forever. My idea is basically conquering a nation then setting up a frindly government. It's basically a permanent allience in which the weaker nation gives some gold inexchange for partial independence. The weaker nation cannot declare war, or peace, sign open borders, or defensive pact, theyare bond to your treaties. You can chose how many of their resourses you will control.

[Thedrin]

My reading of the various previews tells me that regular vassels do not have to be defeated militarily and that a friendly civ can accept the position of vassel.

They're is no partial independence in what you're suggesting. The idea of vassel states was introduced to create one sided permanent alliances. What you are suggesting is more like a glorified city governor if the new leader can't control his own foreign policy - someone who'll give you almost all of the advantages of having cities plus the benefits of no maintenance and free gold. These already exist in vasselage but you want to add in the no down side of not having to keep the vassel friendly. Unbalanced and unrealistic.

However, I like part of what you're suggesting. Like the formation of the Commonwealth in the UK or the division of Charles V's lands between the Spanish and Austrian empires - deliberately splitting up the area you control between two civs; your own and a newly formed one. I made a similar suggestion earlier in the thread. The divisions listed above created, for the most part, friendly allies who grew apart over time by following seperate foreign policy aims.

[Adagio]

I just had another idea (small change really) to the game:

5) Stonehenge gives a free obelisk in each city, but IIRC it has a huge drawback: When you get Calendar all obelisks in your cities goes away (unless you have manually built one before building Stonehenge). I want these obelisks to stay around after Calendar has been discovered (for Egypt this drawback is even worse, as they'll lose all their unique buildings)

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by johnmcd
If the Jewish people became a civ then the status of the religion in the game would surely have to change. Given the relationship between the two is complete, it's not like France and Christianity or Arabs and Islam.

I don't see a problem. Hinduism is inherently "India's religion," just like Judaism is Israel's. Hinduism has also sparked spinoff faiths that have spread across continents (eg Buddhism) just like Judaism has (Christianity). Also, the Judaism of the early Hebrews was different from the later Jews, as it revolved around the temple. Focusing exclusively on the Jews eliminates the other tribes that made a part of the earlier civ. David wasn't just king of the Jews, after all. But I don't mean to make this another religion debate thread.

Originally posted by johnmcd
I'd like diaspora populations too. Or leave in a Total War like device of 'kill them all' through to 'just occupy it' so you can control to some extent the strength of the diaspora and the residual unhappiness. Perhaps also the appearance of partisans.

I agree. Where do the people go? If I, as Napoleon, conquer Saladin's entire Arab civ, they shouldn't just become docile Frenchies, should they?

[Thedrin]

@ Adagio

Will the Obelisk become obsolete with Calender?

To be honest it looks to be so powerful and arrives so early in the game - plus Ramses has a boost in building Stonehenge to provide him with free obelisks - that it might be more balanced to let it become obsolete.

[Cartimandua]

Originally posted by Thedrin


1) Military promotions on the technology tree. Why should antitank promotions be available in the ancient era?

2) Military resources. Allow axemen and spearmen to be built without copper - but all of these pre-hooking-up-copper units would take a penalty. Say, -25%. Similarly, when iron working is discovered give all axemen and spearmen units built post-hooking-up-iron a 25% bonus. Do something simlar for swordsmen (and pretty much every post iron melee unit) - available with copper but recieve a negative penalty unless built after iron is discovered.

Great ideas!
These would really come in useful in unbalanced early game combat.