Wat do u want to see in civ 5?

[Addled Platypus]

outside the box kind of thinking Aro.... gota love it

[Adagio]

What I'd like to see in Civ 5 is a more dynamic tech tree, where spending more time on inventing economy techs could give you a unique boost in economics (e.g. banks giving +60% instead of +50%), or if you spend a lot of time on the offensive while spending more money on inventing military units could give all your units a boost of 10% while attacking... or something like that

I would also like to see some changes in religion. You should be able to declare a holy war (but only if you have a state religion). There are several differences between a normal war and a holy war:
- The civs with the same religion as you will like you a bit more (and hate civs with the target religion a bit more). By how much depends on the civs general attitude towards religion (e.g. Spain will feel more strongly about this than Russia). Civs with Free Religion will also hate you more
- The civs with the same religion as your enemy will hate you more (no matter how their relationship with the target civ is)
- During the time of war there's a small chance that the target religion will be "removed" from some of your cities (look at this as if they move out of your civ, or maybe they get killed)
- When taking a city there's a good chance this city will convert to your religion (depending on the size of your forces in or around the city)
- During the war your cities without your state religion will have a chance of converting to your state religion (even if there are other religions in that city)

... or something like that...

Originally posted by Flubber
every Civ ever would be better if it incorporated more elements of Smax-- particular the design workshop

Hell no, the design workshop in SMAC was annoying

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Adagio
Holy War!

And two more things:

- After starting a Holy War cities with the target religion will get one more angry face ("You started a war against our faith"). It will be three angry faces if your state religion is not present. This will go away after 500-1000 years

- Your cities with your state religion and without the target religion will get an extra happy face ("The Holy War helped spread our word"). This will also go away after 500-1000 years

[Addled Platypus]

workshop

[LordShiva]

workshop

[Mortabis]

Civ 4's modern age needs a makeover.

Things to fix:

-First off, air units should be able to completely destroy units, especially ships.

1. Paradrop:
ADD A PARATROOPER FEATURE ALREADY! This is the one thing that could really help modern age wars. Wars in modern times do not go fast enough. There is not enough time to influence the game. In an ideal world, every unit should be able to paradrop once flight is discovered.

-The paratrooper should be able to drop anywhere within a certain tile radius from a city or fort. Yes. Fort.

-Attacking by paradrop causes a significant decrease in combat strength, in the same way that crossing a river or attacking from water does.

-There should be a 'paradrop' promotion that gets rid of the combat disadvantage when paradropping. A paratrooper unit should be made that starts with this promotion.

2. Aircraft carriers:
-The planes should be folded into the carrier. It can attack 3 times using the system that air units use, ie select the carrier and pick a mission type and a tile to attack.

-If the mission is intercepted, the health of the carrier is reduced.

-The carrier can move like a ship, but cannot attack by moving into a tile with an enemy unit.

-The carrier can carry helicopters

3. Helicopters:

-Gunships should be able to attack sea units from carriers and transports, but only units one tile away.

-Gunships should start with the Medic I promotion, maybe even Medic II. After all, the first use for helicopters was ferrying injured soldiers to hospitals.

-Perhaps more types of helicopters could be added?


4. GPS
Available with sattelites, a GPS wonder should be added. It gives additional gold from airports and sea tiles in all civs and adds +1 movement for all units of the civ that built it. It also adds +1 range to aircraft.

5. Sattelite unit:
-Air unit with infinite range. Can only rebase or recon. Has a relatively high sight range. Perhaps explorer should upgrade to it?

[CrONoS]

Weather? What about weather influencing the terrain bonus?


I know that the games is played in terms of year, and the change of weather is day by day. And more you advance in the games, more your prognostics on the water will be true. And thus, it will add more tactics to war!

Can we also add a kind of supply line or something along that way in civilization, when you have one of your units in an enemy territory, his stamina will decrease 5 turn after he enter the territory?

[foudres]

There is many ideas... But most of them if they are fun or interresting would simply break the game if implemented and make it too complex/borring in certain area.

A few exemples that are not wises (unfortunaly most change that where proposed would need lot of other game change to make them viable) :

Having much differents road type is only feasible if it's automatic. I do not want to spend half of my game time making roads. Just also note that we have already 4 lvl of roads.

* no roads
* roads ( 2 mvmt)
* roads + some tech discovery that allow for 3 mvmt
* railroads (10 mvmt).

I'am not for allowing to spend your money to make your unit more mobile. There is things money can buy and other it can't. I don't understand how if you accept to spend money that turn trains will run twice as fast but would return to turtle mode one turn after. Hey if they can go fast why are they are so slow most of the time ??? i don't take it.

Plus it would be unbalanced as with lot of money you would be able to declare war and take severals cities before the enemy could react.

It would also always make strategies like going to the enemy capital in one turn and taking it without possibilities of organised defence.


There is a lot of

* add this unit / this religion / this civilisation.

Hey there is already a lot of differents unit there. Why more is always better to somes here ?

i prefer well balanced unit/civ that adding more. Maybe civ could be more different from each other but i think you get my point. Making the exact same civ as an existing one but with a different color and flag even with different tech start, different trait and different unique building/unit do nothing good to the game.

[bjsiders]

Stuff I'd like to see in Civ 5:

* All of the actual 7 Wonders from Earth (it's gotten better, Civ III managed to have them all eventually, but Civ IV dropped the Mausoleum)

* Just once, the St. Louis Arch. Dunno what it'd do - trade, I suppose, or maybe even engineering. It's one of the most recognizable pieces of architecture in America. I know, this is me being America-centric and Midwest-centric, but hey. Somebody has to cheer for us.

* Ability to share food between cities. In reality, cities like LA survive because they import food and water, not because they're located near appropriate terrain. Sometimes you get a new city in a strategically important location but it needs more food to be helpful. Meanwhile another city has tons of food and no production. Would be nice to have the city with excess food donate some to the needy city, or to help it grow more rapidly.

* Natural events like earthquakes that can happen in random places. Might cost a city some money or suck up some hammers for a few turns to repair damage. I wouldn't have it cost much in the way of population though. Especially for advanced civilizations whose buildings would presumably survive better.

* Better naval combat with combat groups.

* Better air combat. It's hard to represent air battles that take 2 hours to complete in reality when your granularity is measured in years, but surely it could be better.

* Diplomacy and world events - in reality, far-flung colonies geographically cut off from nations almost invariably become independent, especially prior to the concept of public contracts (Constitutions). It's annoying to have somebody plop down a city RIGHT NEXT to your empire to claim some resource. Yeah you can culturally assimilate them but such cities are likely to claim independence.

* New Civs Showing Up - used to be in old Civ that if you beat somebody too soon another Civ sprung up. New Civs are impossible in Civ IV, where the entire planet is papered in human population and explored end-to-end by 1000 AD. Every Civ has met every other Civ, new Civs don't come into existance - some way for this to happen. Perhaps large enough unchecked Barbarian populations mature into actual civilizations at some point and become available for diplomatic arrangements.

[Virdrago]

Thoughts on the last post:

- There's still at least one more XP coming to Civ IV. The Mausoleum will probably show up. Don't worry yet...

- Um, I don't know about the St. Louis Arch. I can't think of a great reason why it should be in Civ 5.

- Sharing of food may make a game too unbalanced. Supercities being supported by lesser ones (large hammers, more food given to them, and suddenly size 30 cities in the tundra or desert hills, and they can use all the production in the fat X). The AI wouldn't do as well with having to try and decide what should become a supercity.

- Like the idea. Loss of pop would probably be worse though; there are many instances of major cities losing prominence after a major earthquake (Antioch in 325 was the second largest city after Rome. Because of an earthquake, it lost half its population. Otherwise it would have been the Byzantine capital when Rome split).

- more modern ships for better naval combat, but

- Yeah, air combat may be worked a bit better.

- Independence has positives and negatives for me. I'm on the fence on this one.

- New Civs. I miss that. Some should also be (at least early) slightly more advanced, or close to advanced as the rest of the world (so they aren't doormats like in Civ I & II). The barbs becoming civilized is a nice idea.

[bjsiders]

RE: Earthquakes and stuff
I don't like "random events" usually in strategy games, the only randomness I like is as a consequence of the player's decisions where you have SOME influence over your odds. But if there's highly productive land near a volcano and you want to roll the dice, then roll the dice. Ancient peoples didn't really understand fault lines, I imagine, so I wouldn't want a huge penalty for earthquakes.

RE: Independence
It's annoying to build up a colony and have it break off and be lost, but again - that's the risk you take. History is replete with examples of this happening and yet civilizations do it again and again and again. I'd make it so that any city that is not geographically connected to your own via cultural borders has a much greater chance of breaking off, up until the discovery of Constitution.

RE: Diplomacy
The ability to bargain for where border shall be set would be helpful. Suppose you just want a border moved a little because your enemy is encroaching upon your territory. Seems silly to have a war over it (e.g., Kuwait tunneling under the Iraq border to get oil so Iraq invades - nobody likes it). The downside would be that if you move borders so as to put a tile that belongs, culturally, to another civ, you end up with some unrest and unhappiness as a result until that population assimilates. If it's a population that REALLY hates your guts, or has differences of civics or religion, it might take a long time. Might never happen at all.

Also with diplomacy, the AI should be more willing to settle for an loss of cities or territory to end wars, rather than stubbornly fight it out to the end. I had France on her knees with one city left, and all I wanted was three technologies. Wouldn't even give me _ONE_, with four stacks outside the last city. Perhaps some civs hate you so bad they'd die first, but this is silly. I suppose it's a game balance thing, but it still seems dumb.

RE: New Civs
I like unchecked barbarians maturing into new civs, and I'd like to see it much harder to clear cut jungles. After centuries of effort we've barely made a dent in the world's jungles supply. A few hundred works could pave the earth in Civ in about 50 years in the modern era. They should regrow insanely fast in their old tiles.

I'd like to see the ability to raze cities of a certain size removed. Nobody is going to burn Paris to the ground, even Dresden survived.

Naval warfare has historically been a critical component of fighting. I don't usually build a single nonworkboat ship until I get destroyers. Needs some work.

[_BuRjaCi_]

Originally posted by Virdrago
Thoughts on the last post:

- Sharing of food may make a game too unbalanced. Supercities being supported by lesser ones (large hammers, more food given to them, and suddenly size 30 cities in the tundra or desert hills, and they can use all the production in the fat X). The AI wouldn't do as well with having to try and decide what should become a supercity.

Actualy it wouldn’t be that unbalanced. Just think of the support costs of the little food export cities. And if they would introduce that concept, they would probably put a technology-modified cap on food import/export. And the AI would probably benefit since its good at number-chrunching.

[Addled Platypus]

go for the gusto -

If you run a democracy, every 4 years you run the chance of a new leader with new traits, after 8 it's guarnteed

now that would be a challenge

[Targonis]

Originally posted by Platypus Rex
go for the gusto -

If you run a democracy, every 4 years you run the chance of a new leader with new traits, after 8 it's guarnteed

now that would be a challenge

You are focused on how the government is set up in the USA. Democracy by itself doesn't set any specific policy, and really wouldn't even have much more than a figurehead since the people would decide almost everything.

That's why you notice that you don't set "democracy" as a government type the way you could in previous Civ games. You have your civics, and that's it. More choices of civics would be welcome though.

[samspock]

Mostly relgion changes. The current system is a bit too simple/predictable.

Randomize religion. For each tech on the religious track there is a percentage chance that a religion would be founded. The percentage goes up as that tech is discovered/traded but no religion founded yet. This would be based on the number of civs so that the if it has not founded yet then the last civ to get the tech would get the religion.

Example:

You go for Polytheism but only have a 25% chance of founding. The next civ that researches it gets a 35% chance. If a religion is founded on it then the chance on that tech drops to 0%.

The founding civ gets to name the religion. The ai would pick from a list of names. A mix of real and made up ones.

Put traits into relgions but make them random. Each one would get 1-3 traits that make it different from others. No combinations would be allowed more than once.

Increase unhapiness if the dominant religion is not declared the state religion. All your cities have Hiduism but you are eithe running none or budisim. One unhappy per. Only for the one with the most cities in your empire. Dominant would be in more than half of your cites. Ended at Free Relgion.

When you build the shrine for a relitgion it should have the build a missionary ability like the monastary.