Contemplating the Design of Civilization...

[Melboz99]

@Elok,

The distribution and allocation of scarce resources is the foundation of economies in the real world, and it creates a need to develop strategies and tactics to overcome these scarcities.

I don't feel the game would be as fun if you could simply build an unlimited amount of units regardless of how many resources you have. If that's the way you like it, why have resource tiles at all?

To be fair though, in the real world while wars have occasionally fought over resources, in other situations substitutions have been developed. The entire German airforce, army, and navy, was powered on synthetic diesel created by modifying coal.

I just think you loose a significant strategic element if you tap into one tile with oil and can therefore build an unlimited number of tanks, ships, bombers, etc.

[Elok]

I haven't played Civ5 (and have no intention of doing so, judging by my own impressions and everything I've heard about it from longtime Civ players who have played it), but there's definitely a point to resources in 4; they give a unique strategic value to regions of the map to make them worth controlling, in addition to adding flavor. That you can build an infinite number of swordsmen from one iron mine is unrealistic, but the alternative doesn't sound terribly fun to me. Of course, even the strategic resource restrictions can be not-fun in the first place--if you start on a continent without horses, you're in the same boat as the Aztecs and Inca were historically, i.e. just about hosed. Which is why they included the balanced resource map type. And they left out a number of not-fun real-world problems, like massive epidemics spreading along trade networks, periodic rebellions and civil wars, crop failures from unforeseeable climate cycles, broken lines of communication, insubordinate generals deciding to use their armies however they damn well please...oh, and directed research is wildly unrealistic. Civ isn't a realistic simulation of leadership; they try to leave out or abstract all the annoying and frustrating parts. That's why you don't have to budget your limited coal for the trains to carry soldiers around on railroads.

[Elok]

Also, it's not like hard unit limits are the only way to make multiple resources valuable. Consider a scheme where having multiple horses incrementally decreases the build time or maintenance cost of horsemen, or multiple luxuries will mean more happiness (with diminishing returns, e.g. one spice gives one smiley, but you need three to give two, then six to give three, ten to give four, etc.). Or something like that. My feeling is, if there's accounting or record-keeping to be done, as much as possible should be seamlessly done by the computer to streamline the experience for the player. If the player wants to look under the hood, he should be able to, but if he doesn't he can just think "more horses means better cavalry forces" and leave it at that.

[Lambiorix_be]

I haven't played Civ5 (and have no intention of doing so, judging by my own impressions and everything I've heard about it from longtime Civ players who have played it), but there's definitely a point to resources in 4; they give a unique strategic value to regions of the map to make them worth controlling, in addition to adding flavor.

At least play it once unbiased instead of only hearing what other people are saying. It would give more weight to your comments...

[Elok]

See, that would involve paying a good deal of money to upgrade my computer and buy a game that doesn't terribly interest me (and which I have good cause to believe isn't worth the investment), all to give my opinion weight. And not that much weight, because this is a general civ-design thread. If it doesn't work the way it sounds like it works to me, please tell me. Or simply ignore me.

[Melboz99]

And they left out a number of not-fun real-world problems, like massive epidemics spreading along trade networks, periodic rebellions and civil wars, crop failures from unforeseeable climate cycles, broken lines of communication, insubordinate generals deciding to use their armies however they damn well please...oh, and directed research is wildly unrealistic. Civ isn't a realistic simulation of leadership; they try to leave out or abstract all the annoying and frustrating parts. That's why you don't have to budget your limited coal for the trains to carry soldiers around on railroads.

The difference here is that all those "not-fun" elements you mention are not fun because they are out of the players control, creating problems without obvious solutions that the player has no control over.

Resource consumption, allocation, and procurement is very much an element under the player's control. It has obvious solutions, and creates a need to make decisions, plan, coordinate, and develop a strategy to be successful.

For all the talk against Civ V and how easy it was at release, it seems odd for a Civ IV fanboi to be suggesting we remove strategy, make things simpler, etc.

Dan O.

[Elok]

Did you hear me say anything about simplification? I don't like the sound of Civ5 because the best of its new ideas sound irrelevant/nonsensical--oh boy we discovered the grand canyon so now we riot less WTF?--while the worst sound simply ridiculous or, in the case of 1UPT, game-breakingly terrible. They just threw a bunch of random gimmicks together and called it a game, from the sounds of it. Anyway, simplicity and complexity are not valuable of themselves; there's simple-fun (chess, checkers) and simple-boring (paper, scissors, rock) and complex-fun (most civ-type games) and complex-tedious (calculus homework). The complexity of hard unit limits does not sound fun, it sounds like a hassle to keep track of. I am at least familiar with their equivalent in Civ4, where it was simply a dratted nuisance that was only bearable due to missionaries not being required in bulk. Whether or not resources are intrinsically valuable in multiples, they will remain useful for the purposes of backup/redundancy and trade, so the "problem" solved is no huge deal in the first place. If you wish them to have intrinsic value in multiples anyway, I already outlined one way of doing it, off the top of my head, that would not involve turning the player into an accountant. Micromanagement is rarely fun, and when it is it's fun because it's optional and doing so effectively/with skill gives you a devastating advantage.

Also, most of the things I mentioned could easily be controlled, prevented, or influenced by the player to some extent. For example, rebellions did exist, to a limited extent, in Civ2. Good ol' civil disorder made a city utterly dysfunctional the moment its unhappy people outnumbered its happy people. If you were a democracy, leaving them that way for more than a single turn would make your whole government collapse. This is not too different from the way it actually was for rulers throughout history, it could be controlled, and it was a massive PITA because controlling it was not fun. It was a constant chore hovering over your cities making sure they weren't all about to grow another citizen past the point of equilibrium. You were an imperial babysitter tending to spoiled children, and Civ4's simplification was a welcome reprieve.

[Melboz99]

Did you hear me say anything about simplification? I don't like the sound of Civ5 because the best of its new ideas sound irrelevant/nonsensical--oh boy we discovered the grand canyon so now we riot less WTF?--while the worst sound simply ridiculous or, in the case of 1UPT, game-breakingly terrible. They just threw a bunch of random gimmicks together and called it a game, from the sounds of it.

I was trying to point out that adding a limited amount of resources adds a strategic element to the game. I'm not implying that *all* of the features added the same strategic element.

You can throw around all the broad over-generalizations about Civ V you want, but without playing it, you really can't say that resource limits don't add a strategic element, or that resource limits make the game less fun.

"Fun" by definition is a personal viewpoint, and therefore it's impossible to claim that something is not fun unless you have personal experience with it.

Anyway, simplicity and complexity are not valuable of themselves; there's simple-fun (chess, checkers) and simple-boring (paper, scissors, rock) and complex-fun (most civ-type games) and complex-tedious (calculus homework). The complexity of hard unit limits does not sound fun, it sounds like a hassle to keep track of.

Way to over exaggerate and blow things out of proportion...

I have 4 tiles with a total of 18 Iron, I can build 18 units that require iron, if I want to build 6 more I need to acquire 6 more Iron.

Calculus???

[Melboz99]

@Elok, if you really have a hard time dealing with "complex" concepts such as limited recources, try playing virtually other strategy game out there.

More Vespene Gas!?? Oh No! My head will explode with the complexity!
Need more gold to purchase this unit? My God! The Micromanagement!
Need more rounds for my 9mm pistol!??? I can't handle the calculus!!!

[Elok]

I listed calculus as an example of a complex thing that isn't fun. At no point did I say any Civ game was equivalent to calc in difficulty. Please stop acting like a snarky numbnuts. We have other posters for that, and they do it better.

[Wiglaf]

Not sure if this was mentioned, but Civ5 limited strategic resources are a disaster, and terribly implemented. Really limits number of advanced air/naval units you can build as well, even though they are already really expensive and only of limited utility

[DutchGamer]

I've been around since Alpha Centauri, Civ II and Call to Power 1, so I'd like to think I know the genre.

You ask for improvement, well lets start with combining the best elements of all those games together :

*In Alpha Centauri you designed your own units, and techs only unlocked new parts to design with, I loved that and want that to return.
*Never where the advisors as fun as in Civ II even nowdays people ask for them to return, please do so.
*In Alpha Centauri city's could build unlimted amounts of satelites (producting 1 food, 1 production or 1 gold per satalite for that city) while quite expensive this did able you to specialise certain city's I'd like them to retun.
*In Civ II and III you had sliders to direct a percentage of your gold to science, treasury and happyness, I'd like to see that slider to retun.
*In Call to power I and II you had no workers , instead you directed a percentage of your production (just a slider like that for gold) towards communal works, improving lands needed to be paid for from that communal works pool. I found that concept brilliant and want it to be added to civ too.
*in Call to power I and II you had sea engineers, alowing you to build city's at the bottom of the sea, I'd like those to be added to civ too.
*in Call to power I you had space engineers, that could build space city's (space was an opaque 2d map on top of the original one, so in facts they were more like "space stations" grown large enough to be city's. this space level also allowed for unique form of combat, I want this space part added to civ as well.
*The best thing in Civ IV were the religions and multinaionals, glad to see it is added in some form to civ V too (though not perfect yet)
*The best concepts in Civ V are city-states, unit promotions, tiles that can be BOUGHT and the Social Politics tree, they should defenitly stay.
*In Alpha Centauri you could customise your goverment setting in detail, and it affected also your relation with other players, I'd like to see a setting like this to be added on top of the social setting.
*In Civ II and III you could still trade technology's, I want that to return.
*In previous games we had the stacks of doom, lets face it we liked that a lot better, the one unit per tile is a big fail, please restore the stacks of doom.
*I do like the need for tactacal resources in Civ V, it may stay.
*The cultural take over from borders in previous civ games was nice, it need to return.

Now we have listed what made previous games great, but what would I like to be improved on those matters :
*religion, based on how it was in Civ IV, can be greatly iproved, for starters, the auto-founding faith is not to my liking, instead I'd like to see a religion tab in the state politics menu. Like in alpha centauri new faiths being unlocked for all players as soon as the required tech is unlocked.
As a state you MUST pick a state religion, and an attitude considering that religion and others.
This are the avaible faiths for example :
Monotheism
-Judaism
--Levites
--Orthodox
--Liberal
-Christianity
--Catholic
--Orthodox
--Reformed
-Islam
--Soenite
--Sjiite
Poletheism
-Hindoeism
---???
-?
Nature Faits
-Druidism
-Animalism
Rationalism
-Confusionalism
-Deism
-Atheism

You can pick either a maingroup, a subgroup or a speciffic faith, picking a maingroup is more liberal and will cause less unrest and better relations with others, picking a fixed religion will cause better bonusses. you can alway change your state religion.

You must also pick an attitude :
**Defender of the faith (only possible if piked a speciffic faith) all effects doubled, so even more unhappyness and aggresion of others but better boost.
**Pious, (only possible if picked a speccific faith or subgroup) effects slightly increased
**Conservative (always possible) effects of faith stay standard.
**Oecoemenic (only possible if picked a subgroup or maingroup) effects of faith slightly lowered.
**Tolerant (only possible if picked a maingroup) effects of faith almost gone, can even have good relation with tolerant rulers of other maingroups)

The special faith buildings and the religious specialist from Civ IV will return, but somewhat different :
when you change your national faith, depending on the size of the change all your faith buildings will be ineffective for a couple of turns.
unlike in Civ iV you can build them forever even in modern age.
================================================== ==========================================

Keep in mind this will be part of you STATE POLTICS tab, independant from your cultural progress tab.

A likewise system will be added for economics (based on those multinationals)
The other 2 state politics you will get are less eleborate tabs one will be for authority, alowing you to pick between diffent forms of goverment (dicatorship, monargy, oliachy, technocracy, republic, democracy, digital democracy, communism, facism, corporatism) each with certain bonusses and drawbacks.
and one will be named Attitude, and it ill determine your nations attitude to others you can pick from (Xenofobic, Nationalistic, Patriottic, Explorer, Imperialist, Unionist, Globalist) each with bonusses and downsides.

Ok, faith and politics have been improved, next topic border expantion : allow for a tax slider on your cultural income, that tax will not go to your cultural progress, but will go to your propaganda pool, you can buy tiles owned by others with this pool.

With that We are done improving on what excists... now new idea's to be added :
-For starters I'd say add most of my ocean improvements as listed in my IS THERE ANY OCEAN MOD post.
-next I'd to say go away from fixed history by this way :
**the number of special goods gets extended to be around 1000 different items, though one can set volume per map between 50 and 200 of them none has all of them, each map unique.
**the tech tree goes out of the window instead we have about 5000 techs, each having different prerequisits (both in other techs (sometimes one of those listed is ok, sometimes multiple are needed) as in specialgoods. yes thas rights you need acces to goods to be able to research.
Also your future is BLIND, so you ONLY can see your current available research projects.. you can NOT see what you will unlock by reasearching one. as a result every game is unique and you really build YOUR history of time instead of coping the way our real world has gone.

**rebalancing is needed, research need to take a LOT longer, it goes way to fast now. Also the price of buildings need to go down a lot.
and that of units even more (making units cheap) the number of turns in the game is increased by a lot too.
-> giving you finally ample of time to build all available buildings everywhere, build a sizable army and fight epic battles before any new era dawns.
(in current game buildings go so slow, and tech so fast, and movement so slow relatively that by the time I have 5 units at my enemy's doorstep they are 2 era's behind)

**while double map is nice, why stop at world domination, new level will be added, after you won victory on either path you enter space stage, 2-20 double layerd (surface ad orbital) maps or "planets" are visible for you to travel too.
Every one of those planets will have one or more civs on them, some primitive some as advanced as you, in a way the game gets a new level.
Can you get galatic dominations too after you have it on your planet? Or become president of the intergalatic counsil, or become the first to acend your people to pure energy, etc!

**To add more fun those other planets will each have random nd therefore very different resources than youhave and thus the civs on them be will have other techs and hence other units than you, also when you gain controll of those new resources you too can research new techs and unlock new buildings and unit parts.

**because of all this randmisation standard unit names and your civ name is removed, you chooce one yourself. and specialise by picking your politics.

** to replace civ attributes Genes are added to the blend, there are 100 possible genes in the game each with a certain effect ( many different ones, butsome may have the same effect and able to boost eachother). Your planet gets at random 10 genes of those 100, you may select 5 of those 10 for your people,that will be you race, by genetic experiments, intermingling or sortalike on your rival civs on your planet you may get acces to the other 5 (given one of them selected them), in space stage you may also extract dna of the races on the othe planents to further improve your race.. get 50 or more genes and you win the homo superior victory.

Well that were my 5 cents, lemmy hear what you think of all my idea's.

[Adagio]

I have a few ideas also on how to fix some of the problems I have with Civ:

Problem: It's too easy to explore the world in all Civ games. In most games I have explored the full continent before 1AD, I know exactly where the borders of all civs are (this is worse in Civ V, where I can see new cities being built, even though my units saw that area 1000 years before the city was built)
Solution: Have some kind of soft limit on how far away from your own borders you can go. As soon as you reach that limit your unit starts to lose health. Each time you reach a new age, this soft border limit will expand. Ships will not have this limit, but units on another continent will have will have this border limit based on how far away from the ocean they are. This way you wont know how the world looks before 1AD

Problem: The world is too empty throughout most of the game on a standard game. In my last game on a large map, one continent, there was only cities on 50% of the continent at 1700AD
Solution: Add more civs as standard on each map. Every time I play a game I always add at least 2 more civs (and often more)

Problem: Your government is written in stone in Civ V. When you have made a type of government, you'll stick with that type of government until the end of the game
Solution: Something like the government in Civ IV or SMAC would be better. There are 1000 ways to make it better and I'm not going to list them all

Problem: The advisers are useless in Civ V. The science adviser has always only said I was producing a lot of science compared to population, no matter how behind I was in sceince. The other advisers keeps on repeating the same message over and over. Sometimes there is an interesting message between them, but I'm not interested in clicking through "I'm not sure COUNTRYNAME has an army at all" 100 times to find that one interesting message. But even the most interesting message is still useless
Solution: Make the advisers repeat less by making all the repeating messages all be in the same message and add some more advises that is useful. And make the advisers more like they were in Civ II. I really miss those advisers

[Sava]

How is it that Calvary can upgrade to Tanks?

Don't think of it as turning horses into tanks. Think of if as the Cavalry unit being a designated military unit (comprised of men, horses, supplies, etc) in which obsolete elements are phased out when new technology becomes available.

For instance, the US 1st Cavalry Division doesn't use horses anymore. It's a combination of mechanized units, artillery, armor, and transport helicopters (aircav).