Civ 4

[Tiberius]

It's definitely not a civ game. It is a RTS with some civ elements in it. I also played the demo and didn't like it.

[Tiberius]

Re: Scale-able Maps

Originally posted by JesseSmith
The idea of having the map scale to the Era could be a lot of fun. IE: During the Ancient Era the entire map is actually just a small piece of the eventual game world. When entering the Middle Ages/Industrial/Modern the map expands to encompass a larger portion of the world. By the late Industrial Age (Flight to Satellites) with the growth of technology the entire world (game map) is available. To use the Conquest maps as examples, it would be like going from Mesopotamia to Middle Ages to Epic Game.

By expanding the map for each Era the game world is suddenly dynamic and mysterious. As with RL, as technology advances Distances quickly becomes smaller and smaller. I'd love to see the expression on a time warped Ancient Era humans face as they flew across a continent on a 747. More so I'd love to be on a ship traveling faster than the speed of light across our galaxy!!

Jesse, this is an excellent idea

[zorbop]

Originally posted by Master Zen

Finally, one biggie: FOR ALL THAT IS SACRED AND HOLY PLEASE MAKE IT A HEX-BASED MAP, REGARDLESS OF IT BEING 2-D or 3-D... HEX HEX HEX!!!!

Yes, the entire quad thing is getting a bit old...

Besides this the most important things are to

-Make navies useful! This means that it sometimes might be a better choice to move units over sea instead of over land.

-Good combat system. Combat is the center of any Civ game, the combat system should NOT suck. Trading functionality for simplicity, like in CivIII, is not an option.

-For the love of god, don't make it 3D.

I know most of that has been said already, but we really need to pound these points into Firaxis's head. Would any of you like CivIV to have CivIII's cambat system. I don't think i would be able to take that...

[Kuciwalker]

make it a MODDERS PARADISE.

[Dis]

I didn't like the tech "tree" in the Rise of Nations demo. In fact I didn't like the tech in that game at all. And I admit that was a big reason I did not buy the game- and the fact I usually suck at RTS's . I did a little better in this game because I can assign actions while paused. My main problem is forgetting to pause and assign more actions . I need to pause often to keep up with the action. I'm a slow but thorough thinker.


I am fine with the square squares. Does that make sense? Having a 6 sided hex basically is for war purposes. It means your units are more vulnerable to attack from different directions.

But as we all should know, civ3 should not be mainly a war game.

[WarpStorm]

Rise of Nations is a very good polished RTS. It is in the same mold as the "Age of..." games. It is not Civ though.

[asleepathewheel]

Re: Scale-able Maps

Originally posted by JesseSmith
The idea of having the map scale to the Era could be a lot of fun. IE: During the Ancient Era the entire map is actually just a small piece of the eventual game world. When entering the Middle Ages/Industrial/Modern the map expands to encompass a larger portion of the world. By the late Industrial Age (Flight to Satellites) with the growth of technology the entire world (game map) is available. To use the Conquest maps as examples, it would be like going from Mesopotamia to Middle Ages to Epic Game.

By expanding the map for each Era the game world is suddenly dynamic and mysterious. As with RL, as technology advances Distances quickly becomes smaller and smaller. I'd love to see the expression on a time warped Ancient Era humans face as they flew across a continent on a 747. More so I'd love to be on a ship traveling faster than the speed of light across our galaxy!!

I would love this. Actually I've fantasized about this before, as part of the ultimate civ experience, in the long sad time between ToT and Civ3.

[alva]

I would love this. Actually I've fantasized about this before,

Hmmm, Sleepy, might be time to take a step back from Civ for a while...

[Zevico]

I like the idea of social engineering, but it all depends on how in hell it could be implemented in practice...how was it done in SMAC? Was it fairly complicated or not?
As to micromanagement: workers are a blight upon my patience, especially at the end of the game. I do not know how this problem can or can not be solved, but please, please solve it.
Jesse, that is a truly game evolving idea, I think, and one whose implementation does not sound too difficult for players to handle (as to the progamming I side, I have no clue, though I can't imagine it to be too difficult in comparison with making the map work itself).
Navies should be simplified and made similar to the current system in use for the Air Force in Civ3, via "rebasing" a navy to a certain area and giving it orders to do something there, whether it be to attack a town or protect shipping from piracy.
Which brings me to my next suggestion (or rather question): piracy and sea linked trade. Both of these things have the potential to be very good parts of the game, and be kept simple, if only a system of sea trade was created which was easy to use: something, perhaps, along the lines of creating a "trade route" (ie. a specific area or areas) which merchant ships travel through in order to trade with other nations. I would suggest that, wherever there is not a naval patrol "based" in the region, the trade should be hampered (or there is a chance of it) by piracy. If they are based, then the chance of piracy is severely decreased. If nations give support to privateers, then the chance is increased. Then again, the practicality of this system won't be too good-how is trade to be measured, and thus hampered, by piracy? A simple 1 turn interruption? Perhaps a loss of luxuries in a few cities of the empire (and a loss of income of a similarily small nature for the paying empire?)?
If my ideas have been in any way comprehensible, then I hope they have been of use.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
No harder than it is to implement in RTSs.

Which brings up an interesting point - it hasn't been implemented in RTS's they use a tile system too, it's just you don't see the gridlines.

[Edgar Newt]

Things I want (now or in Civ IV)

I'd love more choices within diplomacy and have the AI actually reflect rational thought when it comes to making decisions (both in and outside of diplomacy).

I want a multi-player experience that is turn-based, but not laggy or buggy. My Dad and I play Civ III over the Internet. It is one of the better ways we communicate. He plays very slowly, so even a little lag drags the game out even farther. It is not uncommon for our games to stretch 36-48 hours of "real life" time.

Speaking of my Dad, and on a related topic, it would be great if there was a feature whereby when a human player drops out of a game (whether MP or SP), the game could continue with just AI (as in a zero-player game). Often times either in MP or SP, after playing 300+ turns or so, my Dad would like to remove himself from the game and see how the computer would play it out. Think of it as a zero person game. I don't think it would require much retooling, but I think it would add alot to people who tire of the end game process. I hate to have to wait for Civ IV for this -- it seems like it could be implemented in patch (or a workaround -- I just haven't figured it out yet).

Thoughts?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by alva

I would love this. Actually I've fantasized about this before,

Hmmm, Sleepy, might be time to take a step back from Civ for a while...

What are you trying to say alva? It is abnormal not to fantasize about civ, from my pov

[Gyromancer]

Re: Things I want (now or in Civ IV)

Originally posted by Edgar Newt
...
Speaking of my Dad, and on a related topic, it would be great if there was a feature whereby when a human player drops out of a game (whether MP or SP), the game could continue with just AI (as in a zero-player game). Often times either in MP or SP, after playing 300+ turns or so, my Dad would like to remove himself from the game and see how the computer would play it out. Think of it as a zero person game. I don't think it would require much retooling, but I think it would add alot to people who tire of the end game process. I hate to have to wait for Civ IV for this -- it seems like it could be implemented in patch (or a workaround -- I just haven't figured it out yet).

Thoughts?

If you save the game and reload, on the setup screen in multiplayer you can assign positions to be computer, open, or closed. (You can also change which position is assigned to which slot by clicking on the number next to the player name.) I'm not sure you can start a multiplayer game with only a single player, but you could switch him to a computer civ and see what carnage ensues....

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by skywalker
Which brings up an interesting point - it hasn't been implemented in RTS's they use a tile system too, it's just you don't see the gridlines.

Not necessarily. A height field doesn't have to be a tile system (unless you really stretch the definition of a tile system). I've seen terrain using an irregular triangular network in the past.

[Edgar Newt]

Gyromancer, thanks for your response. While it is true that you can save and restart, dropping one player, you cannot drop both to have the computer play it out (as if it was an all-AI game). I am sorry if I was unclear before.

My Dad and I are really looking for a way to let the computer play out the end-game.

Thanks again.