What needs to be done to make this game great.

[Dis]

we'll include realistic and unrealistic changes. Just label them as such.


all my ideas are unrealistic for Firaxis to implement except the pollution and corruption options.

wonder movies. I don't care if I turn them off. I want the respect I deserve for building them

real advisors. gives life to the game. cartoon figures don't do this

fp/hp: just kidding...kind of

options to adjust pollution and corruption to our liking. We shouldn't be forced to endure pain in the ass features because the designers felt we needed the challenge.

get rid of the french

[yin26]

Change the title to Civ 2.5 and release the True Civ3 sometime late this year?

[General Ludd]

All I want...

is a working, and accurate, world map.

[notyoueither]

Group movement. Not attack, mind you. Just able to assign a number of units to a group. Select group. Assign movement goal. They all go towards that goal. Not as easy as some assume. What does one member of the group do when it encounters a trigger to stop for player input (like, Hey, there's an Aztec Warrior, we're at war with them ain't we? Better call this in.) Does the unit stay a part of the group? Does the whole group stop? Does...? ... Oh yeah, an imperative of this is that general orders are followed by all members of the group (ie clean this patch of pollution up, or Fortify for instance). In other words, it does away with the worker tedium many have noticed (me included).

Aircraft can sink ships, but ships from DD up can shoot down attacking Aircraft. It would be best if this was accompanied by the advent of Naval Attack Aircraft. Land Based Air should have penalties in attack against ships. Bombers? Forget it (big penalty). Fighters? They're OK (no penalty) but they don't have a big bombardment to begin with.

Group movement.

I second the easy access for users to adjust corruption (and pollution). I believe I have seen a Firaxian actually state that this was in the cards for corruption. Yeeeaahhh!

Group movement.

Ancient units auto upgrade to Militia at start of Industrial Era, regardless of presence of Barracks. Same strength as Spearmen, but it would stop the *Anti-Tank Spearmen* complaints.

Group movement.

Subs should have Precision Bombardment option against stacks of vessels (pick your target) but weak bombardment strength maybe.

Group movement.

A more complete editor for the more creative among us. I'm not one of them, but I would love to see what some of them could do with scenarios, new units, blah, blah, blah. Some of the most compelling reasons to continue to play Civ2 were the products of the fans. Would this increase sales? You betcha. In fact, it's almost a no-brainer. I personally do not require a Firaxian statement about this, I think that it is coming is a given.

Did I suggest group movement? Just thought I would in case Lib isn't paying attention.

Oh man, oh man, there are so many things and so few resources for the programmers to do them (I fear).

Still, good idea for a thread though.

Salve

[yin26]

I forgot one. Group movement. I had to say that because nobody else has.

[Capt Dizle]

I really believe that the design team doesn't understand what makes a game fun so there is no hope of greatness with them involved.

However. Group movement.
Is a very good idea.

It is a shame that Sid didn't get involved in this project. He would have accidently created more enjoyment in this game than most designers could make on purpose. But I know he is just tired of the series. That is understandable but so sad.

[notyoueither]

Oh, and lack of resources should not doom a civ to failure.

The following would benefit the AI more than the player (I think).

There should be weaker versions of units that require a resource. If you don't have Oil, you should be able to build a Light Tank. Same shield cost as a Tank, but lower A/D rating and it costs 2 or 5 or 10 gold to initiate in production.

Likewise RR. You want to build RR in a square, but you don't have Iron? Pay 5 gold. No Coal? 5 more gold. No Iron or Coal? 10 gold.

Nations can always obtain needed materials, whether they have an agreement with some other government or not. About the only exception to this might be Uranium.

I would just be glad to never see the Longbowman regression ever again. You know how when you take your oppo's Oil and Salt Peter with your ModernArmour, you start to see Longbowmen showing up?

Salve

[yin26]

These days when I play SimGolf and find myself saying "Damn, Sid is so good he can make Sim+Golf actually pretty fun!" ... a tiny tear forms in my eyes in expression of the countless broken dreams discarded like so many fallen leaves at the corner of Civilization and Third.

(...sorry, wanted to see if I could make myself gag -- it worked! LOL! )

[notyoueither]

Did I mention group movement?

salve

[Dis]

who in the hell wants group movement. yeah it would be nice. but fixing the game is more important

naval combat. there already is a thread on this. I don't expect all that stuff in naval combat. If I wanted extreme realism I would play Harpoon or a sub simulator. But naval combat in its present state is pathetic. And I want a dive bomber and torpedo bomber unit that can sink ships. Of course AEGIS ships and modern carriers have phalanx and sea sparrow launchers to virtually eliminate this threat. So the length of time those air units are useful are limited.

[notyoueither]

Get rid of the French! After all, they're just Romans with a bad accent.

Salve

[OneInTen]

Get rid of the Americans. After all they're just overweight, fast food gobbling brits.

[yin26]

Hey, buddy: Americans are overweight, fast food gobbling people from all over the world!

[notyoueither]

Get rid of the Brits! After all, they're just Huns who dream of being Roman. And who have atrocious accents.

Salve

[Archaetus]

Set a release date AFTER the game is finished.

Add an abandon city option.

Add more Civs.

Bring back real advisors. Why can't that military advisor ever keep his hat on?

Terraforming . . . even if just a future tech.

Kill those #$@! workers.