More Civs or Civ expansion.

[Spec]

I dont know about you but I'd like to see more civs to choose from in the game. The max per map should stay the same because 16 is enough to deal with, but it would be cool to have more to choose from, IMO. I'd like to see some other Civs like the Vickings, the Mongoles, Spain and Portuguese (both of them conquered a part of america), Turqey (I know what you're thinking right now but dont laugh, they were pretty strong in ancient times), Arabes, Mayas, Esquimos and so on... There could also be a hidden Civ like the Atlantiniens from Atlantis but you know, this one is a bit far fetched....

Or what we could also get is an expansion of your current civ.Like if you go on another continent. Just like what happend when they discovered "the new world". Let's say you start with the french, you conquer a new land far away and build atleast five cities and after a couple of hundred years that expansion demands independence. From that point on you control 2 civs but the corruption in the expansion drops considerably because it is now considered as a new civ but both still work jointly.

So what I mean is that the forbiden palace would be the palace for that new civ, for that expansion. Just like Canada an Bitain or Brazil and Spain. What do you think?

Spec.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

More of it all ...

I'd like more civs, more special units (at least one for each period in time; some may be overlapping), more civ traits, custom options for each civ (civ à la carte: choosing names, colors, traits, UU) and more medium sized earth maps with correct starting locations. (But at least Mike is working on it!)

Spectator, I like your idea of controlling a mother nation and independant former colonies. The extreme corruption when ruling a major empire should be reduced. (I don't like editoring a game; I'd get used to new rules/settings fast, while they're not official and commonly used --> it would just confuse in regard of tournaments, discussions, etc ...)

AJ

[volcanohead]

Indepedent colonies is a nice idea. You could include some carrots and sticks for the player: The colony requests independence you can

1) Refuse. Higher probablility of cultural loss to another civ, more corruption, but complete control, as before.

2) Accept. MUCH lower corruption, but control of production is removed. The AI governor takes it. You continue to control any units produced. Occasional random disruptions to resource and luxury supply (if any).

[Spec]

Originally posted by volcanohead
Indepedent colonies is a nice idea. You could include some carrots and sticks for the player: The colony requests independence you can

1) Refuse. Higher probablility of cultural loss to another civ, more corruption, but complete control, as before.

2) Accept. MUCH lower corruption, but control of production is removed. The AI governor takes it. You continue to control any units produced. Occasional random disruptions to resource and luxury supply (if any).

I agree. But I would say that the AI governor controls the production but you can give your opinion on what you would like to get. Example: You know you need tanks so you propose to your governor to make tanks. So then, you would have a certain chance that your governor is going to listen to you or he'll just do what he thinks is best.

Spec.

[volcanohead]

Not bad. Pushing things even further, you could have a new 'leader' who you can request various things of, such as not trading with other civs, and so on. If your relationship continues well, then he agrees to 90% of requests. But if the relationship sours, he/she can become increasingly problematic, eventually devolving altogether.

But this is probably beyond the capability of Civ3 right now.

V

[aahz_capone]

All these ideas are great. Especially this mother nation thing. About the more civs (I want more EVERYTHING too anyway) there's a nice thread in Civ-Files going on about 16 new civ with their unique abilities and units. (Including Spanish, Vikings, etc.)

[jabroni154]

Colonies is a pretty cool idea. After long enough or perhaps enough culture points or population, the people demand independence. If they demand independence, add in a bit more a twist to the refuse scenario.

If you refuse, the citizens on the remote island/etc. have a chance to revolt and form their own semi-independent civ. This probably goes way, way beyond the Civ engine but if a colony would revolt, each city could have a chance of joining the revolution or staying with you. For each city that revolts, you could have a chance of each unit defecting to the resistance or staying with you and being expelled just outside the city.

The random chance could be based on some sort of random number factored in with the number of luxuries, population, tax rate, etc. In theory, during the war, you could sign a peace treaty (i.e. the same as accepting the initial call for independence) or you could send over a bunch of troops and crush the insurrection but you suffer additional unhappiness and corruption in the city for X turns.

[White Elk]

Interesting ideas.

jabroni154 This reminds me of the unofficial expansion "The World At War" for "Axis And Allies". I like it. It would add an element of nervous expectation to the game, wondering which cities will remain loyal and which will rebel. And then having to determine wheither the best course of action will be to let them be free and retain some commerce trade or to squash the ressistence and take it all and thereby risk it all. Do they posses a critical resource? Were they a pain in the arse anyway? Can I bribe them into submission? Will they join forces with an enemy Civ and be a threat later?.......

I think the mother country should control the production and unit orders. With factors like an enemy invasion of the colonies not being quickly dealt with, unhappiness, overall culture in comparision with the other Civs, government, and even an adherance to the Civ specifics- determining how well the colonies respond to your rule.

Along with the other peace agreements, I'd like to offer the enemy Civ a Vassal State option. To be ruled in a similar way as the colonies, but with a greater chance of revolt and higher corruption.