WISH List

[Verto]

As far as additions in an XP or Civ4, canals and outposts or forts - a place where you can station troops, get the healing effects of a barrack and the defense of a fortress. Maybe letting you see 2 squares away, as if you were on a mountain.

Missile silos? Not really necessary, just fun.

Trenches. Build only on grasslands or plains, add defensive bonus to infantry and the like. Takes away irrigation, etc.

As previously mentioned, colonies shouldn't disappear when your culture borders expand. They should stay there, and maybe eventually grow into a city?

Fixes: IMO, fighters and bombers are now useless in Civ3. Sure, they can have some uses, but they were more effective in Civ2. Same goes with artillery. Fix it Sid and I will stop the death threats.

UU needs a lot of rethinking and work. F-15? C'mon. Is that all they could pick? And Panzers? whats the point, if they get annihilated by some club-wielding barbarians and spearmen?

Another thing is more for looks, and they made have fixed it in Civ3, i don't know cuz I haven't tried it yet: when fortifications are built adjacent to each other, they should appear to be connected.

I have never won by UN victory, because I never play the option. However, I gather that when the UN is built, they vote and if you are elected, you win, end of game. Correct me if I am wrong.

What I would like to see is, if you are elected to UN, you have the ability to build "peacekeepers". Ideas for them: Nation A is attacked by Nation B. Nation A petitions you, the UN, for help. You can then send in peacekeepers, when can defend only. Don't have details worked out.

Diplomacy: fix the option to trade cities, or remove it. I have offered every city but one to Zululand, just to see if they would accept it, and they don't. Someone explain that to me.

Trading: negotiate the length of agreements.

What happened to nations going into civil war and splitting in half? Was there a specific reason they took it out? Wouldn't it be nice to see Bolsheviks take over half of Russia?

Civs: true, a lot are missing and need to be added, but a lot need to be removed! Yes, Iroquis did noteworthy things. That doesn't mean it needs to be in Civ3. They lived in obscurity until they were conquered: simplistic, yes, but you get my idea. And then the argument about America, which wasn't created until the 18th century. Personally, I think some of you are just hating on the US, but this isn't the place for that. I believe that the Civs that are in the game were decided upon because of their impact on world events, their achievements - cultural, scientific, and military. Rome and Greece are in there for obvious reasons. The same for the rest of the Eurasian countries. As far as America being in there, which nation had a greater effect on the world: America, or Korea?


We all know that the leaders need a lot of work. Give us the option of playing male/female, like in Civ2 - that will quiet the liberal feminists . Also, to satisfy those who want to see Washington give way to Lincoln, then FDR, etc, either have the leaders change in the appropriate year, or have them serving as your ministers. A lot of diff. ways to fix that problem.

[Panag]

hi ,

, a SAM ground unit , ...

have a nice day

[OPD]

After playing populus again for the first time in years I thought how cool it would be if there was a conquest style set of maps/scenarios increasing in difficulty that you could only play by completing the previous level.

About 500 levels would keep me going for a few years.


Instant nuclear response - good idea.

[Nubclear]

The ability to negotiate civs for demands. Like, if Russia comes up and says:

"We want steam power now!"

And I have 31000 gold, I would like to be able to say "Well, we can give you steam power, but how about 10000 gold instead?"

(not a very good scenario, but hey...)

[Qilue]

Originally posted by Verto

Diplomacy: fix the option to trade cities, or remove it. I have offered every city but one to Zululand, just to see if they would accept it, and they don't. Someone explain that to me.

A clarification, you can't trade cities, either to an AI civ or from them. Apparently this was a change made in the first patch.

You can however, give them away like giving gifts of gold, tech or resources. Also, you can get or give cities as part of a peace deal.

[Verto]

You can however, give them away like giving gifts of gold, tech or resources. Also, you can get or give cities as part of a peace deal.

That's what I was doing. Guess I confused everyone when I said trade.

[Gen.Dragolen]

While we're at it

This one is a stab at the heart of Firaxis:

In future, get someone on the payroll who has a degree in History or Archeology, please.

I've been looking at the editor and some of the settings you have setup for advances and improvements have absolutely nothing to do with what has already happened. Too many of the advances are allowed when there were numerous precondidtions for their developement and use:

Scientific Method list Medicine and Electricity as prerequisites. The Scientific Method was developed several hundred years before Modern Medicine and Electricity by people like Newton and Copernicus. They adopted a method of testing their ideas that allowed people like van Leeuwenhoek to examine invisible plants and animals which led to Sanitation.

On the history channel, they have showed medical texts that had detailed directions on how to treat specific wounds, like a broken jaw. And one of the skeletons they found in a gravepit from the War of the Roses in 15th Century England showed that the treatments worked: a trooper that had his jaw broken and it had healed. Nasty scar, but he was healthy enough to fight after it had healed.

It seems that in an effort to make the game simple for the masses, they have lost most of the accuracy and detail of how history prgressed. Even the older versions like Civ I and Civ II were better with the logic used to pick historical benchmarks to use for advances and to pick prerequisites. It would be a great improvement to game play if more of the advances were tied together, and relied on earlier advances. After all, most of what Europe learned that allowed the Renaissance came from China and Islamic scholars in Persia.

Do us all a favour and try finding a BBC produced show called "Connections" and watch all of the episodes before attempting to write Civ IV.


D.

[Panag]

Re: While we're at it

Originally posted by Gen.Dragolen
This one is a stab at the heart of Firaxis:

In future, get someone on the payroll who has a degree in History or Archeology, please.

I've been looking at the editor and some of the settings you have setup for advances and improvements have absolutely nothing to do with what has already happened. Too many of the advances are allowed when there were numerous precondidtions for their developement and use:

Scientific Method list Medicine and Electricity as prerequisites. The Scientific Method was developed several hundred years before Modern Medicine and Electricity by people like Newton and Copernicus. They adopted a method of testing their ideas that allowed people like van Leeuwenhoek to examine invisible plants and animals which led to Sanitation.

On the history channel, they have showed medical texts that had detailed directions on how to treat specific wounds, like a broken jaw. And one of the skeletons they found in a gravepit from the War of the Roses in 15th Century England showed that the treatments worked: a trooper that had his jaw broken and it had healed. Nasty scar, but he was healthy enough to fight after it had healed.

It seems that in an effort to make the game simple for the masses, they have lost most of the accuracy and detail of how history prgressed. Even the older versions like Civ I and Civ II were better with the logic used to pick historical benchmarks to use for advances and to pick prerequisites. It would be a great improvement to game play if more of the advances were tied together, and relied on earlier advances. After all, most of what Europe learned that allowed the Renaissance came from China and Islamic scholars in Persia.

Do us all a favour and try finding a BBC produced show called "Connections" and watch all of the episodes before attempting to write Civ IV.


D.

hi ,

, in the end its just a game , ...

and they cant know everything either , ....

have a nice day

[OPD]

Someone once said
when gameplay meets realism, gameplay should win.

You've gotta give them a bit of poetic licence.

[Sheik]

I always thought that it might be nice to have scheduled battles. Perhaps you could invite the AI into a battle. This feature would be avaliable till a certain period. I know it may sound dumb and I don't know exactly how it would work but thought it might be a fun option that could be turned on before gameplay.

[Verto]

You'll need to elaborate, because I have no idea what you mean...recreate historical battles? I'm confused.

[star mouse]

Originally posted by Verto
You'll need to elaborate, because I have no idea what you mean...recreate historical battles? I'm confused.

Military exercises, perhaps?

You and the AI send conscripts and regulars in for military exercises, and have them fight until one has 1 HP. The winner can promote with half the usual chance. Leaders cannot be created this way.

Were you thinking of something like this, Sheik?

[Barchan]

Originally posted by panag

[other occasionally reasonable suggestions omitted]
weather
day and night

if the above would be included , well , .......

one can only hope for it

Dude, you *cannot* be serious. How, exactly, would you implement day and night in a game that covers over 5000 years? And what conceivable purpose would weather have? What difference would it possibly make if it were raining or sunny? And, again, how would you implement thousands of years worth of weather?

Do you actually think through some of these suggestions you'd like Firaxis to implement, or are you just spouting them off the top of your head?

And believe me, I'm really trying to have a nice day, but sometimes I run into people that make it very difficult for me to do so.

[Sheik]

Yeah sort of.

[Civfan]

I wish for a great Patch and a game thats not broken. Maybe thats to much to ask from these companies today!

Anyways with Civ3 a better organized AI. Its good but not the greatest it can be.

Maybe we can have more options in the tax options. A slider for taxes and happinest is ok but who knows. Maybe personal income tax, city expenses,. Actually maybe a balance sheet.

Well thats my two cents....