 |
| |
|
|
brianshapiro
|
|
Berkeley
Nov 2001
time: 21:27
|
|
I originally posted a list of several suggestions in threads in the Play the World forum, I'm being persistent because I think these are good ideas, and even if Firaxis doesn't adopt them I would want to see if others here could join with me to work these out in a game. If there's a different forum where you think this thread would get more needed attention please point it out to me.
I should note that these suggestions are inspired by my play of many other strategy/simulation games, including SimCity/SimEarth, Imperialism, Caesar/Pharoah, Lords of the Realm, Deadlock Colonization/Railroad Tycoon, etc. Except for a few I won't have on this list, I think while they would change the Civilization game dramatically, it would still be close enough to the original game to continue the series. The changes mostly are to boost the aspects of the game dealing with infrastructure (which includes commerce) and culture, to take away the primary military bent still in gameplay despite many changes already made with the intent to downplay it. I dont think these will complicate the game that much either.
I think I have some more suggestions I don't include, which I may remember later.
FEEL FREE to use this thread to add your own suggestions for the game.
1. The city's radius, within the border, as an area for growth of residential, industrial and commercial complexes, similar how its done in Railroad Tycoon; this at first may remind people of the original realtime attempt at Civilization that Sid Meier speaks of, where the player just made 'seeds' for industry, but its significantly different, while trying to keep the same intent, as I'll explain. As you found your city you start a residential complex, and also the main city center, forming the border around it. There is no local economy, so the player has to utilize the land himself. He uses a worker to build a farm on a grassland, a lumber industry on forests, and then other industries. Once the local economy has enough steam of its own (enough wood, etc. to construct them) they spring up naturally on their own as needed for the cities, throughout everywhere with connected trade (roads and harbors). Thus, maybe for the next city the player has, after a few turns, farms appear, and other industries. Most of this theplayer never has to worry about at all. The player has some role in 'seeding' things, but it isnt a matter of just placing a seed on the map, its a matter of taking the right steps in the economy. This would obviously also bring resources into the game, like it was in colonization. No fear about this, the resources produced by factories and gathered from other industries would be shown on the map overlayed on top of the industries easy for the player to see; trading is done automatically through Civilization 3's system (unless a more advanced system is added for other reasons). The point is to have the government initiate change, and then the private economy takes over. Also, residential buildings would also appear other places besides the main city center when population grows. They would appear in single blocks and then combine to double sized blocks like in Caesar or Pharoah as its done there for wealth of residence. This would take care of the constant suggestions for cities that take more than one square. Walls would be built on tiles directly, instead of through a city screen, as well as everything else.
2. Technological research should be based on resource gathering. This would mean, say for the technology 'Cotton Gin', the player would gather 1000 cotton, and have a certain science capita. This would be a large change that would make the individual civilizationos grow and develop their own regional cultures, dependent on the means of production, in a Marxist type fashion. Cultures that appear near spices and incense might develop Mysticism, build temples and monuments, and become a very deeply religious civilization. A culture that has other materials at hand might make it quicker to developing in other ways. Maybe or maybe not technology trading would still have the resource requirement, I havent decided whether this would be good.
3. There are more 'tribes' and the player starts out as a minor tribe of a larger culture, so the main part of the early game will involve trading with this early neighbors, forming alliances (having entire tribes join you by treaty) to consolidate city-states into large nations. The game will permanently recognize areas joined as provinces--mainly just for the perk of the player (like naming landmarks), though other civilizations can ask for entire provinces, or have war goals to only gain back these provinces.
4. Unit management should be taken more seriously, armies as a standard thing rather than just a bonus from playing for a while; taking care of stack movement more naturally. 'Generals' of these armies can also be automated in the same way as governors of cities.
5. Landmasses are generated to be more natural. Look at any civ game map then look at the real world map and you'll see that the real world is much more complex and compacted into unusual shapes. Not just large chunks of land. I think this is important mainly because of strategic reasons (but also for the fun of playing on a natural map!) that effect gameplay. I don't know how it would be done but I would first look at how the game SimEarth manages to create landmasses--it creates craters and uses some techtonic shift system. Fractals may also be helpful here.
6. Take scenarios for the game more seriously, and add many options for scenarios so that they become a major part of the game. For example, the ability to alternate tilesets after every turn or so; between day and night, or between winter and summer, or between all seasons; each tileset with its own advantages and disadvantages. Also, overseas tiles like in Colonization, so it isn't strange to play on a restricted map.
7. Add Fascism to the game (this is minor, it can already be done in a way). In the early game, there is the option between Republic/Monarchy, then Democracy/Communism. Instead, Fascism and Communism should be two late game solutions to catch up in the game--Communism managing corruption and large empires, and Fascism with advantages in productivity and technological advance.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
brianshapiro
|
|
Berkeley
Nov 2001
time: 21:27
|
|
oh a minor suggestionthat i thought should have been done with in civ3:
be able to make a deal for a civilization to stop fighting another one
just expanded diplomacy in general
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jarvin
|
 |
America!
Jun 2002
time: 05:27
|
|
1. Expand politics.
5 isnt enough, especially when four of them are just slightly modified/improved versions of eachother (republic/democracy and despotism/monarchy). I want a system like SMAC had, different systems for politics, economics, and societal values. Only i want more than SMAC had. Despotism, monarchy, republic, democracy, and police state for politics. Simple, feudal, laissez faire, socialist, and communist for economics. Survivalist, individualist, collectivist, scientific, and military for social values.
This way we could mix and choose the positives and negatives of various systems, and have countries that follow the player's beliefs. An objectivist could have democracy, laissez faire, individualist. A nazi could have police state, solialist, military. An idealistic communist could have democracy, communist, collectivist.
Much more in depth, much better.
2. Do or Die research.
Research where you get a choice at the beginning to pick a path to specialize in. The tech tree would be divided into loosely connected paths. One for defensive military, one for offensive military, one for religion, one for infrastucture, etc.
This would mean that some cultures would have distinct and obvious tech advantages. Some would have great culture and city flip to victory, others would have great armies to conquer their way to victory, etc.
3. More difference between units, and more units period.
By this i mean that the difference between a spearman's defense and a pikeman's defense, instead of 1 be 2. This means that the more modern army will have a much better advantage. It means that the computer's spearman would get a lot fewer lucky streak's and defend against an army of your tanks. It would alleviate the feeling that the computer cheats when their outdated military beats your horde of modern marvels.
Also, more units period, just for flavor. Instead of the jump from mustketman to rifleman, have it go from renaissance hand cannons to flintlock musketmen to riflemen. Ease the transition through history!
4. Better Espionage
Make it cheaper or make it more in depth, i have no real suggestions here, i just know that it sucks as it is now.
5. Better Combat and Unit Morale System
I think they need to use the combat system from SMAC. That little screen on the bottom to display all the math, the offensive points versus defensive ones, and the terrain bonuses. Plus a morale system thats more in depth than adding a single hit point! I want offensive and defensive advantanges! Currently the only thing i like about Civ3 combat is the cool little animation
6. Bring Back Wonder Movies
This one is self explanatory.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
brianshapiro
|
|
Berkeley
Nov 2001
time: 21:27
|
|
I know in writing it sounds complicated or unlike civ. but i think it would work out in the civ game very smoothly if its thought about. maybe ill do some drawings which demonstrate this
|
|
| |
|
|
|
handyandy
|
|
Instead of set abilaties like religius,expansinest ect
you start with your two and depending on how you play they might change for example, you start millitristic but you are not in a war for say 100turns(or what ever)and you turn into somthing else scientific for instance depending on if you are tecnelogacly advanced or change govs regulay or have a lot of workers.
This might have been said before if it has sorry!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002
time: 23:27
|
|
quote:
3. More difference between units, and more units period.
By this i mean that the difference between a spearman's defense and a pikeman's defense, instead of 1 be 2. This means that the more modern army will have a much better advantage. It means that the computer's spearman would get a lot fewer lucky streak's and defend against an army of your tanks. It would alleviate the feeling that the computer cheats when their outdated military beats your horde of modern marvels.
Also, more units period, just for flavor. Instead of the jump from mustketman to rifleman, have it go from renaissance hand cannons to flintlock musketmen to riflemen. Ease the transition through history! |
I don't mind the differences of just 1 between units... What I'd like is for a there to be LOTS of units, each one just SLIGHTLY better than the previous... So that a tech advantage isn't so crucial.
If the highest attack is going to be 24, then there should be 23 attacking units available under that!
Also... option to play with 2d sprites for units, to facilitate modding. They can be pretty sprites, and animated, but let me edit them in any old paint program.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:27
|
|
I agree with the Fortress ZoC idea of Badams. I also wish that there was unit "range"-i.e. the number of squares outside of friendly territory that a unit can travel, before it starts sustaining damage! (broken record time, folks ). I conjunction with this, I'd like to see forts double as "friendly territory" for the purposes of determining unit range!
I'd like to see a more simple version of what Brian mentioned about the Civ radius. In that, I'd like to see cities actually grow from their central hub-terrain permitting, and engulfing local farms, mines and other infrastructure! Although it should not happen often. It should be possible to two neighbouring cities to combine their radii to become a Metropolis or Megalopolis!
Definitely expanded diplomacy, and trade routes a la CtP!
Bring back the CivII Senate  . Resource dissapearance should not be random, but should depend on both the numbers of the resource, the size of your empire, in cities (to reflect overall exploitation of a resource), and the number of improvements/units which require that resource to build! Also, resources should have a SIZE-e.g. how large a coal seam you have near your city, or how much iron ore has just appeared. This should also be a factor in resource dissapearance and, that way, you might be able to gauge, roughly, how long the resource will last before you have to find a new source. Having a sensible resource dissappearance factor might, along with corruption, place a more effective limit on empire sizes!! Also, luxury resources should also have a Size rating, to determine how many cities can benefit from it!
Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dida
|
|
We need more diplomatic features, ability to interact more with the AI's, such as
Forming multi party alliance
ability to sell/gift units
International Forum much like UN, ability to do peace keep etc
Make trading a profitable business
(right now, trading is either for military resource or for luxury, people should trade just for money as well)
Combat system need to get polished,
stacked combat would be nice
Navy and Air Force need to be strenghthen as they are useless right now.
Needs to have greater variance in unit types,
(one guy can have a cheap but massive army, the other a high tech and expensive army, etc)
unit upkeep should be different depending on the unit
Tanks should not be able to land directly onto a mountain for example.
etc etc
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mad_drama
|
|
we should have a option to set a millitary unit to auto attack, kinda like the options for a worker. If polution pops up it just fixes it. that way if your being attacked bombers would just defend. or a auto pillage for units. It shouldn't be a difficult patch, the computer dose it. I would even pay for a patch to do that. it would save on micro management.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002
time: 23:27
|
|
The Aussie Lurker brought up resource and luxury problems... I agree that this is a system that needs to be fixed.
I'd like for each instance of a strategic resource to provide X number of specific prodcution points per turn, and have a limited number of production points it is capable of producing over the course of the game. Points you don't use that turn could be stockpiled for some resources (oil), and simply not be extracted for others (iron).
Units and certain buildings would cost Y number of specific production points to build, and Z to upkeep.
So it might take ten units of oil to build a tank, but then one unit of oil per turn to keep that tank running. So if you lose your access to an upkeep resource, you could find part of your army greatly reduced in its effectivness.
The current "do they have it, or not" system is better than nothing, but still severly broken.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Admiral PJ
|
 |
Southeast England , UK
Dec 2000
time: 05:27
|
|
Hi, I'm glad people are still thinking of ideas they'd like to see in Civ.
I find this site fun for thinking up ideas for new stuff.
I AM MAKING MY OWN GAME which is similar to CIV, called Mantra , its made from scratch in C++ and directx.
Its mostly 3D and the battles are in real time, giving more strategic options like mass combined assaults and vehicle chases etc.
I am going to put in trading and economies as well as complex millitary simulation/arcadey battles.
There will be private and public industries depending on government types and legal rules, which you can invest in or close down , or run as your country. Companies can help spy on enemies too, by getting offices set up in foreign cities, and buying up enemy cities industry.
Production can also be exported , to simulate how goods are moved to other countries to help build or provide for cities needs.
I'm mainly concentrating on the millitary and city/building construction to begin with, and i'm not sure if I will have a full AI enemy function yet or have it multiplayer, but its mainly single player currently, as its partly plot based, with missions and sub plots.
Future versions will have a full civ like nation simulator,
with more city and population management, and greater diplomatic cooperation and alliance between civs etc.
Millitaries will have varying support and fuel costs, depending on unit types, with morale and independant unit AI affecting play(they don't just jump becuase you tell them to, a HQ value defines how disciplined and trusting of you the unit is, they can even mutiny or join an enemy side)
Stealth values come into affect also, if a unit can't identify another if its hidden in smoke it may attack it before knowing who the other is, even if they are on the same side.
Going back to economies, it will have a more advanced resource system, where the quantity of resources you have is important, as each unit takes a certain amount of your coal reserves away, and big armies need lots of oil or ammo to be maintained.
Raw materials need to be processed in factries into food and building materials etc, and can be sold for a higher value to you or others peoples.
I'm trying to put as many good ideas as I can into this game, I'm thinking of getting a forum set up for it.
I'm about 5 years into this commercial project, and still needing coding/design/art/sound testers for help.
Much of the graphics and basic game engine software is working.
To start with i'm basing this on a defined plot set in another dimension , its a science fiction game. It starts with pre industrial technologies though, as the dimensions physical laws make producingelectricity and such entirely different from earth.
Earth will appear in the game later however, which you have to liberate from its fascist rulers, you play as a human Jupiter colonial coalition yourself.
The games 3d landscape is working, with smooth clipped seas, that curve around the shoreline and show the seabed too.. good for submarine naval warfare or undersea city building, or for finding sunken hitech alien spacecraft.
This is just a taste of what this game will look like as far as has been designed so far.
Admiral PJ
Peter J T at VIRE Technology (t)
mail: zeus@artpac.demon.co.uk
former member of PTWDG team Lux invicta.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dida
|
|
military unit's role in Civ should reflect their real role in life.
for example, Ageis cruiser is mostly used for anti air warfare and not anti sub.
and is Mech Inf that much more powerful than regular Inf defensively?
Even if a battleship is down to 1 life bar, how can it be sunk by a galley? I meant, no matter what the galley does, there is no way in hell it can sink a battleship.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002
time: 23:27
|
|
Admiral PJ, they're refering to giving fortresses ZOC the way Civ 2 had. So if you built two fortresses with a space between them, an enemy would have to either take one of th fortresses or find a way around them.
That would make fortresses far more valuable and fun to use, and I support giving them this Civ2 style ZOC.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:27
|
|
I, too, do not like the way they currently do "Overpopulation Riots". There IS a better way. Basically, in each era, there should be AT LEAST one improvement which can be described as "Infrastructure". This can include water distribution systems, sewege systems, intracity transport networks, communications networks and the like! Instead of population being limited by a lack of an Aqueduct, for example, the population should still be allowed to grow-but each new "resident" will appear as automatically unhappy (untio you build that Darn aqueduct)! Thus, without the proper infrastructure, you get a TRUE overcrowding effect, and riots will result!
It isn't really that hard-and CtP 1 and 2 did it!!
Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-04-2003 07:49
|