Civ 4 - the list of ideas for Firaxis

[Shogun Gunner]

I read somewher on another thread (was it Spiffor's idea? I can't remember) that the population and settler units should be more accurate to the number of people. Instead of a "size 12" city -> "a size 12,034,520 city"

The settler unit could be built for 1,000; 5,000 or 10,000 size. A larger settler size gets the new city started faster than a smaller one.

I think this idea has a lot of potential for variation in strategy. Certainly the REXing strategy is more flexible. Maybe you want to firmly claim a section of good land, so you send your largest settler unit to start the city...smaller size settler units for less important terrain or expanding borders, etc.

[Solver]

No, in Civ 3, there's real AI-AI conquest, and the current AI model doesn't treat the player as a single enemy, like the Civ 2 AI did.

[Brundlefly]

A nice feature for PBEM players would be to see battle results of all battles in which you were a defender since you last took your turn. This could be provided simply as a text file, or could be provided as actual battle replays that you could watch.

[Fosse]

Simultaneous Moves
Forget Civ 3's "turnless." I mean that each turn has a movement phase. During your turn you tell troops where to go, and they have standing orders for what to do if they encounter other troops. If two nations' units meet during the turn phase, they go to their orders to determine what happens.

The standing orders would have extremely simple defaults (attack when enemies, maintain path when friends), but could be very tailored by the player. (dig in and hold ground to last man when encountering the French, rolling retreat if encountering English in numbers twice ours, etc).

After everyone has played their turn, the movement phase occurs, battles that happen are shown, and then the next turn begins.


This would be more fun, strategically, would allow the AI to "play" during the player's turn (since they wouldn't actually have to move units, they could be spending extra CPU time devising strategy and so forth), and would make for a much smoother transition from singleplayer to multiplayer. While I disagree with the idea that the game should be built "from the ground up" for multiplayer, this change adds so much to both that it's a no-brainer.


Stacked Combat
Call to Power I and II have better combat models than any other Civ game. Improve or modify them, tinker with the rules, whatever you must, but USE THEM!!!

This change would add realism, as no army in history ever fought one unit at a time when there were dozens present at a battle. It would add good old fashioned strategy (Infantry or cavalry, tanks or artillery, what will the enemy be fighting with, where will the fight happens, where do I WANT the fight to happen???), and perhaps most importantly of all REDUCE MICROMANGEMENT.



Public Works
However you do it, so long as I don't spend the bulk of my turns shuffling workers.


Editor
Give us the power we had over Civ II and the Call to Power series... and more! There should be so much at our disposal that we don't even think about Civ V for another five years.


Hire these guys
Clash of Civilizations

Maybe not everything they want in their game will make a great mass market game, but their design docs represent to me the ideal Civ game. They could only help any Civ project, in my opinion.


That's all for now...

edited for clarity

[Father Beast]

FIX ICS

I may harp on this from time to time, and no one will listen, especially Firaxis, but I'll say it again

The Only Way To Fix ICS Is To Get Rid Of The Free City Square


It has been demonstrated that it can be done in the freeware game, Civ-evo. Each settler takes 2 pop points to build, and each city starts at size 2, with one citizen working the city square and one working another square. There is and can be no ICS advantage.

Of course, since someone else has already done it, that makes it impossible that Firaxis will touch it.

I'm sorry, but it made me sick how in Civ3, they said they would fix ICS, then did threw the bandaid of 2 pop settlers at it and crippled the game with corruption, then called it fixed.

For this single game mechanic, Civ-evo is the only civ I can bring myself to finish a game of these days.

[Fosse]

Regarding ICS... didn't CtP II work EVERY city square in the city radius regardless of the citiy's population, just at a reduced rate?

If yes, did this impact ICS? If no, would it?

[Solver]

There was no ICS in CtP2. Yes, cities had those radiuses (that would expand based on size), and each square within that radius was worked. No worker shifting... oh, and stuff in CtP2 is rather expensive, so no, you don't get Knights built in 3 turns from all your cities...

The key there was the city limits. Every government had a city limit, and if you exceeded that, there were happiness penalties. While building a city above the limit was OK, if you got 3 above the limit, you would get some very serious rioting.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Solver
The problem with the worker model is, it becomes too slow and too tedious.

Moving each worker by hand and assigning oders is too slow. That can become boring and tedious. Also, even when automated, it takes them all a while to move and carry out their actions - which goes far to make the game run much slower. Those who have played Civ 3 with 16 or more civs in a game will know what I'm speaking of - just all the Workers are enough to make it slow.

but they are fun when there are just 10 of them

that is why the worker model needs reworked so that the optimum number never raises above 15

I think a real problem with civ is that more equals better and so you just get more and moreuntil it is hard to manage everything

Jon Miller

[Solver]

Yeah, and going for a public works model is the better choice. How exactly will you make 10-15 Workers optimal? Either give them some weird and high upkeep costs, but that will generally just make everything less productive, or make the game favor really small empires - which will remove the fun for many.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Solver
I hope that, in Civ 4, games with 8 civilizations will no longer be the standard, but rather games with 16 civilizations will be.

Um . . . . . .


guess what -- Civilization III DOES allow you to play games with up to 16 civs.

[Solver]

Did you see the word standard in my post? While you can play with 24 civs in Civ 3, 8 is the standard, for speed and interface reasons.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Solver
Yeah, and going for a public works model is the better choice. How exactly will you make 10-15 Workers optimal? Either give them some weird and high upkeep costs, but that will generally just make everything less productive, or make the game favor really small empires - which will remove the fun for many.

do like before, where there were food upkeep costs (For example)

also, make it so the workers increase effiency as time goes on

make it so that working outside of your city radius makes people really unhappy

make it so that there are bad effects for too many workers

Jon Miller

[Solver]

And this is far too complex a solution, which would be bad for the AI, and generally add no fun, while making an attempt to solve a problem.

[Jon Miller]

how come?

I enjoy doing workers early

I don;t late

so they should lookat why I enjoy doing it early and not late

and make it so that I (And others) enjoy it all the time

workers icrease efficieny is not something strange

nor is additinaly upkeep costs (they use to have them)

having soemthing else in addition is just more of the same

Jon Miller

[Trifna]

COMBAT

From TechWins :

When two nations are at war and there are enemy units in the other nation's territory there needs to be more of an effect. As it is now you're not able to harvest that tile the enemy unit is in. I don't think that is enough. I think that all surrounding tiles should lose 1 food, 1 shield, and 1 trade. To not make it too extreme, only once can a tile be effected by surrounding enemies. So if two enemies were on seperate tiles but surrounding a same tile that tile would still only lose 1 food, 1 shiled, and 1 trade. This isn't exactly that far fetched of an implementation, either.

Currently almost all the wars only take place in the cities, since there isn't much benefit fighting outside of the city. Well, this will make it a big loss having enemy units inside your territory. You will be almost forced to go attack those units and get them out of your territory. This will finally give more effect to being in enemy territory.

DIPLOMACY

Colonization... a REAL one. One where you can decide, when you conquer, to make as if you had not conquered and to just to control. Of course, colonization of ressources like the French colonization is also useful, but it's not like English colonization of India. Result: less chances to get revolts and gradually assimilates.



And yes, they should give a look at what these guys from the Clash of Civilizations did. And perhaps also that some good ideas can come from Galactic Civilizations.

[Trifna]

DIPLOMACY
Some United Nations that hace councils and actually change SOMETHING into the game.
(from Galactic Civilizations)
Since we're at it, incorporate influence somewhat like in GalCiv.

CIVILIZATIONS
Minor civilizations, that can conquer and are not just there to be conquered. I guess those can come from different events.
(again, like in Galactic Civilizations)

ECONOMICS/TRADE
Somehow, incorporate major trade routes so that those can be cut (like when Constinople was taken in 1493), and so that we can SEE trading.
(from Galactic Civilizations)

CITY IMPROVEMENTS
When a city gets about like New York, it can produce wheat in asphalt. So perhaps the graphics around should change from plains to little buildings being part of New York. Thus, you would need to give a basic orientation to your aagglomerations. Some would be more towards industry, others towards agriculture or else. Improvements should give an orientation to production, city growth, etc.

MOVEMENT, SUPPLY, ETC.
Troops should supply themselves by two ways:
1- Physical supplies
Like in Iraq: you get trucks to your troops with everything.
2- Local supplies
In the past, most of the supplies were mostly from forcing people to give you what you need.

Both of these two have consequences, like the need to build and protect some SUPPLY ROUTES, or the population not loving you...
Supply routes can be done simply by determining the path of this line. The more enemy are round these lines, the most of your supplies will be disrupted.

COMBAT
We had checked all battles in history, and one can also look at the Waterloo battle's tactics more in detail. Result: the more you have troops and the less the other has troops, the biggest advantage you have towards the other. 5000 vs 1000: not each side will lose 1000, you may lose 500 out of 5000. Consequence: you NEED stacked combat. This simple addition is the ESSENCE of strategy and would change everything about combat.

[vee4473]

a simple yet satisfying addition:

a slider for money amounts during negotiations. It gets old when you have to put in an amount, take it back, put in another and on and on until your little advisor says that they will probably accept it.

[Sandman]

Flexible city radius

The 21-square blob doesn't cut it. Allow cities' radii to 'meld', allowing for greater freedom in city placement. If two cities have overlapping radii, they should gain extra squares elsewhere. It should be possible to cluster your cities along rivers or fertile coastlines.

Harsher environment

It should never be possible to irrigate desert or tundra EVER. Most military units that cross them should die, as should be the case with mountains and jungles. Forests and jungles should create plains when cut down. Irrigation should be curtailed.

Point to point transport links

Instead of building roads and railways in a square, build them between squares. That way, you'd get more realistic-looking networks and roads wouldn't magically fuse with others when completed.

[Jon Miller]

a fight in civ3 is not a battle (nor was it in civ2 or civ)

it is a part of the battle

that is why there is tactics in civ

the whole fight takes up 4 or 6 squares

and in the whole battle (not just one part of it) there is lots of losses on both sides

what is lost is just brigades and the like

Jon Miller

[Solver]

Yeah, but civ 3 fights are individual. Come on, haven't you seen a single defender in Civ 3 wipe out a ton of attackers? As said... a good modern invasion strat. Put a mech inf on enemy mountains, and wait for the AI to lose a dozen tanks to it.

[Brent]

Influences from other games

Make sure to be influenced about equally by Civ1, Civ2, Col, SMAC, maybe CtP, GalCiv.

Civilizations

Include in the original Civ4 release at least 50 civs. Be influenced in which ones by Col and maybe CtP. Use all Civs from Civ2 and Civ3. Add Ethiopians, Olmec, Cherokee to name a few.

Culture Groups

Europe, Africa, Middle East, Far East, America, Miscellaneous, Fantasy. Balance as much as possible. Have unique units to be shared within a Culture Group in addition to specific to individual Civs.

System Requirements

My dream would be no higher than those of Civ3.

Civilization Traits

Individualize Civs more than in Civ3. More than in SMAC. Give 10 choices for Agricultural, Seafaring type characteristics. Give two levels of each. Each Civ could choose three points of these characteristics, either three separate choices, or two points for one and one point for another. Give Civs different personalities. Give more starting techs.

Graphics

We don't need no stinking animations. Units don't need to be animated. Appease any who might think the Civ3 animations constitute too much violence. Leaders don't need to be animated. Save the space to have other choices for leader. On the other hand, bringing back wonder movies would be nice, and not CG. The Civ2 High Council was good. Do something better than the other leaders comments for ending the game.

Leaders

No animation. 3 choices for many civs, 2 male and 1 female. Personality traits.

Scenarios

A dream would be for the original release to come with as many as in MGE. Allow for as much variety, including SciFi and Fantasy. Include Biblical scenarios, unless some religious types would complain too much or something.

Terrain

go back toward SMAC. have certain characteristics like elevation, ruggedness, trees, grass, rocks, sand, moisture, temparature. Treat north and south poles as in Civ2. Include fungus terrain characteristic in editor.

Editor

Don't require special graphics or text. Have a graphical screen for techs, be able to drag and drop techs. Have a debugger for tech trees. On the whole make editor more intuitive.

Units

Build and customize units as in SMAC. Choose number of humans, choose vehicles, animals, weapons, tools. Allow for settler parties as small as 500. Allow interesting possibilities for nomads without building cities neccessarily.

Cities

Allow for towns with populations as small as 500. Give smaller towns fewer build options. Allow small scale migration between friendly cities, don't require sending entire settlers from city to city. As mentioned, use actual population numbers like 271,894. Let Cities grow and shrink automatically based on attractions and lack thereof.

Time

Go at least to 2500, and have real future techs.

Technology

Increase number of techs.

[spy14]

Combat: CTP style. Perhaps some basic (and optional)terrain use options?

Diplomacy: Permanent alliances, interfering in external wars etc etc

Graphics: CTP/Civ 3 style is fine. We need gameplay not looks.

Public works similar to CTP2?

Civ2 style spies

Civ3 style borders. Only have the AI respect them.

Sensible World of Soccer (yes, the original!) bundled with the game as a nice side touch (ok licences need to be purchased, needs to work on modern machines, im probably just dreaming...)

More to come!

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Solver
Did you see the word standard in my post? While you can play with 24 civs in Civ 3, 8 is the standard, for speed and interface reasons.

Oh -- well yeah, if you have a krappy computer, I suppose you would be stuck with playing with only eight in the standard game.

[Theben]

One thing that disappointed me in civ3 was the lack of trade routes and cities. There was one game where Shanghai was sitting on an isthamus- with 4-5 trade routes going around it! they should've gone thru the city, and the city should've gotten some bonus from it.
Anyway, I'd like to see other nation's trade routes go thru cities, and have some sort of degradation over distance involved. That way you have a choice of whether to go the long way, and not benefit as much, or thru the other civ, and get some more but leave a little with them.

Plus allow allied units to move and stack together/thru each other ala SMAC.

[Trifna]

just an update (bold part):

CITY IMPROVEMENTS
When a city gets about like New York, it can produce wheat in asphalt. So perhaps the graphics around should change from plains to little buildings being part of New York. Thus, you would need to give a basic orientation to your aagglomerations. Some would be more towards industry, others towards agriculture or else. Improvements should give an orientation to production, city growth, etc. The population from cities where growth is more limited should migrate where development is higher. The more the developement is high, the more the global population of the civilization should go there.


This would also be more immersive by bringing something really like real cities that all have their own characteristic, living in New York not being like in more agricultural regions. It also brings a macro aspect (and organization) to the game instead of just an accumulation of cities where

[Theben]

There are also a few leftovers from the 1st List I'd like to see.
Have to dig it up to remember what they were.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Brent
Influences from other games

Make sure to be influenced about equally by Civ1, Civ2, Col, SMAC, maybe CtP, GalCiv.

Civilizations

Include in the original Civ4 release at least 50 civs. Be influenced in which ones by Col and maybe CtP. Use all Civs from Civ2 and Civ3. Add Ethiopians, Olmec, Cherokee to name a few.

Culture Groups

Europe, Africa, Middle East, Far East, America, Miscellaneous, Fantasy. Balance as much as possible. Have unique units to be shared within a Culture Group in addition to specific to individual Civs.

System Requirements

My dream would be no higher than those of Civ3.

Civilization Traits

Individualize Civs more than in Civ3. More than in SMAC. Give 10 choices for Agricultural, Seafaring type characteristics. Give two levels of each. Each Civ could choose three points of these characteristics, either three separate choices, or two points for one and one point for another. Give Civs different personalities. Give more starting techs.

Graphics

We don't need no stinking animations. Units don't need to be animated. Appease any who might think the Civ3 animations constitute too much violence. Leaders don't need to be animated. Save the space to have other choices for leader. On the other hand, bringing back wonder movies would be nice, and not CG. The Civ2 High Council was good. Do something better than the other leaders comments for ending the game.

Leaders

No animation. 3 choices for many civs, 2 male and 1 female. Personality traits.

Scenarios

A dream would be for the original release to come with as many as in MGE. Allow for as much variety, including SciFi and Fantasy. Include Biblical scenarios, unless some religious types would complain too much or something.

Terrain

go back toward SMAC. have certain characteristics like elevation, ruggedness, trees, grass, rocks, sand, moisture, temparature. Treat north and south poles as in Civ2. Include fungus terrain characteristic in editor.

Editor

Don't require special graphics or text. Have a graphical screen for techs, be able to drag and drop techs. Have a debugger for tech trees. On the whole make editor more intuitive.

Units

Build and customize units as in SMAC. Choose number of humans, choose vehicles, animals, weapons, tools. Allow for settler parties as small as 500. Allow interesting possibilities for nomads without building cities neccessarily.

Cities

Allow for towns with populations as small as 500. Give smaller towns fewer build options. Allow small scale migration between friendly cities, don't require sending entire settlers from city to city. As mentioned, use actual population numbers like 271,894. Let Cities grow and shrink automatically based on attractions and lack thereof.

Time

Go at least to 2500, and have real future techs.

Technology

Increase number of techs.

I disagree with almost all of these

JOn Miller

[Fosse]

Divorce growth and food supplies

Let growth be a factor of previous population, city and civ health, the time period, immigration and emmigration, commerce in the city, and other possible factors.

So the city grows, and now the ruler has to make sure that there is enough food.

There is a possible micromanagement problem, and my solution is to make city commerce and industry weigh heavily in the growth factor, so that the cities you are most likely to have food troubles in are the ones you'd be paying close attention to anyhow.

And also to...

Use More Nation Wide Resources
Federalizing unit support was great. Now, let's have Civ automatically spread out the food supply based on which cities need it and which have it. Food can travel farther according to technology levels, and the type of economy the player has can carry with it various impacts.

Perhaps in a free market each "unit" of food moved from one city to another generates a "unit" of tax currency for the player. And the wealthy cities will buy extra food (food over the amount needed to keep people alive makes them happy), causing the poorer cities to starve. Solution to this: Planned Economy! In which everyone gets as close to the optimal amount of food as possible.

Rework those Resources
No more on or off resources. If I discover one tile of oil in my land, I should know that I am going to generate 10 barrels per turn. That means I can keep 10 tanks running, or 10 oil plants, or five of one, two of the other, and three to trade. The numbers, of course, are to be tinkered with.

Spherical Map
It's just better... computers are good enough now.

edited format.

[Jon Miller]

first, a ha ha ha to Tass, I have been playing Civ since the first one first came out, and have enjoyed evreyone

I just am against ideas which I feel would ruin the game

anywys, newest idea

make it so that units defense goes down based upon number of times they are attacked in aturn

most units can only attack like once (for reasons of fatigue)

we should have this effect be for defensive units also, even if they don't lose at all

so first battle at 100%
next at 90%
next at 80%
next at 60%
next at 50%
next at 50%
next at 40%
and all remaining ones at 30%

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

make it so that food can be exchanged between cities with a road

and shields with a railroad

this is probably a huge change and hard to implement, but it sounds cool

here is an idea on implementatino

first have it go through and make sure that all cities are getting fed

next make it so that there can be a choice when you are building (like hurry) but is emphasize production

what this chioce would do is steal 1 production from all cities connected by a rail road to that city and give it to that city for the duration of the contruction (you would also need to make it so that there is a penalty, like 30% of the shields gotten this way are lost)

Jon Miller