Civ 4 - the list of ideas for Firaxis

[Fosse]

I think that the combat should be stacks. The one unit at a time system is too tedious and outmoded, especially as we can expect bigger maps, more civs, more cities (at least, we'd BETTER get that ).

CtP style fighting and movement (maybe we should call it something else, so Firaxis might consider it. ) is the better way to go.

Besides, Civilization is, and should be, a STRATEGY game. Not a tactical one.

Leave tactics to the generals, and I'll take care of the generals.


edited for typo

[Fosse]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
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, this might be the first thing I agree with you on!

I like this as a way to build wonders. I'd like to see it such that it's really the only good way to build wonders, so that if you're really going to build the pyramids then you have to really commit to building those pyramids.

Perhaps this could be the only way to "hurry" anything though, and there could be a gold cost associated with each shield moved. Instead of having those purchased shields simply appear out of nowhere.

Anyhow, it's a damn sight better than the caravan flash build!

[Brent]

Trade

Possibly have more than one type of trade. I miss the Caravans from Civ2, I like Col trade, and I like Civ3 trade.

Great Leaders

I like the Continental Congress (or whatever Col called it). Maybe it would be redundant to have this along with Wonders, but maybe not.

Truly Single Player

Make it more interesting to play with no AI or human opponents. Let the game end better when you don't have them. Allow appropriate victory conditions, such as culture, land domination, and space, and make them still be challenging. You could play either only Barbarian opponents, or not even them.

Goodies

Be able to set which Goody results you can get, and how frequently.

Difficulty Levels

Have ten levels of difficulty. Be able to set different categories of difficulty: My build price multiplier, Enemy build price modifier, Barbarian level, Enemy aggression, Goody results, Terrain, Unit strength multipliers, Enemy intelligence. Have ten levels for each.

Setup

Be able to specify in varying levels of precision the terrain. Be able to give percentages of specific terrain types. Be able to not know how many opponents you have until you meet them. Let the minimap begin covering a small area that grows as you explore so if you don't want to you won't know how big the world is. Make sure you can still play with whatever combination of civs you want. Be able to limit the random selection of civs. Be able to specify some civs to choose from and some not to allow.

Maps

Let maps and scenarios work more like in Civ2. Be able to mix and match rules sets with maps. Keep the ability to specify custom rules, civs and city names on a random map. Include premade maps of The Americas, North America, South America, MesoAmerica, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, The Old World, and the whole world. Offer the whole world in five sizes. Include Chiron, both with SMAC terrains and earth terrains.

Terrain- Specific Civs

Let some Civs be more suited to specific terrain types, such as mountains, arctic, desert, forest, and islands.

Civ 1

Include Civ 1 with the game, in a form that can easily be run by modern computers.

Wonders

Keep the two kinds of wonders like in Civ3. When a city wants to build a wonder, it should automatically ask you which one it wants, maybe in a big window reminding you of the effects of each.

Terrain Improvements

Be able to build Walls, such as The Great Wall of China and Hadrian's Wall, which have an effect without the involvement of units. Be able to build Canals.

Zones of Control

Return to Civ2. At least notify you when a rival unit enters your territory.

Cheating

Allow cheating like in Civ2, but do not put cheated games in the hall of fame.

Hall of Fame

Have separate halls of fame for some scenarios.

The list of Ideas for Firaxis

Why do we have to start with all wishlist topics in the same thread?

[Trifna]

BORDERS

This is crucial and perhaps easy to implement:
A distinction between CULTURAL border and PHYSICAL border. It's not the same thing and while happiness can go down when a city is more attached to another culture, it doesn't mean it can't be countered, nor is the physical border itself dependant on culture.


MISCELLANEOUS/OTHER

It may just be useful to many humans on this planet: some anti-addiction mecanism you can toggle on/off. The best I know: you put a timer that can't be changed once toggled on (except by going out of the game and back), and it only lets you finish your turn once the time's off.

[MrFun]

I'm curious -- has anyone else ever argued for migration concepts similar to what I proposed??

[Trifna]

MrFun: I never heard of your concept... Would you be kind enough to make a new thread about it? To me, it should simply be in function of where there are new jobs, thus city growth (industry...). It should all be done automatically.

[Oncle Boris]

*Short* Wish list:

1. Order phase + Resolution Phase
A system à la board game Diplomacy, in which everyone issues orders simultaneously, which are then compared and resolved. This would allow for combined forces, and some interesting strategy twists: for example, someone who has achieved superiority in military doctrines could be allowed to change his orders during the resolution phase, thus simulating his superior maneuvrability and tactics. I'm thinking about Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Rommel, and the likes.
This would also makle MP much more enjoyable.

2. Give some use to naval power
Instead of useless and agonizingly slow ships who take centuries to circumnavigate the world, you build navies that are docked in. Each turn, you can assign them a mission, such as escorting merchant ships, conducting an amphibious invasion, blockading an enemy port, or exploring (the list is obviously not restrictive).

3. Social engineering!!!
What was a brilliant innovation in AC has been forgotten in Civ3. They could even create a "social simulation", in which, instead of having the leader choose for his people, your nation evolves with your decisions. If you're a warmonger, your people is going to like war; if you build universities, they'll tend to want a democracy; if you don't, they are more likely to support a fundamentalist state. If your country is rich, with banks and stock exchanges, citizens will support a free market economy; and so on.
Instead of being an absolute thing, happiness would be calculated by comparing your people's desires with your own politics.

4. Fix culture!
Culture is a brilliant idea, but it was flawed in its implementation. Instead of being an absolute number, it should be a yearly production that compares with other countries. The basis number would be 0; if you are above average, your value will be more than 0, while if you are under average your cultural worth will be negative.
This way, we can avoid successful nations in the ancient age dominating for the rest of the game.
I mean, hieroglyphs were nice in the third millenium BC, Greek was neat at the time of Plato, French was à la mode and refined in the 19th century; but it took at most 75 years for English to overcome French as the most widespread international language. No culture has ever achieved the kind of perpetual supremacy that is possible in Civ3.
Wonders and cathedrals should produce lots of culture when they are built, and their influence should gradually decrease with time, not increase.

With a system like this, we could also link social engineering and culture. At any given time, values and morales supported by the most influential culture would slowly affect the views of other nations. This cultural intoxication would increase with the discovery of cinema, radio, TV, and computers. Dictatorships could also impose a cultural embargo against any nation... From now on, though, I'm leaving the rest to the game designers. The possibilities are endless.

5. Trade!
Trade is another feature that was improved in AC but went backwards in Civ3. It should naturally increase with bordering nations with whom you are at peace. If you invest in a navy and build docks, it should also increase with other maritime nations. It should also benefit from railroad and road connections, and from some technologies: currency, trade, navigation, economics, the corporation, market globalization, etc.
Again, trade would come into play with culture: nations who trade together gradually share their culture and their values.
Custom fees, embargos, free trade agreements would be part of diplomacy.

6. Science
Civ3 introduced a great idea with scientific research: the more nations know about something, the easier it is to research it. This concept sould be further expanded. Research is conducted automatically, and again based on social engineering. Warmongering nations give priority to military techs, peaceful ones give priority to civil ones.
Free-thinking nations research faster.
The government could conduct research itself on some high-profile projects, such as a space program, nuclear weapons, dreadnoughts (like in WW1), stealth aircraft.
Countries who trade together also exchange techs.

7. Politics, diplomacy, spying and others
Spying needs a huge rehaul. The importance of the Secret Services to stage coups in minor nations or create evidence in order to get population support should not be underestimated. Uprisings should be frequent. Keeping your throne is a challenge!
Governments should be different in their inner functions. Dictatorships can use the ressources of the nation as they see fit, without care for the people (as long as the soldiers are well paid!), but at the expense of trade, free-thinking, and efficiency. Democracies produce more ressources, but they can't be directly allocated by the leader.

Democracy does NOT bring wealth; wealth brings the need for greater social justice, and thus, unions and human rights. As Ford understood, it is in everyone's interest that the workers can afford to buy what they produce.

I can also imagine a new kind of victory: the Perfect Government. Either a perfect, unbreakable Big Brother-esque dictatorship, in which everyone has to share the same morals, or a perfect, unbreakable cyber-democracy defended by Robocops that force everyone to share the same morals. Either could be similar to the "material perfection state" described by Marx.

Ok, I've told enough. Whaddya think of my ideas?

[Fosse]

Oncle:

1 - Order/resolution phases. I'm a big fan of this one, though I don't see the need for player/Ai intervention to simulate great generals. Just combat bonuses.

2 - YES to more necessary navy. I don't know if I like your way of doing it, but your heart is sure in the right place! I'd like to control of the seas in your trading waters be a prerequisite for sea trade. If you or your allies/trading partners have a strong enough prescence in the region your trade goes through, all is well. If not, expect piracy. If the enemy does, kiss those merchant marines goodbye.

3) Yes to social engeineering, though the name would have to chagne. Your idea of the people having an ideal setup is interesting. What about political parties like in GalCiv? Even in nonrepresentative governments you could have the miliatry, the church, the academics, etc with their ideal way to run things, and they could have various influeces. Clash of Civlizations, anyone?

4) You're spot on about culture. I like this approach.

5) AC trade was good for being realistic and easy, bad for being something so easily ignored. I'm a supporter of that system though, just with more player input (tarriffs, deals, piracy, etc). And with a seperat system for Civ 3 type trades of resources, units, and the like.

6) I don't know how I feel about that.

7) Espionage certainly needs a revamp.

I agree 100% that different government types should have bigger differences "under the hood." As it is now, different goverments are just filters for where your gold goes and how it gets there.

I'm not a big fan of th perfect government win... it depends too much on fantasy future tech and not enough on anything concrete.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by Fosse
Oncle:

2 - YES to more necessary navy. I don't know if I like your way of doing it, but your heart is sure in the right place! I'd like to control of the seas in your trading waters be a prerequisite for sea trade. If you or your allies/trading partners have a strong enough prescence in the region your trade goes through, all is well. If not, expect piracy. If the enemy does, kiss those merchant marines goodbye.

How do you propose it is done though?

Personally I got this idea from playing Avalon Hill Wargames, in which fleets have an (almost) unlimited range, and usually it works well. I just HATE wargames (and games) where ships are "land units with a few more movement points".
Solving the fleet problem would be great to the civ experience.

[Brent]

Improvements

Be able to build more than one of the same type of building in the same city. Let improvements look different for different culture groups, or allow a choice, for such as temples.

Trade

I never payed much attention to trade in SMAC, I think I like it better in Civ2, Civ3 and Col

Feats of Wonder

Like I heard about in CtP2. Different degrees. Circumnavigation of landmasses and the world. Exploring entire landmasses, water bodies, and the world. Building a terrain improvement wall a certain length.

Borders

Let borders be affected by the terrain.

Countryside

Let people live where there aren't cities. Maybe say there are small towns there but don't show them or anything.

Science

Let civs take widely different directions. Let civs focus on agriculture at the expense of industry.

Seasons

In scenarios with turns covering less than a year, let snow spread and shrink. Let vegetation thrive some of the time and not other times. Let squares increase and decrease in moisture and temperature.

SMAC

Have some of the same random events as in SMAC. Have random tidal waves, either with no goody box or let there be goody ships in the waters. Have heat waves and such.

Governments

Fix fundamentalism and bring it back. Have more options.

Automation

Make all units automatable as in SMAC. Let units look for new cities built by others when they've explored everything.

Governors

Let governors be more precise. Have more pages of Governor options. Have a list of wonders you want and don't want, and want more and want less. Be able to specify Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Often, and Exclusively. Be able to specify options to apply to a particular border, a certain number of cities closest to your capital, on coasts, on all islands.

Complexity

Make the game more complex than SMAC.

Political Parties

Have various government officials who come in and out of power. Be able to appoint government officials from several choices.

[Skanky Burns]

Population points in your cities are of a certain nationality and can be assimilated.
This would be similar to colonization or MoO2 or indeeed Civ 3, where each population point would identify with a certain nation. Over time they would be assimilated by whoever controls the city they live in. Unlike Civ 3 though, these people once assimilated would be of your nation, not Japanese-American or Russian-American but just plain American (for example).

People on borders between civilizations would be influenced by the foreign culture, if enough of the population identifies with another nation then there is a chance for culture flipping. This could be combatted by military garrison, the higher number of foreign civilians, the higher number of military required to prevent any chance of culture flipping.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Brent
Complexity

Make the game more complex than SMAC.

Complexity is an excellet thing. But, being the best thing about SMAC, it also was the worst thing about it - the game was so complex that the AI had no chance of keeping up. If Civ 4 is to be more complex than SMAC, then I fear the AI will be back to pre-Civ3 standards.

[Solver]

Flexible Movement Rates

Movement rates should change depending on map size. Suppose, in Civ 3 on standard map, your ships can reach the enemy in 3 turns. Makes sense, more or less. But, on a huge water map, it might take you 8 turns just for the invasion force to reach the enemy landmass, which is ridicilous.

Same applies for aircraft - a Bomber with the range of 8 is simply non-serious for Huge maps.

Solution: add a map size factor to Civ 4 when getting the movement points of aircraft/naval units.

[Colonel E]

What about something like the Ethos system from (the old design of) MOO3?

For workers, how about simply getting "work points" which you can distribute around to get work done instead of having actual units?

[Solver]

For workers, how about simply getting "work points" which you can distribute around to get work done instead of having actual units?

That's exactly like CtP Public Works .

[FrostyBoy]

It will be very difficult for Firaxis to use most of these ideas, because imagine trying to use all of these ideas together in one game, it would seem like an impossible task.

I'm sure they will look at the ideas, but ultimately they will only pay attention to the ideas they can implement with what they already have.

What you should be doing this time round is trying to merge your ideas with each other's, try to come up with a funtional and basic Civ4, something that Firaxis could actually use and trust will work.

[Asmodean]

I see what you mean, Sn00py, but that would mean creating a design document that we can all agree on - truly a daunting task.

If we make a list of suggestions, all can participate, noone get left out, and Firaxis can pick and choose what they like, and feel they can fit into the project.

Asmodean

[Trifna]

Asmodean, Snoopy, People of the Jury,

I think this IS achievable by one way.
Instead of aiming to get something with what EVERYONE agrees, we simply make a document grouped perhaps in a few classes of ideas:
1- Green/Primary/***
2- Yellow/Sedundary/***
3- ...

Or put some colors on them if you prefer. Anyway, the goal would be to use polls to arrange this problem by knowing what is wanted BADLY, what is seen as trivial, what is just "something considered normal to see it in Civ IV", etc. This would of course necessitate a globally ORGANIZED set of polls with neutral questions.

[Jon Miller]

I think that we should make suggestions and say what we think we woudl like

no more

we shouldn't set out to design a game

they are the ones who know what they are capable of, and are the ones being paid to design the game (As well know a lot more about what is actual good gaming for everyone than a few of the poeple here)

as such we should just pass on suggestions of improvements that someone here thinks is a good idea

they can look at the list of improvments, and judge them for being good themselves

that shouldn't be our place

as such this should be a list of ideas, we are not trying to make a game here

Jon Miller

[DrGerry]

I have opened a thread in the Spanish forum to work in a list like this. Probably we will post here a summary at its moment.

We had already made a list several months ago and we are going to depurate it in the first place.

[Kuciwalker]

A simple request - events at least as powerful as in Civ2. That could go under several categories, like CUSTOMIZATION, RADICAL IDEAS (I'd prefer not ), SCENARIO/MAP EDITOR, SCENARIO IDEAS, or MODABILITY

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Solver
Flexible Movement Rates

Movement rates should change depending on map size. Suppose, in Civ 3 on standard map, your ships can reach the enemy in 3 turns. Makes sense, more or less. But, on a huge water map, it might take you 8 turns just for the invasion force to reach the enemy landmass, which is ridicilous.

Same applies for aircraft - a Bomber with the range of 8 is simply non-serious for Huge maps.

Solution: add a map size factor to Civ 4 when getting the movement points of aircraft/naval units.

I think, however, that it shouldn't be in direct proportion. Part of the reason you PLAY large maps is so that the distances are larger. So make it like, Small moves at .75x, Normal at 1x, Large at 1.25x, and Huge at 1.5x (you get the idea). So, even though Huge is, say, twice as large as Normal, it only has 50% extra movement rate.

[Brent]

Points for Exploration

Maybe this should be separate from wonders. One point for some number of squares for a landmass or water body. One point for each square for circumnavigating a landmass. A fixed number of points for circumnavigating the world and for exploring every square in the world.

Something like the above is a high priority for me.

Findable Features

SMAC did some things that I didn't know about for a while, probably some things I still don't know about.

Thie above is a low priority for me

Be Able to Do Things in Cities

Be able to search for a person or thing within a city. Have units that can wander the streets within a city. Be able to control battles within a city.

The above is a low priority for me.

Aircraft

I don't like aircraft in the game, at least not the way they worked in Civ2 (I have not used them in Civ3 so far). One option I would like would be for the game to end before the advent of aircraft. I liked Locusts of Chiron in SMAC, but not any other aircraft. I guess my "anti- aircraft" policy would work with just limiting the game eras, does Civ3 do that?

The above is a low to moderate priority for me.

Notes

Should we go back and indicate our levels of priority in our previous posts? Or did Trifna only mean coming to a concensus of priorities?

Cutting and Pasting Maps

I want to be able to cut a piece out of a large world map to create a smaller map of a smaller part of the world. I want to be able to increase the size of maps, like each original square becomes four squares, either all four exactly the same, or do something random.

The above is a high priority for me.

Languages

Should civs have trouble understanding each other at first? I would guess not.

The above is a low priority for me.

Playing Perpetual Nomads

I would like to be able to play the whole game wandering without building cities. I would like a wandering unsettled group to be able to increase in population and create military units.

The above is a moderate to high priority for me.

[problem_child]

My wishlist for Civ4 is simple, everything that Civ2, Civ3+PTW and SMACX had should be present, that means guerillas, partisans, the ability to negotiate commodities and resources, the ability to design new units, the ability to stack your units with other nations and base units in their cities, the ability to maintain protectorates and hegemonies, a more interesting espionage aspect, the ability to negotiate mining rights and pursue a rich and deep range of economic warfare strategems, and that the player this time represents a power ionside a nation that must compete not just with rival nations, but rival powers, thus allowing for civil-wars and powerstruggles within borders and all the interesting meta-games that that entails (like supporting rebel groups in other nations...) And religions and political theories should be significant, not just in a players nations, but in deciding who the enemy is (eg islam vs christianity, or capitalism vs communism).

There, I said it.

[Solver]

You can't get everyone to agree on even the simplest concepts. You can't get everyone to agree on units vs. stacks cobat. I'll never agree to tech research model changes (such as SMAC blind research). Others will never agree on future age. Etc.

The List is supposed to be a list of ideas, for Firaxis to review, and choose the best - and see what most people want. Like it was with Civ 3.

[Skanky Burns]

Tunnels and bridges.

Well, someone was going to mention them sooner or later.

[Brent]

Enlarging, Shrinking Maps

Be able to shrink a map, but how do you decide which terrain to keep?

The above is a low priority for me.

Scenarios

Vikings, with enjoyably playable Skraelings, separate Viking tribes, playable Europeans to defend themselves. Israelites settling Canaan, each tribe a separate civ but with a locked alliance. American Civil War or something with Yankees, Confederates, and Mormons if using Mormons wouldn't cause any problems. Possibly a race to explore every square should be a scenario. A scenario based on the separate Colonization game.

These scenarios are moderate to high priorities for me.

Playing Perpetual Nomads

Playable nomads should be able to build ships. Playable nomads should be a possibility, but should be able to build cities if they want. You can have some cities and also have nomads that can do the things I want.

The above is a high priority for me.

Waterless Maps

I want to be able to play on a landlocked map, but maybe this can be accomplished with impassable terrain.

The above is a moderate to high priority for me.

Ships

I want ships to work more like in Civ2, be able to attack the way they did in Civ2.

The above is a low priority for me.

Transports

Go along with being able to specify the number of human beings in a unit. Settlers should have to be small numbers to board a transport, but we can be a bit unrealistic, I guess one transport unit can be more than one ship.

The above is a low priority for me.

Palace

Definately a Palace instead of a throne room. Plenty of alternative choices. If a throne room, give alternative choices.

The above is a low priority for me.

Modes

Have modes to make the game more like previous installments in individual ways. City Radii. Civ2 style civilization traits. Graphics. Diplomacy. Trade?

The above is a moderate to high priority for me.

Internal Cultural Variation

Let regions within an Empire develop their own cultural variations. Based on different landmasses, proximity to other civs, separation by isthmuses, or each city have its own cultural distinctiveness. Settlers give cities they build similar culture to city that built the settler. Possibility of regional differences rebelling to establish independence or join rival civ. Things to do to keep regions happy, keep them under control. Based on real groups or not. "Colonies" differ between each other more than homeland, differences increase with distance from capital.

The above is a high priority for me.

Diplomacy

More options early in the game.

The above is a low to moderate priority for me.

[lord of the mark]

Im not sure i can even contribute, since i still dont have Civ3, and I have issues with the whole civ sub genre at this point, so I'll just a list a few pet issues.


Scenario desigin
one of the best things about Civ2 was the huge (and still lively) scenario building community. A Scenario editior with full scenario building tools, including events, complex triggers, etc seems to be a requirement,I think.

Trade
Bring back the Camel Seriously, the delivery of individual caravans, the dangers accomanying them, the use of caravans for exploration and making contact, was historically important. I realize that delivering large numbers of caravans got tedious in the late game, and that Civ3 seems to have done ok without camels, but is there not seem to work this in? Perhaps use camels, then trade routes after a give tech level achieved? While Civ3 abstracted this, Im not sure i want a game where combat is completely granular and other aspects of civ building are largely abstract (but then we're getting into my issues with the whole subgenre)

Civ specific traits
Well as some here may recall, i opposed that on historical and philosophical grounds. I havent been enough part of the Civ3 community to see if it has had the negative impacts on the community i feared - I do like the ideas for generating traits through Civ experiences.

[Brent]

Trailblazing

Units tend to follow paths already travelled. Over time roads automatically appear along these paths.

The above is a moderate to high priority for me.

City Names

The game should come with many more. Some Civs might have enough, but some civs should have at least three times as many. When you build a city, there should be a drop down box listing the built in names to choose from, with the option to enter one not listed. Names chosen by the computer should depend on terrain and location. Have names tagged for compass direction from capital, or center of landmass or empire or unclaimed territory. Tag names for coastal areas, mountains, forests, and nearby rival Civs. Tag names for proximity to capital, and have map size and potential growth affect tags, on a large map with other civs far away have a tag for the first few cities and the ones nearest to the capital. Have tags for home landmass and overseas.

The above is a high priority for me.

Startup Options

Be able to create an original civ as part of startup. Be able to choose ruler name, civ name, and civ attributes.

The above is a moderate priority for me.

Espionage

Should be less risky than in Civ3.

The above is a low priority for me.

Technology

Advances should be affected by the units you build and use.

The above is a low to moderate priority for me.

Customize Ruler Portrait

I guess there was something like this in CivNet? But make it sort of like the palace screen, be able to choose skin color, hair color, hair style, facial hair, headware, facial shape, caricature noses from ready made options

The above is a moderate to high priority for me.

[Fosse]

Brent: Absolutely on more city names! There is no excuse for EVER having a New Berlin!

I mentioned this before, but I'd just like to throw in one more reason for having two phase turns (i.e. an orders phase, then a simultaneous movement phase).

Three way battles! Or more! If you coordinate with another player to have both of your armies reach Rome in 750 AD, and they do, and there is a three way battle resolution... then that's cool as spit!

Other ideas...

More sandbox-y
Sometimes it feels to me that Civ is too much geared towards winning. But so much of history has just been about surviving, or internal affairs, or other goals. For me to be worried about being in a position to launch a spaceship 2000 years from now is a bit silly.

How to increase the Sand levels? More internal conflict. Give us more to worry about in the management of our civs. Not things like corruption or generic happieness. But what about various interests or parties to keep happy? An approval rating that matters could play into this, it'd be nice to conquer the iron supply of your neighbor, but the Church has a lot of power over the people, and they are for peace. So if you invade it might make some people mad.

Couple this with real reasons for unhappiness - instead of "I'm the second citizen in this city and we're on Emperor... I'm sad," such as lack of food sources, oppresive government... anything that makes sense. Now you have natural things to worry about in your Civilization, that if left unchecked could lead to rebellions, or rioting, or increased corruption. How about that... instead of an equation determining how corrupt a city is, have the ruling class' happiness factor in!

I'm going to cut this one here, and maybe have a more detailed approach in its own thread if people want to hear it (or if I just decide to anyhow).

What do you think about adding sand? It's a huge item on my list.

Mid Game name chagnes

This is little, but would be cool. What if whenever you change governments you get the option to rename yourself? The AI would have a Civ Name List that it would pick from in appropriate circumstances. So you might fight the Russian Democracy or the Soviet Communism. An American AI that switches to Democracy becomes the United States, and an England that manages to conquer a couple of nations starts calling itself the Commonwealth.

It's small, easy to do, takes no resources, and adds flavor.

As always, more to come...

Fosse