Civ 4 - the list of ideas for Firaxis - Page 6

Stefu · December 15, 2003, 08:13

Quote:

Too much time has passed. Furthermore, many ideas will be inspired by the changes to the series that Civ 3 introduced, so the old list is just that: Old

However, we should at least go through The List and see what proposals could be reused. At least go through the Essential Civ3 List - many good proposals in there that went unheeded.

Asmodean · December 15, 2003, 16:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Beta
Hmmm - this will require some thought. I like the early comments about the combat system from CtP.

But I think the first thing I would ask for is that Asmodean's avatar be one of the leader heads.

Yeah...that'd be nice, eh?

Asmodean

Asmodean · December 15, 2003, 16:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Stefu

However, we should at least go through The List and see what proposals could be reused. At least go through the Essential Civ3 List - many good proposals in there that went unheeded.

What do you guys think my good night reading is these days

Asmodean

Space05us · December 18, 2003, 06:34

I dont know if anyone has mentioned it yet, but being able to play Civ in a window would be nice.

Maquiladora · December 18, 2003, 06:46

I agree, its one of the things that makes civ2 so addictive to play, and easy to hide at work.

Adagio · December 19, 2003, 12:29

What I'd like in Civ4:

A new era
Like mentioned in this thread:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=50341

This thread was before PTW's time though, but still valid

DarkCloud · December 19, 2003, 18:57

sorry about posting this here too, but I don't want it to get lost and couldn't figure out where to put it:

I would also suggest adding air capacity to the game... basically designating air routes for supplies in the game.
For example: Armor Units in Washington can be put onto a Cargo Plain and flown to the front in Tripoli, or something of that sort.

Frozzy · December 19, 2003, 23:24

I don't know where to put this so...

I'd like to have the option to create civs out of your own civ. So if your nation becomes too rowdy, you can seperate a part of civ and rebuild your nation.

DarkCloud · December 20, 2003, 13:45

Frozzy, I'll take that and add it to the Civilizations section... It's an intriguing idea, although I don't know how much use it will really get... why would someone want to give up part of their nation unless they were going for space victory? or some sort of non-size, non-combat victory?

Frozzy · December 20, 2003, 13:56

If your Civ is on the verge of revolting against you, you can just cut off the rowdy cities so you can work on making the ones you have better.

DarkCloud · December 20, 2003, 13:59

I suppose that makes sense.

Nikolai · December 20, 2003, 15:33

If we have some kind of vassal feature in Civ4, the newly created civ should be that. After all, they have been given their independence by you, right?

If there is no vassal feature, the new civ should at least have very good relations to you for a long time, and be very forthcoming to all oyur proposals.

Myrddin · December 20, 2003, 15:50

Maybe not - how friendly are the ex Soviet states to Russia?

DarkCloud · December 20, 2003, 17:12

Actually, many of them are very friendly toward russia and are moving toward an economic union with mother russia... look at the Asian-SSR states for examples of that, Myrddin.

Nikolai · December 20, 2003, 17:22

Well, firstly the ex Soviet states didn't get out of the union with the motherland's blessing...

And think of it; If a country is granted independence with the motherland's blessing, don't you think they'd be gratefull?

Myrddin · December 20, 2003, 18:00

The Central Asian states were not very friendly to Russia (or Russians living in them) at the time of the break-up of the USSR - friendliness now has more to do with economic realities

Nikolai · December 20, 2003, 19:15

See my post...

Urban Ranger · December 21, 2003, 02:27

It's just that a lot of people put a lot of time into developing ideas for Civ 3 and they were unheeded. Some of them might be obsolete by features in the new game, but surely it is easier to update ideas that are thoroughly discussed and polished than to start from scratch?

Maybe it's just my software development habits

Mr. President · December 21, 2003, 02:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
It's just that a lot of people put a lot of time into developing ideas for Civ 3 and they were unheeded. Some of them might be obsolete by features in the new game, but surely it is easier to update ideas that are thoroughly discussed and polished than to start from scratch?

Maybe it's just my software development habits

It's not just you.

No matter what or if any ideas from this forum are implemented, large numbers of people will be satisfied and large numbers of people will be dissatisfied.

I thought that Wizards of the Coast's Selecting Eighth Edition event would bring people together. Wrongo. The Magic online community is more polarized than ever.

Bottom line: You can satisfy some of the people some of the time and you can't satisfy all of the people all of the time.

Urban Ranger · December 21, 2003, 02:42

Well, I wasn't exactly saying that huge numbers of people will be disappointed, I was merely saying that a lot of people are going down some well trodden paths over and over again.

It seems that these people will be bitterly disappointed when their suggestions get ignored by Firaxis, like what happened last time.

Nikolai · December 21, 2003, 05:33

We obviously should have learned something by now, though...

art_vandelai · December 23, 2003, 14:25

I'd like to see CIV evolve from the 'found a city with x radius and build everything in that area model.

What I envision is a 2 level map. The main level of the map would be similar to the current map - that would be used to move your units, and administer the game. The second level would be at a higher level of detail (think 10 x 10 for each square).

In the start of the game, there would be fewer cities and more spread out farming type commuinities, until the techs were researched to allow for urban type facilities (granaries, aqueducts, etc.) Buildings would be placed on a square (or number of squares for larger buildings, walls, etc.

An army would not be able to occupy an entire main map square, unless there's enough room there for its units (maybe 10 squares per unit in the beginning) or a barracks/fort in the square to house it.

Instead of moving workers around, use the population in each square to create additional improvements. Building forces, settler caravans, etc. would subtract population to each square
while building farms, granaries, aqueducts, would increase the rate at which a square gained population.

Large cities later on in the game would take up several map squares, and be able to apportion % of the population to various tasks (i.e. 10% agriculture, 5% military, 20% transportation infrastructure, 30% city production, 35% commerce) while the buildings in the vicinity (not necessarily in the same square - would expand with technological development) would add to each square's working effectiveness.

Defenses would be handled by building military facilities (e.g. barracks, forts, in the syquare(s) to be defended, or by moving armies from square to square. At the detail level, you would see the camps, forts, etc. showing multiple battalions.

Roads would take up 1 small square and be continuously upgradable. (pathway, cobblestone, asphalt, highway, interstate) and would increase in effectiveness in terms of moves per turn with each upgrade. Railroads and roads would be mutually exclusive. Armies would only be able to move 1 way on a road or railroad each turn. There would be a significant cost for upkeep of roads at the higher levels, which will ensure that superhighways only get built between major cities, not on every square of the map.

To aid in micromanagement, make a number of map squares selectable at a time (CTRL-click), and the preferences can be set at a global level.

I like the idea of claiming land by settling in the vicinity or having armies stake a claim. If an area is sparsely populated, in diplomacy, other civs could contest your ownership, and even start moving troops in to provoke a war.

I would like to see more buildings/improvements/wonders available, as well as more middle-late game unit types.

Spiffor · December 28, 2003, 07:14

Ell, here is a very small idea that I think would add some spice to the game:

When a Civ has conquered a city, this Civ should give it a new name when the city's culture under the conqueror exceeds the culture there was under the previous ruler

I think it would be a nice addition, and it'll really look like you're waging war to Germany or to the Celts

Fosse · December 28, 2003, 16:21

Spiffor,
Nice.

Did anyone else who played SMAC find themselves suddenly enraged when a base taken by the AI had its name changed? It could be the worst base ever, one that you intentionally left unguarded, and you'd get the message "The So and So have changed the name of FosseLand. They now fasion it, "Discotown."

Suddenly nothing else mattered except getting the base back and renaming it!

It is the little things like that, Spiffor, that really add up.

Bonaparte · December 29, 2003, 13:27

Last night I started a new game on a random, huge map with a lot of islands. There were only 3 competing AI civs. After a short while I discover that 2 of the AI civs started on the same island as I did, while the other AI civ had the rest of the huge map for there own. The point of me setting up the game the way I did was so that hopfully each civ would start on there own island. In the end I had to start over. So I thought to myself they should have a little box on the set up screen that you can either check off or not check off. If it is checked off then you will be guaranteed that each civ will have there own starting island or continent...and if not checked off then the game will distribute civs in the same fashion it does right now.

vee4473 · December 29, 2003, 17:24

Not sure if this is the place, or if it has been mentioned.

I would like the designers to solve the problem of having to manually reassign city workers after a polluted square is cleaned up.

This is especially a funsucker when you have specialists assigned in many cities, and if you just click the city center, then yeah, the the worker goes back to work, but so do all the specialists.

Then you have to reassign the specialists.

Surely a solution can be found to streamline this process.

I don't understand why the game code ,or whatever, can't automatically send the city worker back to the tile he came from.

vee4473 · December 29, 2003, 17:51

Oh and by the way, this same issue applies to reassigning city workers after you make entertainers to keep the peace during govt switches or before you build an improvement.

then you have to go back in and reassign.

Bonaparte · December 30, 2003, 23:40

Quote:

Originally posted by vee4473
I would like the designers to solve the problem of having to manually reassign city workers after a polluted square is cleaned up.

This is especially a funsucker when you have specialists assigned in many cities, and if you just click the city center, then yeah, the the worker goes back to work, but so do all the specialists.

I'll second that motion.

Q Classic · December 31, 2003, 01:18

the old list(s): i have the old firaxis forums wish list for civ3 in a doc format. i'll upload it by next week when i get my computer back.

Merp · January 1, 2004, 06:23

I think the sooner that multiple threads or a dedicated forum for Civ 4 ideas is implemented the better. I know that the original idea was to start on a single thread, but this thread is already pretty chaotic, with a lot of repeated ideas.

EDIT- OK, I'm a tool who should have checked the rest of the forum first