What Else could be Included?

[Admiral PJ]

I think buildings like ports should be reintroduced, they can be the only shipbuilding repair building again and be part of a bigger improved trade system.
I'd like to be able to trade more than 1 luxury with each civ, and maybe resources too, and have each luxury only supplying 4 cities or 8 towns with happiness, and maybe each resource only allows 3 units to be built with it.
This would make trade quantatitive more, and make resource strategy more important, trying to gain every last resource. What doyou think?
Something that annoys me is when you lose a resource you can continue building things with it that you've started, dosen't seem right.. but its just a minor niggle.
Air defence ability for land and sea units would be good, and units that can move on land and sea would be nice(its nearly working already)

[Panag]

Originally posted by Admiral PJ
I think buildings like ports should be reintroduced, they can be the only shipbuilding repair building again and be part of a bigger improved trade system.
I'd like to be able to trade more than 1 luxury with each civ, and maybe resources too, and have each luxury only supplying 4 cities or 8 towns with happiness, and maybe each resource only allows 3 units to be built with it.
This would make trade quantatitive more, and make resource strategy more important, trying to gain every last resource. What doyou think?
Something that annoys me is when you lose a resource you can continue building things with it that you've started, dosen't seem right.. but its just a minor niggle.
Air defence ability for land and sea units would be good, and units that can move on land and sea would be nice(its nearly working already)

hi ,

yep , and only a port should be capable to fix naval units , hmmmm, ports of allies also , ...

have a nice day

[Jethro83]

Being able to position your troops into the cities of those you have an MPP and Right of Passage with. Just like pact brothers/sisters in SMAC could do. When engaging in a war overseas, I'd like to be able to deploy my bombers in the cities of a nearby ally. Or use an allied city as a staging area for my invasion of the enemy.

When you try to enter an ally's city like this, the military advisor could ask you if you want to just enter the city, or betray and attack them. Of course, for this to be implemented, the AI will need some extra work.

[Oerdin]

I want a tech tree with more options plus more wonders and underwater cities ( a la CTP2) would be nice.

[da_jaymz]

Only main grip I have in Civ3 is lame combat...
A different combat system is all I'm asking for, little more strategic, attack bonuses, mass fighting, it gets a bit boring fighting one after one after one...
Combat like in CTP(12vs12) or maybe a variant like in Age of Wonders(you could have all armies adjactent to the attacking square involve in combat)...
They could leave the current combat system as a choice for newbies..

[wrylachlan]

Originally posted by da_jaymz
Only main grip I have in Civ3 is lame combat...
A different combat system is all I'm asking for, little more strategic, attack bonuses, mass fighting, it gets a bit boring fighting one after one after one...

There are some really simple things that could be done to fix combat. Really simple. I probably sound like a broken record about this, but I just hope that Firaxis is following this forum and reading some of these ideas.

1. Group Attack
The ability to order groups of units to attack with one simple command and that group will attack in their correct order: air superiority, bombing, bombarding, ground attack.

2. Flanking Bonus
Give a small percentage bonus for every adjacent tile occupied by friendly troops to represent flanking. This would discourage the use of large single stacks and make players think more strategically about troop movements.

3. Increased Air Range
Nuff Said

3. Anti-Aircraft Units
Nuff Said

5. Upgradeable Army
Nuff Said

6. Increased Army Movement
Army moves as fast as slowest unit.

7. Terrain Bonuses Specific to Unit Type
Right now the terrain does not really make a difference in combat because the terrain modifiers effect all troop types equally. But a rolling unit should be penalized more for being in the mountains than footmen. As a corrollary, fortifiying in the mountains should confer a much greater bonus than fortifying on the plains. Foot troops should be at a disadvantage in the desert. etc. etc. The bottom line is that the more specific the terrain bonuses, the more players will use terrain strategically.

7A. Make Roads and Railroads Fewer and Strategic
This is a rant I've given at least a half a dozen times but no one seems to be listening as I've had no feedback good or bad on it, so I'll say it again.

Roads and railroads make the game unstrategic because their bonuses make players and the AI put them everywhere. When railroads cover every single tile, no one tile is of strategic importance.

My fix is simple. Do away with the bonus per tile that having a road or railroad on that tile confers. NO per tile bonus. Instead give a city an OVERALL percentage bonus for each of the four closest neighboring cities connected by a DIRECT road or railroad.

Additionally make building roads and railroads significantly more difficult. The end result of all this will be that each city will only have four roads/railroads leading out of it, and each one will be of serious strategic importance.

Come on. Someone back me up on this idea.

7B. Auto-Cut Railroads
When you take over a city all rail tiles adjacent to the city, which your units do not already occupy, auto-destruct. This would prevent the phenomenon of stacks rolling through an empire on a single turn using the enemies rail lines.

7C. Rolling Units stuck in the Mountains/Jungles
If you have rolling units on a road or railroad in a tile they normally can't move through, and the improvement is bombed away. They are stuck and are essentially sitting ducks. This would make you think twice before leaving that stack of Modern Armor sitting in the mountains at the end of your turn.


8. Remove Culture-Tile Sight
What I mean by this is that as it stands you can see one square beyond your cultural border. I'm saying take that away. Only cities and units can "see".

How would this make the game more strategic? It would force you to put units on sentry duty. And the sneak attack would become a viable strategy.


I'd really like to hear what you all think about these ideas. I try to throw them out there as much as possible, but sometimes I wonder if anyone is listening.

[Panag]

hi ,

maybe two more era's ,
a lot of people would love that

have a nice day

[Andrew_Jay]

I find it interesting how with the announcement of the XP everyone has a lot of great, and complex ideas. It's almost like they announced a civ4 by the some of the big new features some people are advocating. Not that there's anything wrong, can't fault you for your big ideas, just I guess Firaxis can be commended for announcing an XP with quite a few additions, and giving the impression that anything is almost possible for the expansion.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Andrew_Jay
I find it interesting how with the announcement of the XP everyone has a lot of great, and complex ideas. It's almost like they announced a civ4 by the some of the big new features some people are advocating. Not that there's anything wrong, can't fault you for your big ideas, just I guess Firaxis can be commended for announcing an XP with quite a few additions, and giving the impression that anything is almost possible for the expansion.

hi ,

well , maybe the fact that firaxis hired some new people and that they spend time on apolyton has something to do with it

have a nice day

[Andrew_Jay]

I didn't know they had new staffers, cool, though I heard something about it in another post. That's good news, and that explains all the new ideas, such as turnless MP.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Andrew_Jay
I didn't know they had new staffers, cool, though I heard something about it in another post. That's good news, and that explains all the new ideas, such as turnless MP.

hi ,

with Mike in their now , well , he did a lot on other games , ....

have a nice day

[Momboman]

Maybe its already been mentioned (although I haven't seen it), but what I would really like to see is the ability to create handicaps for one or more of the players in multiplayer games. My son and I both love to play single player Civ3 and are really looking forward to playing against each other in MP. While I'm sure I'm no match for most of the people on this board I know I am a much better player than my son. My concern is that unless I can provide a handicap on my game (or make his game easier) our games will quickly become no fun for him. If however we could set my game at a harder level and my son's at one of the beginning levels we could play together and both be suitably challenged.

[SpencerH]

Anything to improve our capabilities to make new unit animations would be nice.

[Grrr]

Originally posted by Insigna
They should definatly make the Manhatten Project a Small Wonder. I don't think a single person is happy with it as a major wonder. There should at least be an option. Does anyone know why it was made a Regular wonder and not a small one?

Definately. That will slow down those AI idiots.

[civman2000]

yeah, they made apollo program a small wonder, shouldn't manhattan project be a small wonder for the exact same reason??

[Panag]

Originally posted by civman2000
yeah, they made apollo program a small wonder, shouldn't manhattan project be a small wonder for the exact same reason??

hi ,

okay , but this way you , as the "human" player has control over the building of the nuke's , and that is what most people want , ....!!!

have a nice day

[kring]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

okay , but this way you , as the "human" player has control over the building of the nuke's , and that is what most people want , ....!!!

I am not sure I understand your meaning here. As it is currently, anyone building the Manhattan Project allows all civs to build nukes. It doesn't matter if you build it or an AI civ builds it. You could always capture the towns it is being built in AND never build it yourself.

I agree it would be nice if everyone had to learn the tech, but in the real world, Russia stole it from the US & UK scientists. So, it is not too unrealistic for everyone to learn it the current way.

[Grrr]

Actually I find that a small wonder would further slow down nuke production by AI civs. The ones who are behind can get away with nukes very quickly when someone else builds the manhatten project.

[Mikel]

wrylachlan

I have posted similar ideas before. They all sound good, easy to learn and implement, and beneficial to the current combat system.

Why has no one commented on them?

A post about the Jovians as a new civ in the expansion would have evoked two pages of comment.

[civman2000]

to be more realistic it would cost less and less as more people built it...or maybe it could be stolen via espionage (that would be the most realistic)

[JamesJKirk]

wrylachlan:

I generally like your ideas, and think they'd greatly benefit the game, especially 7A, although I personally think 7B, 7C and 8 wouldn't be that beneficial. or that's to say they're rules I'd prefer to play without.


New Idea to Make UN Useful

We all know that the UN needs to be better implemented, and that the only reason to build it now is so the AI doesn't do it and then win the game.

So what about using the UN in a way that it actually functioned in the real world? Hastening decolonization, that is. Now throughout the game, you and the AI doubtlessly conquered many cities, and hold cities that have foreign residents in them. Now what the UN wonder could do is force cities in all the civs, aside from the one that built the wonder, to give the cities that have over 50% of its citizens of a different nationality back to their original owners. If that civ's been defeated, then it will be brought back. The civs that are entirely brought back will technologically begin at the start of the era that it's former colonizer was at (typically modern).
This won't completely debilitate those civs that have large foreign populations, as they will by default have MPP and RoP agreements, and the new civ will be inclined toward trade with that civ, often succumbing to outrageous demands, and even selling their only supply of a trade good.
This wouldn't completely obsolete war, because of one, of the following ideas, though I'm not sure which is best:

1) This only affects the cities upon the completion of the UN wonder

or

2) Member states vote when assembled to force a country to decolonialize

or

3) this occurs at regular intervals, and there is a warning before decolonization will happen.

What do you all think of these ideas? I'm sure they need refining, but they'd add a new layer of intrigue to the modern era AND make the UN useful, IMO

[Andrew_Jay]

I think they cancelled the small wonder nature of Manhattan Project (I remember hearing that it was originally to be one) to represent the relatively quick proliferation of nuclear weapons to whoever wanted to build them. As soon as it is built anyone can have nukes if they want, which is fairly close to what we have now in reality, the original Manhattan Project did all the real work.
However, perhaps it could be a sort of reverse Great Library, once one person has the Manhattan Project Great Wonder, the ability to build nukes is given to the other civs over the course of a couple turns based on their technology.

[Panag]

hi ,


maybe they should just put more options in the editor , ...right , ..??

for al wonders , ....

have a nice day

[wrylachlan]

Originally posted by JamesJKirk

New Idea to Make UN Useful

We all know that the UN needs to be better implemented, and that the only reason to build it now is so the AI doesn't do it and then win the game.

So what about using the UN in a way that it actually functioned in the real world? Hastening decolonization, that is. Now throughout the game, you and the AI doubtlessly conquered many cities, and hold cities that have foreign residents in them. Now what the UN wonder could do is force cities in all the civs, aside from the one that built the wonder, to give the cities that have over 50% of its citizens of a different nationality back to their original owners. If that civ's been defeated, then it will be brought back. The civs that are entirely brought back will technologically begin at the start of the era that it's former colonizer was at (typically modern).
This won't completely debilitate those civs that have large foreign populations, as they will by default have MPP and RoP agreements, and the new civ will be inclined toward trade with that civ, often succumbing to outrageous demands, and even selling their only supply of a trade good.
This wouldn't completely obsolete war, because of one, of the following ideas, though I'm not sure which is best:

1) This only affects the cities upon the completion of the UN wonder

or

2) Member states vote when assembled to force a country to decolonialize

or

3) this occurs at regular intervals, and there is a warning before decolonization will happen.

What do you all think of these ideas? I'm sure they need refining, but they'd add a new layer of intrigue to the modern era AND make the UN useful, IMO

I like the basic idea of decolonization as an attribute of the UN. However if it doesn't have a counterbalancing positive attribute, the players and AI will never build it. Also the positive cannot be a better trade relationship with member nations since that won't work with MP where there is no AI to manipulate that way.

My suggestion to the counterbalance for decolonization would be that when you get into the modern era, the longer you DONT have the UN more citizens become unhappy "33% Its way too crowded 66% We want to be part of the United Nations" (Note I'm thinking of the UN as a small wonder or maybe a UN wonder with certain benefits, and then small wonders which are UN Embassies which likewise cure the unhappiness).

Also, I don't think players are going to stand for random decolonization which they cannot effect. I had a mechanism for this which I posted into a thread on late-game barbarians. Basically my idea was that for every foreign national in a city there is a percentage chance each turn that he will turn into a rebel(barbarian) which will pop-up next to the city as the most current military foot unit. If the rebel, or rebels manage to take over a city, the civ returns. The UN could drastically increase the chance of rebels popping up, but decolonization would still not be a foregone conclusion since the players could man the city with military units to rebuff the rebels.



Andrew_J

I like the idea of some lag time between the Manhattan Project and all civs getting nukes. Maybe once the Great Wonder Manhattan Project is built, every other civ has to build a Nuclear Proliferation Small Wonder to get nukes. The small wonder would cost a significantly smaller amount of shield so that most civs could build it in 5 turns or so. And with the editor you could adjust the amount of lag time by changing the amount of shields for the small wonder.

[Andrew_Jay]

That idea sounds good wrylachlan, the first civ has to do all the work but actually gets rewarded for their labours with nuclear weapons earlier than anyone else. Whether anyone else gets them is up to them and if they want to also work for them.

[Panag]

hi ,

it was tried to make "it" a big wonder , however this seems to unbalance the game , if you dont "flag" the option on a wonder "allows all civ's to build nuke's" on a wonder , no nuke's , .......

have a nice day

[Andrew_Jay]

Hey, I have an idea, how about leaving the Manhattan project as it is, and also putting in the small wonder idea that Wrylachlan had. However, the catch is, the small wonder makes uranium appear on the map for the civ that makes it. That was MP technically allows nukes, but you don't get the resources to do so unless you make the small wonder. But is the "resource x appears" attribute only for techs?

[JamesJKirk]

What about for Manhatten Project, instead of their being a lag or anything, just that the civ who builds it first gets a free nuke or two (or three?), so that way there is a real lag, since nukes are pretty expensive and would always take a few turns to build

[Andrew_Jay]

They'd have to make one or two for testing anyway

[Panag]

Originally posted by Andrew_Jay
They'd have to make one or two for testing anyway

hi ,

its done ; the results are not what was expected , however that is different for every player ,....

most did not like it , ....NEXT , .....

have a nice day