Some Things We'd Like to See :)

[Azeem]

Although it's quite early to be talking about another expansion or the 4th installment of the "Civilization" series, I think it would be interesting to talk about what we'd like to see in a future "Civilization" game to pass the time.

What new aspects do you think should be included?

Here is what I'd like to see:
1. Import/Export: Trade is vital to any civilization. We should be able to import or export both goods and food for luxuries, sustenance, and cash.

2. Civilization-specific Wonders: It's kind of wierd to see a Chinese "Forbidden Palace" in an Aztec city. Why not have a "Forbidden Palace" for the Aztecs have Aztec architecture? Ever wonder what a Chinese colossus would look like? The Chinese could have Emperor Qin's pyramid tomb at Xi An as their version of the "Great Pyramid" and the Babylonians could have "Babel Tower" (since it is somewhat like a stepped pyramid). Each civilization should have their own style of architecture for wonders.

3. More different wonders: There are A LOT of wonders in the game from Europe, but not a lot from Far East Asia, the Middle East, Mesoamerica, or South Asia. Here are other wonders Firaxis should consider: Brobadur Buddhist Temple (one of the most elaborate Buddhist Temples in the world) of Indonesia, Stonehenge of Britain, the pyramid of Chichen Itza, the Pyramid of the Sun at Teotihuacan, the "Porcelain Tower" of China, or the Taj Mahal of Agra.

4. More specific architectural styles and more Civs: The Indians shouldn't have Far East architecture, but their own unique architecture. How about having other civilizations (you can never have too many civs) - the Khmer and the Indonesians and have them and the Indians form a group? We could have Far East, Mediterannean, Mid East, American (all of which are already in Civ3), and "South Asian" (for Indian, Khmer, and Indonesian) as the classifications for civs.

5. DOMESTIC POLICIES!: It doesn't really feel like you're running a country or empire until you have domestic policies. You should be able to set minimum wages or tax rates upon citizens and that could affect their mood. The presence of a large military in a city could also alter citizen mood depending on government. Citizens riot over domestic policies, not necessarily because there aren't any collosseums in their city. You should also be able to pass laws that can both make or break you such as an act to strictly limit freedom, which would prevent riots for a time, but would cause resentment.

6. Disasters: Disasters affected every civilization. They could make the game much more challenging and make a game more interesting, though they shouldn't be too frustrating.

Do you have anything else to add?

[Oerdin]

I doubt will see even another expansion for civ3 but maybe if you wait for civ4.

[WarpStorm]

I don't know about that, Oerdin. JMo in the last chat said it was quite possible if PTW made a profit (and at that time it looked likely).

[Willem]

If I read between the lines correctly, another expansion pack is definitely going to happen.

[Oerdin]

So how do we find out if PtW made a profit or not? I'm kind of torn between love of civ and disgust at the condition recent civ products have been put on market in.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Willem
If I read between the lines correctly, another expansion pack is definitely going to happen.

What is this going to be? The "Real multiplayer expansion" perhaps?

[Coracle]

Originally posted by Azeem
Although it's quite early to be talking about another expansion or the 4th installment of the "Civilization" series. . .

Wrong. A YEAR ago people were posting inquiring about a Civ 4 (not made by Firaxis) as they were disappointed with Civ 3. That was early in 2002. There has been considerable speculation since.

So it is not too early at all. I can't wait for Civ 4 as I;ve gone back to playing scenarios of Civ 2.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


What is this going to be? The "Real multiplayer expansion" perhaps?

No, the one that works a little better, and includes a few new civs, followed by three more patches.

[Azeem]

Um, this thread is about things we would like to see in a future "Civilization" game. What would you like to see?

[The Moose]

Besides more civs (inca, sioux/apache, thai....), i'd like to be able to get a leader by peaceful means. there have been threads about that before. e.g. first circumnavigation of the world and others...

[woody]

I'd like to see Civ4 made by someone other than Firaxis and Infogrames!

[Switch]

I'd like to see Civ4 made by Firaxis and published by EA. It's not Firaxis' fault that Civ3 was rushed. And have you played SMAC/X? That game, and the way it was published, was and still is amazing !

Does anyone else know why Firaxis used Infogrames instead of EA like they did with SMAC/X?

Now on topic, I like those ideas of individual archetecture and pseudo-idividual Wonders (ie, if te Chinese have Emperor Qin's pyramid tomb at Xi An, then no one else can build their 'Great Pyramids'). Another neat thing, which someone else on this board has started, is certain units have civ-specific graphics and names. Such as the Arabs have some sort of camel unit, as opposed to a Knight unit.

[Azeem]

Another neat thing, which someone else on this board has started, is certain units have civ-specific graphics and names. Such as the Arabs have some sort of camel unit, as opposed to a Knight unit.

Having all units unique units for different civilization is a great idea, although it may take quite a long time. But I'd have the patience to wait for a high-quality product.

Civ-specific units could be something like this:
*These are only examples and perhaps all you wonderful modders out there can use this for ideas.

Japan:
Yari Ashigaru (Spearman) - Yari Samurai (Pikemen) - Ashigaru Musketmen (Musketmen) - Japanese Infantry

Mongolia:
Hussar (Horsemen) - Keshik (Knight) - Mongolian Cavalry

Arabia:
Camel Rider (Horseman) - Mameluke (Knight) - Arab Cavalry

Aztec:
Warrior - Eagle Warrior (Swordsman) - Jaguar Warrior (Medieval Infantry) - Aztec Guerillas

China:
Archer - Crossbowman (not in Civ3, but there should be crossbowmen) - Chu-ko-Nu (Longbowmen)

Russians:
T-80 Tank (Modern Armor)
Katyusha (Artillery maybe? )

Korea:
Turtle Ship (Not sure if this should be a Frigate or an Ironclad )

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Switch
Does anyone else know why Firaxis used Infogrames instead of EA like they did with SMAC/X?

The question should rather be, why Infogrames used Firaxis. Infogrames holds the right on the Civ series now. They could as well have ordered the programming work from another company, but they decided to go with the name Sid Meier. In the unlikely event, that CivIV will ever happen, it may be that Infogrames chooses a cheaper and less user friendly company than Firaxis, who cared a lot to patch and improve their work. Our only hope is, that Infogrames goes bankrupt. What is, btw, more likely to happen than CivIV, given their present problems.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Azeem
Here is what I'd like to see:
1. Import/Export: Trade is vital to any civilization. We should be able to import or export both goods and food for luxuries, sustenance, and cash.

This is already done except for food. I agree that food trading would be a good addition.

2. Civilization-specific Wonders

Well, I'd rather not, it doesn't seem to add to the game too much. Besides, I would like the wonders to be easily recognizable.

3. More different wonders

Sure, why not.

4. More specific architectural styles and more Civs

Okay.

5. DOMESTIC POLICIES!: It doesn't really feel like you're running a country or empire until you have domestic policies. You should be able to set minimum wages or tax rates upon citizens and that could affect their mood.

That is already done inderectly, because if you increase the tax slider you can't afford to set the luxury slider as high. I'm not sure a strong association is necessary.

The presence of a large military in a city could also alter citizen mood depending on government.

Civ3 already has this.

6. Disasters: Disasters affected every civilization. They could make the game much more challenging and make a game more interesting, though they shouldn't be too frustrating.

I don't think there should be any frustration. I don't like the idea of disasters because of our inability to control them. Randomness is tolerable in the game (i.e. combat) but combat is more heavily influenced by actual values that you can control. Disease is annoying enough, IMO there is no need for disasters.

[TheEmerged]

More control over world map creation -- for example, an option to pick the frequency of special resources.

More scaling support for Huge Maps, or at the very least enough options at the start of the game to help mitigate some of the game aspects that get out of hand.

REAL support for a "create your own culture" option in non-scenario play -- at the least, allow me to pick my own advantages!

I'm still working my way around PTW right now (I finally broke down and bought it), so I can't comment on too much. Those three still stick out like sore thumbs though.

[Azeem]

That is already done inderectly, because if you increase the tax slider you can't afford to set the luxury slider as high. I'm not sure a strong association is necessary.

The tax slider isn't much for "Domestic Policies". Strangely, people don't complain about high taxes, nor are they happy about low taxes, which absolutely makes no sense whatsoever. I think it would be more interesting when you can have more effect on your citizens through laws you pass. I would like it if it feels like I'm running a country, not a board game .

BTW, the Import/Export thing ought to affect commerce. Like you can have your cities creating a certain product with resources nearby (such as silk clothing made from silk or jewelry made from gold or gems) and selling them to other civs. Actual trade between civilizations should be a HUGE part of civilization, but in Civ3, that's not the case. I think it was a little better when they had trade caravans back in Civ2.

[ZargonX]

On the subject of trade, I think an improved system for disrupting trade would be a good addition. It is incredibly difficult to blockade every single port an enemy has, usually, and since the trade routes are a sort of nebulous, non-physical entity, stopping it is very hard indeed. Sure, you can cut some roads, but sending units into the heart of enemy territory isn't how supply lines are cut in real life. You can sink convoys, as the Germans showed us. Mayhap that's getting too realistic, though...

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Azeem
The tax slider isn't much for "Domestic Policies". Strangely, people don't complain about high taxes, nor are they happy about low taxes, which absolutely makes no sense whatsoever.

Their taxes are the same, all the time. In game, they are called "commerce". The word "taxes" for the remainder of state income minus science spendings minus luxury spendings is just wrong. It should be called "upkeep spendings and monetary reserve", that would be more appropriate.

[zulu9812]

Markos should really start a topped thread, so these don't keep duplicating. This is the 5th one I've seen in 7 days...

[TacticalGrace]

Originally posted by Azeem
4. More specific architectural styles and more Civs: The Indians shouldn't have Far East architecture, but their own unique architecture. How about having other civilizations (you can never have too many civs) - the Khmer and the Indonesians and have them and the Indians form a group? We could have Far East, Mediterannean, Mid East, American (all of which are already in Civ3), and "South Asian" (for Indian, Khmer, and Indonesian) as the classifications for civs.

Which style should the Americans have then. Presumably they wouldn't have the American style you are suggesting...

5. DOMESTIC POLICIES!: It doesn't really feel like you're running a country or empire until you have domestic policies. You should be able to set minimum wages or tax rates upon citizens and that could affect their mood. The presence of a large military in a city could also alter citizen mood depending on government. Citizens riot over domestic policies, not necessarily because there aren't any collosseums in their city. You should also be able to pass laws that can both make or break you such as an act to strictly limit freedom, which would prevent riots for a time, but would cause resentment.

This is partly abstracted as the government types which could perhaps do with some overhauling. The rest is done perfectly well in the tax rate/science/luxury rates.

[Willem]

Originally posted by TheEmerged
More control over world map creation -- for example, an option to pick the frequency of special resources.

That already exists, look in the editor under Natural Resources. You control the frequency with the Appearance Ratio.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Azeem


Strangely, people don't complain about high taxes, nor are they happy about low taxes, which absolutely makes no sense whatsoever.

They do if you you use a negative Luxury number with your Taxmen .

[Willem]

Originally posted by zulu9812
Markos should really start a topped thread, so these don't keep duplicating. This is the 5th one I've seen in 7 days...

Not a bad idea. I started one myself in Creation awhile back. It would probably be best to keep them all together so we don't end up repeating ourselves. Many of these ideas have already been offered several times already.

[woody]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
The question should rather be, why Infogrames used Firaxis. Infogrames holds the right on the Civ series now. They could as well have ordered the programming work from another company, but they decided to go with the name Sid Meier. In the unlikely event, that CivIV will ever happen, it may be that Infogrames chooses a cheaper and less user friendly company than Firaxis, who cared a lot to patch and improve their work. Our only hope is, that Infogrames goes bankrupt. What is, btw, more likely to happen than CivIV, given their present problems.

Don't kid yourself into believing that Firaxis patched Civ out of the goodness of their heart. They only did so because IG funded them to do it. IG may suck, but don't attribute everything good to Firaxis and everything bad to IG. They're both to blame for the mistakes of Civ3 and PtW.

And yeah, IG is headed for bankrupcy. Their book value is negative and they're also losing money. They can't keep that up for long before their creditors come knocking at the door.

[TacticalGrace]

Originally posted by woody

And yeah, IG is headed for bankrupcy. Their book value is negative and they're also losing money. They can't keep that up for long before their creditors come knocking at the door.

depends how much the creditors have put in. If you give someone $1000 credit then paying it back is the debtor's problem. If you give someone $10,000,000 then it's your problem...

[Azeem]

TacticalGrace, there already is "American" architecture for Civ3. It's used for the Americans, the Iroquois, and the Aztecs.

When I speak about "Domestic Policies", I mean that I would like to impose laws upon my citizens. Perhaps we should be able to customize our governments directly through the game (not just through the editor)? For example, you could have a constitutional monarchy (such as the UK) or a religious republic (such as Iran).

[TacticalGrace]

Originally posted by Azeem
TacticalGrace, there already is "American" architecture for Civ3. It's used for the Americans, the Iroquois, and the Aztecs.

I thought America had Greeco-roman arcitecture like it did in civ2...

When I speak about "Domestic Policies", I mean that I would like to impose laws upon my citizens. Perhaps we should be able to customize our governments directly through the game (not just through the editor)? For example, you could have a constitutional monarchy (such as the UK) or a religious republic (such as Iran).

I agree. The civ system of government is too one dimensional. having two components which could be mixed and matched sounds like a good idea.

(religious, feudal, consitutional, libertarian, conservative, communist).(despotism, monarchy, republic, democracy)

[woody]

Originally posted by TacticalGrace
depends how much the creditors have put in. If you give someone $1000 credit then paying it back is the debtor's problem. If you give someone $10,000,000 then it's your problem...

Well, according to the financials, they've only got about $12 million in cash left, and they'll burn through that in a year. After that, do you think anyone will loan them any more money? 2003 is the last year for Infogrames!

[Willem]

Originally posted by woody


Well, according to the financials, they've only got about $12 million in cash left, and they'll burn through that in a year. After that, do you think anyone will loan them any more money? 2003 is the last year for Infogrames!

A lot can happen in a year! "You shouldn't count the chickens until the eggs are hatched."