 |
| |
|
|
Prince
|
Jan 2001
time: 03:38
| |
|
|
Shouldn’t change:
-The focus of colonization on trade and low level economics, turning goods into other goods, selling goods to various trade partners(the natives, the other nations and your home colony) is what made colonization, colonization. Some extra automatisation options to reduce micromanagement are fine. But
colonization would no longer be colonization, if the goods would for example just function as the resources of civ4.
-The bonuses of each nation: the bonuses the various nations got in colonization helped diversify them and they did fit their nations well. If I would do anything to them, would I increase them and make the nations even more diverse. We are not dealing with new nations in colonization after all, all come with their own culture and history.
Should change:
-There should be other victory option then revolution. Some type of "Canadian victory", a reward for having very good relations with your king. Your king grants you much autonomy, but your nation still remains a royal servant of the king.
-Giving all goods some sort of function, beyond the value you can sell them for. Coats could maybe help colonies in cold regions, cigars could make the upper class jobs more productive, rum could maybe give your ships a morale boost, and cloth would help in colonies with average climate.
|
|
| |
|
|
Deity
Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia - FUKCOV
|
Dec 2000
time: 22:38
| |
|
|
[QUOTE] Originally posted by kolpo
Shouldn’t change:
-The focus of colonization on trade and low level economics, turning goods into other goods, selling goods to various trade partners(the natives, the other nations and your home colony) is what made colonization, colonization.
absolutely, I agree.
Some extra automatisation options to reduce micromanagement are fine.
Yeah. I played Col for the first time only a couple of years ago, and the interface was totally frustrating.
Should change:
-There should be other victory option then revolution. Some type of "Canadian victory", a reward for having very good relations with your king. Your king grants you much autonomy, but your nation still remains a royal servant of the king.
I dunno.
Giving all goods some sort of function, beyond the value you can sell them for. Coats could maybe help colonies in cold regions, cigars could make the upper class jobs more productive, rum could maybe give your ships a morale boost, and cloth would help in colonies with average climate.
I lean against, on historical grounds, and gameplay.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
I'm thinking:
Add some of the Protestant vs Catholicism rivalaries going on at the time.
Reign in but don't eliminate nation traits.
Incorporate the automation options from Civ IV for those that want them.
Perhaps a downsized civic list from Civ IV should also be included?
Govt : Monarch or Republic; Economy : Mercentialism or Free Market; Religious : Catholic or Protestent.
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Nov 1999
time: 22:38
| |
|
|
Should change:
Starting points in the original map...IIRC, England would always land in North America, some of us like to play with American maps but don't want to travel down the coast to land somewhere different
The way every one of my colonies would be surrounded by other nations' armies even when I'm at peace. I don't recall that happening in real life. And I'm a peaceful guy.
An option for sailing in from the west...yes, its not historical, but for once I would have liked to fight it out on the West Coast
If my Lumberjack has to defend my colony and is skilled at it, let me have to option whether to convert him to Veteran vs keeping his orignal status
Shouldn't change:
I want a real Americas map, not just random maps
Don't lose the schools and specialization of colonists
Insane wish:
Maps for other continents. I always wanted to fight to colonize Africa or Asia. You can have the same European nations and Tribes, just let me take over French Indochina
|
|
| |
|
|
Prince
|
May 2001
time: 04:38
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by AoA
An option for sailing in from the west...yes, its not historical, but for once I would have liked to fight it out on the West Coast. |
I have repeatedly settled on the west coast. It was always a question whether the loss of all those early turns my picky pioneers sacrificed to get to the promised land could be compensated by the advantage of being far away from the competition and having more advanced Indian tribes to trade with. (Most of the time it could not, but the games were still fun.) I had to look out for that founding father who cuts down travel time for the Pacific route.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Prince
Christchurch, New Zealand
|
Apr 1999
time: 15:38
| |
|
|
I think they should start off by replicating the game rules as they were, though with the new interface, graphics etc. THEN they add other stuff, like extra founding fathers and other game options etc. and perhaps making them optional. Then you can always play the "classic" game if you want or play with expanded rules.
I hope we will get a graphic representation that tells us whether or not a scout has visited an Indian village. It was hard to remember (unless you wrote it down) just where the scouts had been.
|
|
| |
|
|
Prince
|
Jan 2001
time: 03:38
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guynemer
I disagree about the nation traits. They seemed rather unbalanced to me the first go around. Clearly, there should be some civ-specific traits, but the originals could be refined a bit. |
Yes But I think this rebalancing should be done by increasing the traits of the weaker nations, so the nations become even more diverse. The English for example could get an even bigger immigration bonus, so they are better balanced with the Dutch.
Having only 4 nations gives them the perfect opportunity to make them very diverse yet balanced. I'm in favour of balanced nations, but I prefer asymmetric balanced ones (huge advantages of nation A, are balanced by giving nation B huge advantages of a completely different type).
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
Montréal Québec
|
Sep 2004
time: 22:38
| |
|
|
Shouldn't change
-The economy : should be staying... It needs more polish (what doesn't, this game dates back in 1994).
-Indians relations : unlike Age of Empire 3, Indians should remain fodder to European fire. Like in real history, genocidal campaigns should be made available. One possible new feature should be a complex system of relationships between Indian nations, in which Europeans allies would be dragged into inter-tribal wars (just like the French were brought into the Iroquois vs Hurons/Algonquians/Micmacs/etc... wars.
Should change
-Add new players. Firaxis doesn't need to add that many nations, it only needs to add Portugal and maybe Sweden. That's it. Russia, Denmark and other minors don't need to be added. What we could see is competition from rival same nation colonizers. The English colonization of North America is a great example of this, no need to be reminded of the Maryland-Delaware/Pensylvania contentious, or the inter-New England competition... Having several domestic competitors would add to the gameplay, not only full fledged wars against them would be impossible, but you would resort on the Crown/Estates to settle out some conflicts.
-The game's diplomacy, especially your relation to your mother country should be brought closer to history. That means, colonial wars should be subject to European wars... Only the Seven Years War was started in North America.
The game shouldn't be limited to winning via Independance. I'm sure Firaxis could find alternatives...
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
Montréal Québec
|
Sep 2004
time: 22:38
| |
|
|
Oh, and let's add some other ressources like coffee, maybe make agricultural product more diversified than wheat... and worth something on the market...
|
|
| |
|
|
Prince
|
May 2001
time: 04:38
| |
|
|
It's probably too late for this wish, but something that should not change in my opinion is the style of the manual:
- a descriptive and precise language
- no major omissions (like the UN rules in the Civ4 manual)
- a very clear structure (as you might guess, I am not fond of the Basics / Advanced Rules division in the Pirates and Civ4 manuals)
- a useful introductory chapter (particularly the section "Colonies and Colonists" that gives you an excellent overview of the game mechanics clearly inspired by the corresponding section "Cities and Civilizations" in the original Civilization manual)
- a well-written historical appendix that really puts you in the mood for colonizing a new world.
For me, a comprehensive and well-written manual is an important contribution to my enjoyment of the game and the original Civilization and Colonization manuals were the best ones that I have read. (If they do not have enough space, they should rather leave out all those tables with information that can change with the first patch and that is more easily looked up in the Colonizopedia anyway.)
|
|
| |
|
|
Settler
Portsmouth, England
|
Apr 2002
time: 22:38
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Verrucosus
It's probably too late for this wish, but something that should not change in my opinion is the style of the manual:
|
Bang on! The manuals for the old Civ games and Col itself were excellent and I found myself returning to them time and again as I became better aquainted with the games.
The modern tendency to either include thin outline guides in the useless DVD boxes or else put the full manual on a .pdf should be resisted. Give me a nice big box and a nice big manual every time.
|
|
| |
|
|
Prince
|
May 2001
time: 04:38
| |
|
|
Tech trading was mentioned in one article and borders are shown on some of the screenshots, so I am confident that you will get what you wish for.
I agree that a less static game environment is desirable for the timespan, but they should not go overboard with it. I am afraid that a full-blown tech tree à la Civ4 might overshadow the steady growth of European population, infrastructure and trade as the main source of change in the new world. That is what the race between the colonial powers should be about, not technological advance (which, in any case, should be driven by the mother country). In particular, I hope that the four powers will have the same level of military technology pretty much by design. Maybe automatic and simultaneous advances with slightly randomized dates (like in the first Imperialism game) would work.
Verrucosus
P.S.: I think I will start a game of Colonization myself next weekend ... perhaps on Discoverer level because it's been so long.
|
|
| |
|
|
Technical Assistant
Of the Peanuts Gallery
|
Apr 2004
time: 21:38
| |
|
|
I think I'll solidly throw my hat in the "no technology research" ring. Col is not about teching, and that would really annoy me if it were in the game. I much prefer the game to be about developing the New World. Perhaps if it had periodic technology advancements I wouldn't mind, but if it's a primary gameplay feature, that would be irritating.
|
|
| |
|
|
Prince
|
Nov 2005
time: 03:38
| |
|
|
Hmmm--- So i always regarded the liberty-bells as Col-Beakers and the founding fathers as techs and independence as space-race-victory...
What should change is the military - but that i guess is a given, that the Civ1-stylish combat of total win or lose are history by now. But here again: Yeah, maybe some tech, like Verrucosus suggests, in a Imperialism I style maybe. Or maybe steady tech-rates (oh-oh --- one nation could have a slight bonus here) with just the tree-path selectable... and lump-sums to be paid to make the tech avaiable once it is researched.
EDIT: Founding Fathers: Wouldnt it be logical, that one FF can only be a FF of 1 (ONE!) of the nations ? So who chooses first gets him/her denying that person to the others ? Kinda making them into wonders...
EDIT II: So when all are chosen and members of the Contintental Congrss of some colony, then the colonies can try to ´steal´ (convince to come to one´s own CC) them... making this process kind of like espionage in Civ4 (or an addition to a maybe existing espioange system in C4C)
EDIT III: On research again: Maybe some techs should become avaiable after research by, instead of paying a lump sum, accepting ´penalties´ related to other game-mechanics, like a tax-raise or lose of liberty-bells. Whatever makes sense. Like production machinery would incure a raised tax on the product of the machine. Again here could be differencies between the nations.
Also some FF could influence the motherland in certain ways, which will affect tech-costs. Maybe FFs (or some of them) should be chosen to serve either in your CC or as an ambassador in your motherland (but only one, or a low number, of these at any given time)... This would be a bit like your choices in Civ4 regarding GPs. Like: Do i have Adam Smith to be in my CC, increasing productivity of all factories by 10% or do i sent him as Amabassador to my motherland to advocate free(r) trade of production-techs, which will lead to a 25% reduction of the costs of making those avaiable in the colonies ?
EDIT IV: What exactly are the benefits of the FFs, in the colony or as ambassador, should not neccessarily spelled out to the last point. Just give a vague description of what the person did in real history and let people follow their guts. But that means, that the uses of the FFs need to be as well balanced as they are historically thinkable (not saying´accurate´, cause this involves a lot of ahistoric options of course)
Last edited by Unimatrix11 on 18-07-2008 at 23:55
|
|
| |
|
|
Settler
|
May 2007
time: 19:38
| |
|
|
There needs to be some way to keep track of the wagon trains.
I'll have a bunch of then and soon can't tell which is which and where they are supposed to be headed.
I usually wind up with them going to the wrong town thaat can't use what they are carrying because I lost track.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Oh DEFINITELY! A much better trade network management system is REQUIRED!
Great idea TLF!
|
|
| |
|
|
Emperor
??
|
Jan 2004
time: 19:38
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dale
Oh DEFINITELY! A much better trade network management system is REQUIRED!
Great idea TLF! |
Yeah, I hate the broken trade route system from freeCol (and I assume the original as well. Custom houses were a must, and I hope they aren't included at all in that form in the new game.
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
Montréal Québec
|
Sep 2004
time: 22:38
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
