5 CORE things that would improve Civilization considerably

[lugaru]

1) Changed Combat Mechanic: it would be so much more reliable if done by “I hit you, you hit me” (as seen in RTS games and RPG’s) instead of by statistical probability. That way In order for a spear man to take down a helicopter he would have to be able to hit it enough times without it taking him down in a single blow or two. Also that would make better armor, weapons and advantages more useful. Example: An Axeman has 20 hp and does 5 damage per hit, a swordsman has 15 hp but does 10 damage per hit, odds are the swordsman would win in a direct combat with no advantages.
2) Multiply everything by 10: The game is great but a little too granular… your average warrior had 20 for his stats instead of 2 little advantages would be much easier to tack. Likewise small percentile increases to culture, science, economy, they would all make more sense.
3) Constitution, not Civics: Instead of a set number of categories I think new ones should be added as you make discoveries. Once you discover coin, you have one or two options on how to handle your economy. By the end of the game you see 5 or 6 economic models. Many things could be yes or no questions like “legalize prostitution” or “instate a draft” while others could have many options. That way by the end of the game you could end up with a constitution with maybe 10 to 20 questions with many options to make exactly the civ you want.
4) Generic to specific: When you found a religion (a feature I love) you can select which it is. For example you found polytheism and then choose your pantheon. Or when you found monotheism you can choose your monotheistic religion. Same for many other things, generic discoveries and wonders can be attained and then made specific to your culture or whatever alternate history you are imagining.
5) More focus on the civilization rather than the city: Civilization has always been a city builder first, but I would love to see more options on your overall taxation, culture, army and science than what statues and fountains. Multithreaded development would help, such as researching multiple sciences at once or having two or three rules modifying individual elements like culture or wealth.

Any thoughts?

[Cashew]

I agree that the combat system isn't perfect... But as for your suggestion... I'm really not sure how I feel about that to be honest. I can definitely see a need to change the current system, but making it into something practical yet still fun is a great challenge.

With the potential removal/limitation of stacks in Civ V, I think the usefullness of combat odds will take a new shape. I won't condemn your idea of RTS type "you hit me, I hit you" because taking long shot ridiculously lucky odds out of the game can only be a good thing, but we don't even know how the odds system would work in Civ V because there are so many unknown variables.

[Harle]

Some good ideas.

The larger stat thing is a little redundant. Assuming the game doesn't truncate decimals, adding .1 to 2 is the same as adding 1 to 20. Doesn't change anything. 2.1 is the same as 21/10.

That said, I'd definitely like to see lots and lots of combat modifiers. Terrain has always had modifiers associated with it, but I'm hoping we'll see more unit-type specific bonuses and penalties, like horses attacking infantry in a forest would impose a large penalty, while plains would offer a big advantage to horses.

I'd also love to see weather having an effect on combat, but there's not really anything to suggest they've implemented any kind of weather system, so it's a bit of a pipe dream.

[Beimeith]

It is likely too late for any core game aspects to be changed, but that said, I agree with the OP in terms of the combat needing changes so a weak unit can't destroy a more powerful unit.

I die a little every time I see cavalry destroy a tank.

[lugaru]

It is likely too late for any core game aspects to be changed, but that said, I agree with the OP in terms of the combat needing changes so a weak unit can't destroy a more powerful unit.

I die a little every time I see cavalry destroy a tank.

Yeah, probably too late but I had these things on my mind for a while and figured rather late than never. Also even the companies that listen to the fans the most cant be counted on to incorporate every big suggestion, so I'm posting it more for the fans than the DEV team. I made mods for CIV 4 (nothing you would remember, did not publish, it was stuff for me and my friends) and those where some of the barriers I encountered.

Harle: I would love to see tiny advantages left and right on units. Like Spear giving you good odds to make a free first attack and being good against cavalry, axes partially ignoring shields and so on.

Cashew: If they really overhaul the probability system I'll be happy but I would prefer something less super unpredictable.

BTW does anyone here play TOTAL WAR games? I would love to see improved agents a la Total war, spies, assassins and diplomats that improve with missions completed.

[eireksten]

1)
Civ4 already had the "i hit you"/"you hit me" functionality. It just doesn't appear that way when you initiate combat. Check the combat log.

2)
As mentioned, multiplying everything by 10 doesn't change anything. Don't be afraid of fractional numbers.

3)
Could of course be an idea. Or such a thing could be done in about a trillion other ways. I'm sure the developers have put quite some effort into game design (and that it probably is a little late to change something like this right now). Anyway, I don't see how this exact change would improve the game considerably.

4)
Have you tried the "Choose religion" option in Civ 4?

5)
Depending on how you play, military (and the other things you mention) could easily be more important than city building. In Civ 4 you could also change what you researched every turn to somewhat multithreaded research. Not that I'm against setting multithreaded research, but I don't think it changes much, and thus won't improve gameplay much either.

All in all I don't think these ideas will improve the game much. And to others, I don't see why you make such a big deal out of cavalry/spearmen taking out tanks? Just imagine that the tank had some malfunction or something. Anyway, it's a game, not a real life simulator. Just accept the rules of the game as such.

[JaFO]

I always loved the 'spearman vs tank'-scenarios.
It does make sense when you look at the units as abstract concepts instead of actual vehicles/soldiers.

In Civ 4 the horsemen already had an advantage against infantry as they could retreat from battle. On open plains this was more effective as the movement-modifiers do allow you to get away even furhter when compared to the forest-regions. As a result I think if you were to introduce even more modifiers you'd risk complicating the combat.

Besides ... if you want 'realistic' then what about the absurd concept that you as a leader manage to survive and lead your civilization from stone age to far future ?

// constitution v civics
One of the things to consider is that Civ has been a rather abstract simulation of (human) history.

The 'draft' is already modelled as some of the civics allow you to buy military units at reduced cost (I think it is the fascist-civic, but I'm not sure). And there's the 'conscription'-research ... you should skip that if you don't like the idea of forcing people to join the army

Similar things can be said about the 'prostitution'-concept. Have you ever considered what the 'entertainer'-specialists are ?
Did you really think they only ever are clowns, artists or musicians ? ...

So if you want 'prostitution' as a concept in Civ then you also have to think about how the entertainer-specialist improves happiness in a city.
You'd have to introduce the 'red light district'-improvement ... which would be disabled by a 'prostitution is illegal'-edict.

[Edmundrw]

1)
5)
Depending on how you play, military (and the other things you mention) could easily be more important than city building. In Civ 4 you could also change what you researched every turn to somewhat multithreaded research. Not that I'm against setting multithreaded research, but I don't think it changes much, and thus won't improve gameplay much either.

Sure you can do that in Civ 4 but if multithreaded research were something they wanted to explore in Civ 5 there are lots of interesting things they could do.
At default research would just be x beakers to science no matter how many techs you're researching but certain buildings, wonders and civics could generate tech specific beakers e.g. Theatres add an additional x(potentially a value = to the cities culture rate) amount of beakers to research of music per turn regardless of what your science rate is being put towards - in, say, 40 turns you get music if you build enough theatres. (you could also potentially use this method to get a tech or two out of sequence). Some Civics or wonders could cause a % of a city's beakers to increase if you choose to research just one tech or if you choose to research more than one tech. e.g. a Theocratic regime may have an advantage in researching just one tech at a time but a more liberal society may get a bonus in researching multiple techs at once.
There's lots that can be done to explore multithreaded research that would improve the game (strategically and in historical accuracy) that would be more interesting than just splitting the total beakers out between techs.

[danangleland]

Some good ideas.

I'd also love to see weather having an effect on combat, but there's not really anything to suggest they've implemented any kind of weather system, so it's a bit of a pipe dream.

Weather might be a bit strange in Civ though, because each turn is at least a year (and then only toward the end of the game). So a few squares might have a storm over it for one turn (whether that turn is 1 year or 50 years it is rather odd).

[lugaru]

Weather might be a bit strange in Civ though, because each turn is at least a year (and then only toward the end of the game). So a few squares might have a storm over it for one turn (whether that turn is 1 year or 50 years it is rather odd).

Yeah, if implemented it would have to be totally random, because since turns are often years (or heck, 5 year chunks) it could be any season. Still I would not mind seeing random weather specific to terrains, like a small chance at sand storms or snow storms in deserts or tundra.

Going back to the other stuff I mildly regret using prostitution as an example instead of something like "censorship" or "capital punishment". Still I do all my posting at an overnight job and by 4 am my mind is just a shell.

But yeah, 90% of the modding I did for CIV 4 was with the Civics, they just felt a little too abstract and the bonus they provided often had little to do with the concept they embodied. I would love to see micro civics (as laws) that let me choose for example between

Free healthcare (increased cost, increased health)
Private healthcare (reduced cost, reduced health)

or for example

Religious law (reduced corruption, unhapiness from foreign religion)
secular law (just pretty even across the board).

You know, lots of small things with small trade offs so that you can really build exactly the society you want. But again I mostly agree with you guy's... CIV has 2 faces, the competitive "gotta beat it on the hardest level" and the simulation "I would like to explore alternate history". I tend more to simulation, although I do play a lot of multiplayer.

And I do remember the game having the "I hit you, you hit me" system but it was extremely random. Yeah, it is a thrill to watch somebody go all rambo and take down a helicopter with a bow but when the computer does it to you, well, you usually need to get a punch proof monitor.