Wow! First post:cool:

I noticed that many times culturally developed ancient cities such as Mediolanum tend to dominate other cities belonging to civs spawning in Middle Ages. The dominated cities end up completelly surrounded by Roman teritorry and stuck at size of 1. High culture didn't give new territories in real history so I think it's unrealistic to expand your border via culture in Civ.

I think that big cultural centers should instead drain commerce from culturally poor cities as it happens in real life. For example if a tile would belong to Rome and is outside of any Roman city's radius but is in Marseilles radius, then 5% of Marseilles commerce would be given to the nearest Roman city.

Let me know what you think

Do I know you, Har... Rael? :D

If you don't understand, ignore. :king:

this would be a deep change in how civ works. I'm not sure it's safe to do it.

It already sort of does in the fact that that's now one less tile for Marseille to work on. anything mopre I would be against, because it seems to me it would get too complicated. Especially because Europe is so small and cities are so close together, a single tile will generally get culture input from at least 4 cities, generally more. And those cities rarely stay isolated for long in my experience.

What about give more culture and improvements from the start to the cities founded by the late-born civs and/or transfer the culture of the previous owner to the flipped cities (don't remember if already implemented)?

I think thats a pretty good idea to transfer some culture to newly born civs. Just like how they can steal cities and units, they should be able to steal culture.

Culture seems to work fine as it is now. Not sure it really needs changing.

twould be too much of a change i think.

ps. can everyone see the writing on my avatat by the way?