How shall we define our provinces?

A few proposals so far:

Growing Capital Province
Our governor now takes control over every city that we build. The province grows until a certain size (# cities) and then a new province is designed as needed and so on...

Variant A:
Provinces start small (perhaps 3-4 cities each) and can grow as we get bigger as a nation.

Variant B:
Provinces start big (perhaps 8 cities each) and stay quite static as we get bigger as a nation.

City States
A new governor is elected for each city we build (maybe up to 3 cities or so). As we grow, governors are reassigned to regions.

i support the city-states version early on. we should also decline any mayorship then.

as alternative, we could have a 3-4 city circular province around the capitol with 4 provinces neighboring this.

pattern would be:

|
2 | 3
/ \
/ \
-----| 1 |-----
\ /
\ /
4 | 5
|

(hope this comes out)

I'm in favor of static provinces as that will allow each to develope their own identity and history. Shuffling cities from province to province will only give us schizofrenic provinces and governors. ;)

I do think we need more governors/senators though. (Because I need a job. :)) I'm leaning towards variant A if we can manage to make three or four provinces around the capital city that would be fairly equal production/corruption-wise.

Actually, disorganizer's patter is what I have in mind. I don't like the city staes especially now that dis has pointed out that mayors would then fall by the wayside. (Hey, I said I need a job!)

Trouble is, we are on the north coast so we can't have provinces to the north - unless we move further south before settling.

What if we would leave the capitol as city-state (maybe enhanced with the directly connected cities, depending on geographic review) and then circulate our provinces around it?

The nice thing about city states is that we get a larger senate earlier. One possible con of this is that the production is not centralized at all. Not that this isn't bad for roleplay, but perhaps for the good of the nation.

Another, as donsig mentioned, is that I agree shifting provinces is bad.

Could we elect more governors now and then "assign" them as we get provinces?

no. no base in the rules for that. rules say:
governors of newly aquired provinces are appointed. only governors of existing provinces are elected ;-)

I proposed a system of sentors at large, which would seem to fix the problem. We'ed need a few changes to the CoL and CoS.

Also, I am in favor of creating large, static provinces, not neccisarily based on the number of cities, but by natural geographc barriers, like mountains, rivers, etc.

we should remember that joining provinces together is not as bad as it seems. even splitting may be good.
we split a province with no harm and we joined two of them into one with no harm in the last game.

if we startup with small ones, we could join and group them to get good production in all of them later on.

I agree with Octavian and think that we shouldn't mess with provincial borders to solve our senate issues.

I'm pretty comfortable with letting our governor run the land until we really can see how our provinces may be defined or the # of cities gets too much. I think anything else (especially city states) might be too much hassle for really little gain. We are still at quite an early stage and other systems may require a bit too much of speculation, IMHO.

Joining them? I know we've done that before, with Greater Cormyr and Chondote, but I'd be against it. Combining, seperating, etc. loses some of the heritage the each province has. Also, we end up with lots of confused people when the changes take place.

The progression of city states to provinces is a natural one. We'd simply be following in the footsteps of historical progression. The identities grown by the provinces need not be lost. The original city state provinces would eventually become the dukedoms and then counties of provinces.

we didnt in the last game though ;-)
only civinator was confused when he came back and his province was gone :-P


anyways: should we info-poll this?

You know, dis, your missing the other end of the bold tag in you sig...

Anyway, just the setup of the game would make it more beneficial to have larger provinces to start. Lots of province approval polls would have to go up, and they might not even make quroum! It simlpy would be easier to start with larger provinces.

oct: hey thanks! it must have been lost on the way from apolytonia to fanatika. maybe that was the reason for the sole closing [/ B] in the apo-signature?

i think that the best way to handle the situation would be to create a multiplicity of small provinces that can then be combined and divided as needed in order to increase efficiency and decrease production. a quick and agile system such as this would be out best hope for maximizing our economic and industrial potential.

neutral leader is a good, responsible provincial governor

neutral-leader: you maybe will be a good governor, but at the moment you are not :-P

I like the concept of what dis proposed earlier:
as alternative, we could have a 3-4 city circular province around the capitol with 4 provinces neighboring this.

pattern would be:

|
2 | 3
/ \
/ \
-----| 1 |-----
\ /
\ /
4 | 5
|
Obviously, it would need to be somewhat adjusted for local geography.

Sure, it is just a principle, but the lines will follow roughly geo-lines. Maybe we will have just a small inner province and extend it later as the others grow and have courthouses etc?

Otherwise, the 1 should be 4-5 cities big, the others maybe 10-12 cities i think. Always being modified by geo-lines of course.

The only problem with keeping the capital province in the middle is the fact it's on the sea. We don't know if there's a landmass on the other side, and if there is, it could be inhabitated.

Doesn't seem likely, since it's pretty far north.

I really like the idea of senators-at-large with fixed provinces. Although I would support smaller provinces (5-7 cities) based on geographic divisions. We'd need a change in the rules, but this would be a good move. I would say that the senate = 1/4 size of the census quorum, rounded up to nearest even number and based on the previous term's quorum to avoid the chicken and egg quorum/election timing issue.

we will rarely find a geographical division with 5-7 cities. and 10-12 cities prooved to be handleable last game ;-)
so we maybe should stick with it. it does NOT mean a province HAS to get up to 10-12. if geography is good, it could always be 4 or maybe 8.

the only thing is that the capitol and the FP-province should not be so big because they have a benefit of low corruption

Once we have fully explored we can decide how to divide the land into provinces.

we should try to make geographical features the provincial boundries, some provinces may then be smaller or bigger than others but hey, a province is a province, to begin with we have the city states, of course the governors would have alot of power since each controls a city (which early on can be a large % of pop, growth ect) and later as we expand we determine the boundries and reform, that way each city has a progressive history that isnt lost. From city state to province.....when necessary

Like in real life ;-)

I think that's not the idea of provinces!! Provinces are groups of cities organised together under one leader. I think we will expand fast enough that we can have 2-3 provinces soon. I think, as much as possible, province boundries should be preserved throughout the ages.

Maybe I could start an informational poll about the definition of provinces? I'm not sure of our options so far. I still think with only 1 city and not much map explored, we are still in the dark about provinces. Anyone not comfortable with city #2 joining Bohemia? I think I'll need to hear a bit more support for city-states before making a poll. I don't think this debate is really drawing up enough discussion yet for me to consider a change.

I think that with the current discussion we have about city placement, the "core" cities will be place very close to Bavaria. It would be kind of senseless to break this up into 5 city-states. Make the first Province (Bohemia) get 5 cities (including Bavaria) max. After we see the location of the first 5 cities (Bohemia in its true form), we can work on discussing the layout of more Provinces. By the first 5 "core" cities, I mean the ones we plant around Bavaria. I'm sure our next Province will be established in the direction of the Aztecs, following the Military (hopefully). With the view that a tight packing of the first group of cities is necassary, splitting this group up would just cause unrest, I believe. AJ has a point about the Province identity and about the history and culture of a Province. Let's not go screwing that up to satisfy some weak political agenda.

BOHEMIA - The core cities. Then we move on from there.

We should look at the terrain for defining boundires. We have a few mountian chains that could do this. We could even use the Doughnut Forest as a natural barrier, and base another boundry on that. It just doesn't make any RL sense to define boundries on the cities they contain.

Good idea Octavian X. I would only add that provinces are supposed to be defined well ahead of their actual creation so we'd best get a move on!

We could do that now, but there's still a lot of territory to be defined. How was it done during the last game? 128 tiles? 124? Include coast and sea? Or just coast?

As I recall, none of the provinces were equal in size... Also, I think that we have time to wait before we define some borders. Let our warrior explore some more, and see if it finds more natural borders. We may also need to place current Aztec territory somewhere :mwaha:

Octavian, wasn't it like June when you joined the game?

a 1st proposal for our province borders:

key-features:
* using mountan range in the east do define province border
* using the forest south as border
* ensuring at least 3 provinces can profit from low-corruption
* ensuring we get at least 3 provinces very fast

the mountain range will defend our capitol province to the southern enemies. thats why the border is south of the mountains

the bonus-tiles are included in bohemia to ensure quick growth in the capitol province. maybe we will redesign this later, but at the moment it seems fit and pais for the disadvantage of having a province with a capitol on the borders.

province 4 is maybe not a province, as we dont know how land will continue there. if theres only the sea, we delete it and only have 2 and 3 built.

the borders need to be fine-worked of course, but it will show the general idea of it.
any comments/other proposals?

I like it!

Originally posted by Shaitan
I like it!

I like it too! It defines provinces for now nicely. In the future we will have to have discussions about where the provinces end in the west and the south but that can be done when we know the terrain. This proposal allows us to know which province new cities are in. We also should wait before fixing the border between provinces two and three. We may want that border moved a bit west - but we can decide after we see more.

Yes, but Disorganizer can't define the borders. Only the domestic department can do that, I believe. What if the domestic department doesn't want their borders like that? Stop taking over everyone's job dis. ;)

disorganizer is working for the Domestic Department, through the Cartographic Office.

I guess I did see that, but since I'm also deputy, Chiefpaco said I could aid in defining the borders. *tries to beat Shaitan's T3 line while editing...* Plus, I want to see if there's any other borders south of there. Coast, hills, rivers, even a line of trees or terrain. That (the borders) seems too close in my opinion. Plus, I don't like having a possible province in the sea/ocean. We're pretty far north.

Everybody aids in defining borders. Everybody who's willing, anyway. What are your thoughts on disorganizer's proposal? Do you have a different proposal in mind?

Originally posted by Chieftess
*tries to beat Shaitan's T3 line while editing...*
You beat me. ;)

Originally posted by Shaitan

You beat me. ;)

:lol:

CT: thats why we discuss it... My job at the cartographic office is to push forward discussion of borders. With any measures i see appropriate :-P
So my job is to start discussion, what i did. Btw: Thos proposals will always end in a poll. Binding and Official... Now dare you dont implement them :-P PI is watching you ;-)

Maybe it was your wording that threw me off. ;) I was going to have a PI watch you. And probably the way I interpreted the constitution.

Varient A all the way

ha! dual posting!
@shaino wonder your so fast. im only a cable.

Originally posted by Chieftess
Yes, but Disorganizer can't define the borders. Only the domestic department can do that, I believe. What if the domestic department doesn't want their borders like that? Stop taking over everyone's job dis. ;)

And here I thought it was up to the citizens.... (silly me)

Well, in fact it is. The rules say the domestic department sais who MAPS the borders, not who DEFINES them. Now thats nice ;-)
Anyway, due to the free-speach act, nobody can actually deny discussion on the topic ;-) And as we have 2 supporters minimum, we can even force them to put up a binding poll. But as this area is not governed by a department (yet), we could even setup a binding poll as citizens :-))

Perhaps we should just poll to be sure our second city will be part of Bohemia. We need to know that now but can't define the exact borders of the provinces till we see more terrain.

I think too many polls will just kill the game. I mean, I don't want it ending up where we have a poll on every possible posistion on the map!

We could define the lines we have in the proposal, which will help us until we know more and will bring up to 3 provinces.
If we find a line where we can end one of the provinces, we will poll on putting a borderline there.

I think this is a good start. The physical terrain for the most part will be a constant that we can work with. the lines can be futher clarify as we progress in city placement. we may have issue with a city placed on a hill top though i suppose...

I like the lines. I would wait some more, to see if the mountians on the sea go down further. I don't like the idea of the capital on the edge of the province.

the benefit of the edge-idea is that more provinces profit from low-corruption. if the capitol is in the middle of the province, only the capitol province will profit from it.
an idea would be to place the capitol as its own province (city province) and group the normal provinces around it (i would then prefer the capitol=capitol province to be governed by domestic department as governor). or maybe to have a different province-capitol than the national capitol (bohemia would have a capitol of the province and would hold the national capitol).

Originally posted by disorganizer
the benefit of the edge-idea is that more provinces profit from low-corruption. if the capitol is in the middle of the province, only the capitol province will profit from it.
an idea would be to place the capitol as its own province (city province) and group the normal provinces around it (i would then prefer the capitol=capitol province to be governed by domestic department as governor). or maybe to have a different province-capitol than the national capitol (bohemia would have a capitol of the province and would hold the national capitol).

Great, I give him a job and the first thing he wants to do is get rid of me. Great. ;)
Seriously though, I think that it is fine to have the Capital in a Province. In terms of Provincial v National Capital, take a look at the guidelines I've proposed as Provincial Law.

I would propose that the first few cities are nominaly part of Bohemia until we no enough of the terrain to make an informed decition on borders. I think the benefits of the capital should be shared, but that the borders proposed are FAR too close to the capital. Give it some space people!! Also, the province in the North may be all water, which would be a second-rate province.

How about a new screenshot? Don't we have more info from last night's turn chat?

I agree that I would like to see a little more before assigning borders, but knowing what we know now, this is really good. Nice job, Dis.

Not much news there. The forest line seems to be spanning from bavaria to the south-west up to aztech-land.

The mountain range seems to span to northwest.

See cartographic office for a map. Not enough things for discussion. We should continue exploration to south and east.

May sounds either a) really stupid or b) really obvious, but when we destroy the Aztecs, would it make sense to make all fo the Aztec territory a single province? For the reasons of their proximity to one another, their over-all distance from the capitol, and their provincial history and identity, I suggest grouping the Aztecs into a single province (Aztekae?)

We must see their territory before that, as we decided to use geographical provinces.
But i second you that the idea of having culturally oriented provinces as well is charming ;-)

Maybe if other support this as well, a poll of an addition to our rules would be fine, to change the sole geopgraphic orientation there to geographic and/or culturally oriented.

dis, could you update your proposal with the new terrain that's been revealed?

*sigh*
okok.. for all unimaginative people:
here it is.

It not too nice, but i think we wont decide it now (we will propably wait 1-2 more tc's minimum for it)

One small change. That single tile that was in "Prov 4" should go to the capital province. You can see that it is coast on 2 sides and abuts the cap prov on the other 2 sides.

I think we will need further information on that, as we dont know where the land goes till now... i would prefer waiting till we get a view of the right side of this picture...

anyways, the main idea we seem to comply on is to use the mountain range as one borderline.

I still don't like it. ;) I think we should wait until we have more land. Otherwise, we'll run into provincial redistribution problems again. Remember Greater Cormyr?

I have to admit, I sort of like the single city for the capital province (and Forbidden Palace province) idea too. Sort of like a Washington DC...

DBB? District of Bavaria Bohemia?

Bavaria, District of Bohemia. DB for short. :)

The idea of the capital having a province to itself is appealing, but seems a tad pointless to me. Plus it could result in the capital governorship becoming a relatively unpopular post.

I have to agree on that. It's realistic, but here we have to think about game play. In the last game, we were lucky to have a huge pangaea-like continent. So, we were able to have large provinces. We still need to see what ours looks like. If they're 'smaller' continents, we may only have 2-3 provinces per continent.

I think the capital(s) governorship will always be an appealing position. It's always going to have the lowest corruption and likely the highest citizen count in the nation. With a single low corruption city it'll be the perfect spot for somebody who wants to contribute and be involved in running the government but can't commit the time to run a 10-12 city province.

It will also get our Senate up to a participatory size faster without using the city-state idea. All of the provinces near the capital will have some good low corruption cities. I like this idea more and more as I think about it.

Chieftess - Size doesn't matter. The capital province would be a single city size. An island continent that nicely fits 2 or 3 provinces would still fit 2 or 3 provinces plus the capital province. Since we've got at least 2 other civs on our landmass, both from a different cultural group, we're probably on a fairly sizeable chunk of earth in any case.

I would like to point out that we must get moving on this. According to Section D.1.A of the CoL, provincial borders must be defined ahead of expansion and must be approved by congress. Since this has not been done our second city will not officialy be a part of Bohemia and it will be up to the Domestic Leader (which we don't have) to post build queues. (See D.1.F of the CoL.) Also, according to CoL Section C.2.F.7, the Domestic Department is responsible for organizing the mapping of provincial borders.

I think, at the very least, we need a citizen poll to confirm that city number two will be part of Bohemia.

Originally posted by Shaitan
Chieftess - Size doesn't matter.

:rotfl:

a few thoughts on this:
a. i like the idea of making conquered ares their own province based on a cultural similarity
2. the mountains west of bavaria are a beautifully set provincial border, we should make use of them
3. the capitol should have a province, where it will be both national and provincial capitol, that streamlines administration tremendously through intelligent centralization
d. placing bavaria at the edge of the province to spread the low-corruption wealth is, i think, a good way of maximizing its advantages

just my viewpoint to encourage discussion.

An independent Capital ditrict.... Intriguing.... I would be a interesting concept.

We could call it like the Mexicans do.... Federal District of Bavaria.

Bavaria DB would sound better to me :-)

Anyways, the BDB could be governed by the domestic deputy, which will solve unpopularity problems.

@ct:
greater cormyr was split because the existing governor left the job. not because it was so big. we soon regretted that, and started to enlarge our provinces.

I move that we vote on provinces now. Two choices. Disorganizer's original plan and the capital city province with disorganizer's division for the first 3 non-capital provinces.

I think it's too early to set the borders to the south. There are still too many unknowns in that direction. We should never, ever vote to accept borders drawn in the unknown void! There is also that one tile you pointed out Shaitan that should be in Bohemia. Rather than vote on disorganizer's complete proposal wouldn't it be better to vote on the borders for Bohemia itself? Governor of Bohemia or the Domestic Leader will be setting build queues for new cities.

I'm fine with starting there. I suggest a poll then to approve the capital city province at a "perfect" 21 tiles. Future provinces to be defined as we see territory. New cities will be governed by the Dom Leader until the provinces are mapped out.

As stated before, the proposal is just a discussion base.

Originally posted by donsig
We should never, ever vote to accept borders drawn in the unknown void!

Exactly. So, why are we drawing borders into nothingness in the first place? That's what I've been trying to say. :) We need more warriors for expansion.

Pardon my graphics here. This is my proposal for immediate adoption. For now, define the capital city province. Begin definition of the next two provinces. North of the mountains is one province. South of the mountains is another province. This uses the main feature that we've uncovered (the mountains) as a natural provincial border. As we explore more we can further define the provinces.

Some people will want to wait until we see everything. Why? We simply go along with the natural flow of knowledge. We define the world as we see it. As our view changes so will our definition. This is a simple yet emininently workable solution given our current knowledge.

I like this proposal, however would modify it to include the tiles that will be under the control of cities in the DB (right now, the soon-to-be-second city will have a chunk of it's land outside the DB).

That city will actually be founded outside of the DB, in Province 2. The settler is on top of the cow tile right now. It needs to move one tile east to settle.

EDIT: Oops. I mean one tile WEST. One tile east would give our settler a refreshing bath.

I like it! :goodjob:

Shaitan, thanks. We may have to bring the borders in then for the same reasons. However, in general I like this plan.

Originally posted by Danke
Shaitan, thanks. We may have to bring the borders in then for the same reasons. However, in general I like this plan.
It should work out fine. DB has a "perfect" area. That is, it's set to control all of the tiles that the city will be able to reach at maximum size. Cities from other provinces that can reach DB may still use those tiles but DB has first dibs on what tiles it's going to use within its own provincial border.

While we're restricted to 12 maximum pop there will be plenty of options for tile switching. When we can go over 12, DB will be set to become a true metropolis. Fitting for the capital. ;)

lets not get ahead of oursleves in drawing up borders and such, until we have more cities. We can plan them borders that is but as you all know plans change in the game of Civ3

Change is fine. The mountains are going to be a provincial border no matter what and that's the only one that's really being proposed here. The mountains will just be a simple division between the northern and southern territories.

Agreed on all counts, and thanks for being patient with me on the tile hooey, Shaitan. I'm obviously easily confused by a dense build ;)

Shaitan, about your proposal, the only problem I see are the borders of the Bohemia. I would suggest moving them out to the sea, since that is where Bavaria's cultural influence will extend out to there.

Originally posted by Chieftess

Exactly. So, why are we drawing borders into nothingness in the first place? That's what I've been trying to say. :) We need more warriors for expansion.

We don't need borders into nothingness but we do need to know which province our next city will be in. we are also pre-planning for our third city and we will soon need to know which province that will be in.

RE: Shaitan's proposal.

I'm not convinced we should limit Bohemia to one city. I do think we should get away from the idea of a core province but I like disorganizer's idea of Bohemia and a SW and SE province.

Well, we'll be founding a city tonight and it will not be a part of Bohemia as there has been no congressional approval...

Well I for one think it is insane to limit the province to just one city!! Are you going to do the same for the province with the FP? Essentially, we need to try and make the corruption in our provinces more evenly spread, but why do this by sacrificing common sence? Valhall is two tiles away from the capital, it should be in the same province, we don't even bother defining new provinces untill they have at least three cities usually.

I think before we get a finalized proposal, we should get all of the land between Bavaria and our scouting warrior explored. If I am correct, there is a mounting chain that we can use as a border.
Also, I'd like to wait for the rest of Aztec territory to be scouted. I think the southern chain extends through it. Anyway, it'll need to be in a province when our mighty warriors take it :mwaha:

aj is right. a province consisting of only one city will be a waste. there arent all that many persons participating in the democracy game and to waste the administrative capabilities of a fine and competent provinical staff on a single city would be criminal. not to mention the fact that combining the centres of national and provincial admisinstration would make for a marked increase in efficiency.

i believe you will still upload the picture?

For now the province has one city until we get 4 more cities if we are indeed doing a province of 5 cities.

I would like to submit a second Provincial Border Plan. This plan would use not only the mountains to the SW (which seem to be a given), but the known territory beyond the Doughnut Forest. As Shaitan stated, we define the world as we see it. This "known area south of Bavaria is what we see now. From there, we work our way up to the coast, to include the gold. On the NW end we simply include Valhalla's borders as they now exist.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads2/Bohemiaborders.gif

I've also placed numbers where the cities would fit in nicely. As you have guessed, I have moved away from the tight build theory. Aside from number one, the numbers show location more than placement order. Basically, I'm trying to get the ball rolling again, as we seemed to have slacked off on this issue.

Looks like a fine proposal. We have 3 on the table now. (or 4? Didn't Octavian put a proposal in here?)

I move that we poll on these.

Great job ! I really like that proposal !

i like it, but i would reccomend expanding it 2-3 tiles se to use those mountains as natural border, and a little in the nw to take in the spot up there which is currently under consideration. nontheless, great job!

Here's the Bavaria, DB proposal (where the nation's capital province is the capital only, similar to Washington DC) with the new revealed map parts and predefinitions for provinces 2 through 4.

Shaitan, I increased the size of your proposed borders map. The first was a little small. This one is borders2a. Nice blue lines, I like them. But I'm still not sold on the Distrct idea. Let's keep it simple for now. We will need exterior cities that capture the outer resources (Iron and Horses), so those can be in the new Provinces.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads2/borders2a.jpg

I like the proposal, although I think it would be best if we extended the coastal provincial borders out to the border between sea and ocean.

my only complaint is that province one is too small and province three is too big. Fix that and its perfect.

The Great Iguanaman

I've decided to move mine to this page also, so the citizens could review both.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads2/Bohemiaborders.gif

I think I mentioned this in another thread, but I like a one city capital province. So, I would go with Shaitan on this.

Cyc, what did you want us to review with that map?

The Great Iguanaman

go cyc! that is the best proposal i have ever seen for province borders, and i mean that! i think the district/province is a bad idea, im glad to see im not the only one who thinks so.

SPAM deleted

Originally posted by neutral leader
before my great mentor, the almightyjosh, left us, he had given me his blessing. he had spent much of his distinguished career selflessly trying to further mine. i would like the opportunity to honour his memory by serving as the governor of bohemia. i believe he would have wanted it that way. please give me your support and remember, a vote for me is a vote for aj.
neutral leader, this is an instruction to stop posting your campaign message in every active thread. This is spam and is forbidden by the CivFanatics forum rules.

This has been an interesting discussion, and I would recommend moving forward with a official poll.

Bill
Judge Advocate

Originally posted by Cyc
Shaitan, I increased the size of your proposed borders map. The first was a little small. This one is borders2a. Nice blue lines, I like them. But I'm still not sold on the Distrct idea. Let's keep it simple for now. We will need exterior cities that capture the outer resources (Iron and Horses), so those can be in the new Provinces.
Thanks for growing the image for me, Cyc. I didn't realize how small I had made it.

Are there anymore suggestions, before I put a poll up for these two proposals by Shaitan and Cyc. Donsig (I believe it was him) told me that we need borders now. I completely agree, so lets go this show on the road.

As Domestic Deputy Hopeful (3more votes), this is my suggestion. First let us build Morgana (or whatever the next city is to be named). Then, we draw providincal borders around Barvaria, Valhalla and TBA. The next province would start wherever the next city is placed (near the spice, id assume) and work from there.
On a war realated note- When we conquer the Aztecs, the lands should define their own province.

We need actual border proposals for each little tile of land. Can you or someone else whip up a map concerning the border of the 1st province in your proposal.

Just an idea regarding the Aztec territory we will hopefully soon hold: an Occupation Gov't. Consider this: we start taking Aztec cities. Instead of making them immediately a province, we set up an occupation gov't. called maybe Teotoloco Aztecs (the capital of the original Aztecs is Theonoctitlan, Teotoloco is the occupation capital). We make all the former Aztec cities part of this puppet nation, complete with a puppet President and National Council (who mostly just follow Fanatikan orders). Then, slowly, as time progresses, we absorb the "nation" into Fanatika Proper. Kinda like when Texas was waiting for statehood, or when the Soviet Union had all those puppet states. Just a suggestion to make things more intersting and keep the number of provinces down. Maybe a little off topic. If so, sorry.

nah, I like the idea of an occupation governor, maybe the whole 'puppet nation' thing is a little RP-ish, but I still like it.

Like I said, just to make things more interesting....

zarn- im on it, but first lemme install windows.
also- its in the cartographic office, right?

i think an occupation government is a beautifully nefarious scheme. my only concern is, will we have enough people to fill all the newly created offices?

Well, the way I'm envisioning it, all that we would have would be a President and a National Council made up of the mayor of each city. Basically, lets say the Aztecs have 4 cities that we capture. We take them over, and choose one of those cities as the Capital (say Teotoloco.... can't type Aztec cities....) The President would "rule" the occupied country, but would follow all the orders of the Fanatikan President. Then, every other city would get a mayor, and together they would make "decisions" which would be approved or vetoed by the Fanatikan President. Would only therefore take 4 extra people to run the occupation govnernment. Also, sorry, as I know this is somewhat off topic. If I get enough support for this, I will post a seperate thread as we approach the Aztec War.

Originally posted by donsig
I'm in favor of static provinces as that will allow each to develope their own identity and history. Shuffling cities from province to province will only give us schizofrenic provinces and governors. ;)

I do think we need more governors/senators though. (Because I need a job. :)) I'm leaning towards variant A if we can manage to make three or four provinces around the capital city that would be fairly equal production/corruption-wise.

I agree with thius, Greater Cormyr, when it re-establishes provincehoood, will not be a moving province.

heres my latest provincial attempt.
opinions, please?

SaaM, I'm liking this latest proposal. The only thing I disagree with is dividing the Aztecs into two provinces. I'm assuming that half-uncovered city on the map is Aztec, and I would suggest that at least initially we keep the Aztecs as one province.

Originally posted by Grandmaster
SaaM, I'm liking this latest proposal. The only thing I disagree with is dividing the Aztecs into two provinces. I'm assuming that hald-uncovered city on the map is Aztec, and I would suggest that at least initially we keep the Aztecs as one province.

Have we conqured the Aztecs? I think not, My paper calls for us to but we haven't yet so don't count your chickens before they hatch.

I'm only commenting on the proposal as is. SaaM has so graciously divided up nearly all the land around us, including Azteca, and I'm just saying that we should remove that line down the middle of the Aztec territory. If we don't conquer them, it won't matter, but it seems like we're going. The idea has a lot of support, and President Eklektikos and CivGeneral seem pretty determined to make it work.

Saam: i kind of like your proposal, just i dont like the provinces being too small.
so i would not split the aztec territory and the lower valey in half. also, i would not make bohemia too small of a province.

your proposal as put up will render us with 5 cities each province. this may be too few imho.
if we notice we need bigger provinces later cause we dont get enough cities, we can split them up at any time.

i will maybe come up with another proposal soon. stay tuned.

Now here is my approach:
3 medium sized provinces, where all 3 profit from bavaria.

all 3 also have potential to be splitted in half later in the game if needed.

all 3 seem to have potential for 10-12 cities.

as said, we could also split those, but i would like the idea of having at least 3 provinces profit from bavaria to be continued.

EDIT:
the borders still need to be worked out a bit more in detail though, but i dont have time to do it. so take this as a rough draft and if anyone wants to refine it, please do so.

EDIT2:
i still would support bavaria being a province of its own, and together whith this proposal this would lead to 4 provinces in benefit of the capitol. bavaria DB (district of bohemia) ;-)
someone should setup a info poll on whether or not to put bavaria into its own province.

EDIT3:
i will put up the informational poll on bavaria DB now.

Info poll on Bavaria DB:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33940

Please consider the following map for the Provincial borders. Of course, some borders near the edge of the known map may have to be updated once we learn more about the terrain.

Border Proposal 1 - Strictly Geographical Borders (246kB) (http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads2/fanatika-1450bc-borderprop1.jpg)

Please consider the following map for the Provincial borders. Of course, some borders near the edge of the known map may have to be updated once we learn more about the terrain.

Border Proposal 2 - Capitol Province (244kB) (http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads2/fanatika-1450bc-borderprop2.jpg)

If we leave out the borders on the edged of the provinces (open norhtern border of bohemia for example) i would like that one best.
we only need to define the borders near our civ at the momen imho.

Originally posted by disorganizer
If we leave out the borders on the edged of the provinces (open norhtern border of bohemia for example) i would like that one best.
we only need to define the borders near our civ at the momen imho.

Which one?

I think both proposals should be put to a poll with the proviso that the exterior borders may be modified slightly to fit the terrain. Either way, it's time to settle this issue and move forward.

Also, please note that provinces are named by their first governors. Until then, label all provinces without names with numbers.

The maps are unofficial and the names I used were solely for internal purposes and to assist everyone with discussions, suggestions, etc...

No offense was intended and I certainly did not want to usurp any naming rights. I regret any confusion that may have resulted.

I like 40j Proposal Number One.
Also- regarding SAAM #2, i divided up azteca because i thought we were going to expand first, attack later. Since were on the war path, P4 and P3 would end up as one.
Also- may i suggest that all newly conqured lands be declared a province until further notice?

all conquered cities are a province until new borders are defined and if there are more than 3 of them ;-)
see rules :-P

thats why we have to define borders before we expand.

Wasn't there already a poll for which border plan to use?

@Shaitan - If you're referring to the poll that was set up by SAaM, that poll was invalid, although it was not officially proclaimed so. Even if the poll would have been written properly, Abstain won the poll, and now he can't find his maps. :)

I like FortyJ's "proposal #2 with the following changes:

- If Morgana is to be included in Bohemia, also include most/all of its workable surrounding terrain, No sense having a city in one province and all its worked tiles in another.

- As others have said, the province boundaries only need to be defined near our borders. Let's not 'close off' new provinces until we have a better sense of our global geography.

I think we are really close here! Let's wrap it up and get it to a poll.

the poll for bavaria holding its own province was unconclusive (7-7).
would someone please collect the proposals into one post as poll-proposal?

we can then discuss this proposal for 24h, and thereafter a official binding poll could be set up.

The poll is up. Everyone please vote.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=540597#post540597