Fixed border and culture spreading units

NikG said:

Hey Dom Pedro II,
The close border tension needs of course to be change along with this, ...

Click to expand...

I may be misunderstanding the way you have implemented the changes to cultural spread but I assume culture continues to spread beyond your borders it just no longer causes the border to move except in the case of unclaimed squares.
If my assumption is right then surely the existence of squares with two owners, one cultural and one physical would be the very thing that causes border tensions.

mjs0 said:

I may be misunderstanding the way you have implemented the changes to cultural spread but I assume culture continues to spread beyond your borders it just no longer causes the border to move except in the case of unclaimed squares.
If my assumption is right then surely the existence of squares with two owners, one cultural and one physical would be the very thing that causes border tensions.

Click to expand...

Within the confines of the game, however, it would not really have an impact. As it stands, if I'm playing as Arabia and I'm next to France (why do the French always end up being in the example?) if France has 80% culture in a tile I control, I'm not going to control that tile for very long. So that's bad for me. I'm losing out. However, if ONLY the means by which plots exchange ownership is changed, then France can have 100% culture on that same tile I own and it won't have any effect for me. Only when the discrepency becomes so great that it might cause my city to rebel will it be an issue for me.

Of course, I personally would like this system to be changed as well. I would like a "rural population" on each tile that would grow and expand and largely take the issue of growth out of the hands of the leaders. I was arguing for it publicly when we were waiting for Civ3, and I think I finally may have a chance to get it. In that case, it might make a great deal of difference if one's culture becomes dominant over another.

Another key aspect however that must change is that a civilization should somehow feel entitled to that land where its people are in the majority. It has been one of the most influential and unfortunately destructive trends of the 20th century, the issue of nationalism. As it stands, however, this rather 1-dimensional value based on borders really only has to do with the shifting that comes from cultural growth or domination.

Dom Pedro II said:

Within the confines of the game, however, it would not really have an impact. As it stands, if I'm playing as Arabia and I'm next to France (why do the French always end up being in the example?) if France has 80% culture in a tile I control, I'm not going to control that tile for very long. So that's bad for me. I'm losing out. However, if ONLY the means by which plots exchange ownership is changed, then France can have 100% culture on that same tile I own and it won't have any effect for me. Only when the discrepency becomes so great that it might cause my city to rebel will it be an issue for me.

Click to expand...

Which is actually the point. If there is no longer a game mechanic that automagically flips that plot to the French then it is the very existence of plots like this which are French in culture but are under the ownership of Arabia that should cause severe border tensions and result in the negative attitude adjustment for an AI.

Dom Pedro II said:

Of course, I personally would like this system to be changed as well. I would like a "rural population" on each tile that would grow and expand and largely take the issue of growth out of the hands of the leaders. I was arguing for it publicly when we were waiting for Civ3, and I think I finally may have a chance to get it. In that case, it might make a great deal of difference if one's culture becomes dominant over another.

Another key aspect however that must change is that a civilization should somehow feel entitled to that land where its people are in the majority. It has been one of the most influential and unfortunately destructive trends of the 20th century, the issue of nationalism. As it stands, however, this rather 1-dimensional value based on borders really only has to do with the shifting that comes from cultural growth or domination.

Click to expand...

Precisely the point I was trying to make only not quite so eloquently. This is why fixed borders are important to correctly model the modern age and the tensions that can arise when borders and nationalism are out of sync.

Just so you guys know, the main purpose of this change was for it to be used by modders to implement into their mods only if their mod has more than 5 culture levels.

Such a change to the original game without more culture levels would cause a major problem I think.

Agent 009 said:

Just so you guys know, the main purpose of this change was for it to be used by modders to implement into their mods only if their mod has more than 5 culture levels.

Such a change to the original game without more culture levels would cause a major problem I think.

Click to expand...

What kind of problems do you mean? I must say I love this mod the way it is and hope NikG will finish it. It's definitely what I wanted to do myself but had neither time nor skills

Jouda said:

What kind of problems do you mean? I must say I love this mod the way it is and hope NikG will finish it. It's definitely what I wanted to do myself but had neither time nor skills

Click to expand...

WHOOPS! Nevermind... I thought this was another topic.

Ok maybe I'm missing something here, but if you can't use cities to push against other borders (which is how I understand the way this mod work) then you eliminate cultural conquest of cities, which is a big part of the game IMO.

However, unit spreading culture, that's something that I wanted to do, and now that you already did there's no reason for me to worry about it. The reason I wanted to implement this feature is because I want to give explorer a new ability. I'm gonna go a bit off topic here so read at your own risk...

I'd like the explorer to have the ability to plant a 1% culture on a resource tile outside your borders so that you could build an improvement there. This is so that there'd be no need to build cities in middle of tundra just because there's iron resource there or something. This is the gist of it but I do have a more detailed implementation in mind so if you, NikG, want to perhaps look into implementing something like that, or anyone just wants to know more let me know and I'll post or send PM or whatever, I just don't want to hijack this thread any further.

Hey Rabbit, White.

Cultural conquest of cities do still exists. Culture is accumulated just like before, the only difference is that the tiles/plots dont change owner, unless the city does. This changes nothing about cultural flipping, cultural victory etc. It will be excatly like it is in vanilla civ. My main problem were that it seem rather unrealistic that borders did push one way or another without real diplomatic effect.

An example:
I once had a game were my borders with the indians change every 5 turn, either their way or mine. So my city did have rice, then it didnt. Then it had... and so on! It were driving me nuts. And imagine that this resource were oil, and you didnt have anyother! The it would for sure get irritating!!!

Well, back again. I would like to more about your explorer idea, just PM me. However there exists no such thing as 1% culture really. It is just a convention when we look at the game. I mean 5425235 out of 436346436 culture doesnt not say much... Anyway just babbling here, Rabbit just PM me!

Verify interesting idea's Nik. I would love to work with you on this project.

AnY updates on this project ?