Idea: Vassalizing City-States

[Louis XXIV]

I hate to simply post an idea with the hopes that people will like it, but, since the modding tools aren't out, I was hoping I could get some feedback, especially from programmers who might give me an idea of how complicated this would be to implement (I know there would need to be a UI change, but I'm not sure if the rest would need LUA or not).

Basically, I was playing as Songhai and really enjoying their City-State sacking bonus. Then I realized something. Sometimes you really just want to make someone pay, but you don't want to gain any territory. This was especially true with city-states, where their bonuses far outweigh anything you'd get for taking them.

So here's my idea: Vassalization (or subjugation or some other name). Basically, the idea would be, when you capture a city-state, you still get the gold from sacking them. However, another option would pop up, which would be "Make the city a vassal." With this option, your influence on the City-State will instantly go to 100, so you get all the benefits you would if you were allied with them. However, as a consequence, you lose influence much faster (I was thinking the speed you lose it for trespassing, which I think is 6 per turn). The idea would be to give warmongers a chance to get city-state bonuses without forcing them to take a city-state. However, these bonuses are much more temporary. If you want to keep them, you'd have to keep fighting the city or switch to a peaceful route.

EDIT: Wrong forum. Could a mod move to C&C? Moderator Action: Thread moved. - Methos

 

[Skyler827]

Sure. I like playing in Civ4 with Vassals, they're my favorite way of winning a conquest victory. I don't have Civ5 yet, but I would enjoy it a lot. Since domination victories in Civ5 are based off of the conquest of rival's original capitals, It's probably not necessary to conquor them to win.

I have an Idea that might make the Idea work: what if it became possible for civs to switch between being a city state and an empire, competing to win? My Idea is to make all civs and city-states run the underlying scripts, but have a status of either "full empire" (trying to win) or city-state" (not trying to win) which would affect their behavior. However, their status could change within the game, so if a city state suddenly is in a position to rival other civs, it may switch from city-state status to civ status. conversely, if a civ looses all but it's capital city, it would probably become a city-state.

This would have a few implications: each city state would have to be programmed as a full civ, with city list, leaders and everything, so players may compete with an empire of venice and deal with the city-state of London or something. Also, city states would have to be un-razable, since the city could become an original capital at any time, even if it is just a city state. Third, it would make full diplomacy possible with any and ever city state.

What do you think of this Idea?

 

[sputnik323]

I have thought of a similar idea as well in wondering about making a mod for a viking civ. Basically it is the same idea without "vassalizing" (although I like your idea for city states). Essentially I was thinking of adding another option where a city is taken but ownership never changes hands, you sack the city for gold and a chance to pop a worker from slaves. This would work for all cities not just city states, and it would not be as big hit on diplomacy modifiers compared to taking the city. Songhai could also get more bonus for sacking AI civs as well

 

[Louis XXIV]

Yeah, it's a similar idea (I'd actually suggest implementing that too). Maybe if I fully implemented my idea, it would make Songhai too powerful. I could just make it so you can sack City-States.

So, the option would be "Sack the City", which just gives you gold and you can leave it next turn. The only question is what happens to the HP. Does it stay at zero and slowly recover or does it go back to normal? Can you sack it multiple times? More balancing issues than anything, but something to think about.

 

[sputnik323]

Yeah, it's a similar idea (I'd actually suggest implementing that too). Maybe if I fully implemented my idea, it would make Songhai too powerful. I could just make it so you can sack City-States.

So, the option would be "Sack the City", which just gives you gold and you can leave it next turn. The only question is what happens to the HP. Does it stay at zero and slowly recover or does it go back to normal? Can you sack it multiple times? More balancing issues than anything, but something to think about.

For sure it should probably have a penalty like losing citizens (as collateral damage and taking worker slaves), and/or unrest. Would also have to code some sort of limit for the city to be sacked once per era or so many turns based on game speed. The ability to sack could also be dependent on how much gold is available where 1/10 of gold production goes towards a sacking value, or something like all cities have base 200 gold and once it is sacked and reaches 0 it is raised 2 gold per turn until 200. Those are possibilities. It would also be nice to have a "mouse-over" to show how much gold could be gained from sacking.

 

[Blazar]

I had a similar idea as well. I'd love to be able to "Create a City-state" from captured enemy cities, instead of annexing, creating a puppet, or razing them.

 

[Louis XXIV]

That would have huge balancing issues, however. City-States give you large bonuses you wouldn't naturally get from another city. That's why they made it so you can't raze them and can liberate them from others.

But I suppose it would be nice to create buffer states if you were so inclined (friendly collections of cities that you aren't directly responsible for).

So the different options:
Annex a City
Create a Puppet City
Create a Vassal/Client State (for City-States)
Create a buffer city (for non-city-states)
Sack the City
Raze the City

Add the Settle a colony option from the other similar thread and the possibilities are endless

 

[Feyd Rautha]

You can "vassalize" city-states in Civ V. Throughout history, most city-states that became vassals were either puppet states (conqured by their "feudal lord" or they were states that fell under the thumb of another empire and came to their feudal lord to escape that [which typically involved a conflict between the two empires.])

That said, look at the "liberate" mechanic for city-states. It should work well for your purposes. You just have to be sure to let them get captured first

 

[Louis XXIV]

Well, the idea is to not have to wait to liberate, but the penalty is the effect isn't as long-term and other city-states will hate you. I realize the puppet city mechanic is trying to represent what I'm trying to represent, but it doesn't quite work as well. I figured the best thing it represented was the "recognition of rights and privileges". When a conquering army invaded and they didn't want a city to cause them trouble, they would recognize long standing traditions of autonomy in the city where the King didn't interfere with their business as long as they behaved (and, usually, paid some kind of tax).

Maybe the sacking feature would be the best one, that way I wouldn't have to worry about trying to differentiate between puppet city and client/vassal city (although they differentiated between Liberty and Freedom, so the game clearly thrives on hairline distinctions).