Could citizens in neighbouring countries attempt to join your civ and vice-versa and join the populations. I feel an economy needs to play a bigger role in the game. Someone mentioned tourism i think thats a great idea with wealth moving from country to country. I would also like it if we could take out loans from a world bank not just other civs and use cities, factories etc as collateral. I like the idea of building an aqueduct for an opponent with them paying you to do it. This would be like exporting or importing goods with your workers producing something for export? Would this be too difficult to introduce?
Immigration/economy/tourism
- Thread starter Ian Beale
- Start date
How about if they implemented a MOO3 style migration?
Each of your city pop heads would scan nearby cities (including foreign!) in a range of X tiles. He would then consider whether he would be happier there (e.g. is it less crowded there, available temples and colosseums, whippings, draft, war weariness etc.) and whether there are better tiles in its city radius to be worked at than in his own home city (e.g. "I'm working a standard grassland for two food while that other city has a bonus grassland with a cow and no-one working on it...") Then a random die roll and if the conditions check the worker moves by its own to the other city.
Of course, people would keep their own ethnicity so you could be facing a mass immigration of Aztecs that are attracted by your more improved terrain and less oppressive government policy and suddenly you declaring war and conquering your weak Aztec neighbors like you planned to gets more complicated.
Each of your city pop heads would scan nearby cities (including foreign!) in a range of X tiles. He would then consider whether he would be happier there (e.g. is it less crowded there, available temples and colosseums, whippings, draft, war weariness etc.) and whether there are better tiles in its city radius to be worked at than in his own home city (e.g. "I'm working a standard grassland for two food while that other city has a bonus grassland with a cow and no-one working on it...") Then a random die roll and if the conditions check the worker moves by its own to the other city.
Of course, people would keep their own ethnicity so you could be facing a mass immigration of Aztecs that are attracted by your more improved terrain and less oppressive government policy and suddenly you declaring war and conquering your weak Aztec neighbors like you planned to gets more complicated.
Yeah and maybe your people could become unhappy with the mass immigration. I like the idea of being able to exterminate citizens or force them to flee the country. Often before i take over a city i kill the citizens by bombardment so as not to have the problems of feeding them and maintining order. When you force them to flee they could ask another player if they could join your country, you could then decide which city they can join or whether their request should be rejected? Don't know about the idea of the cow but temples and and other improvements could certainly encourage them to join your civ.
Motsart
Chieftain
How about refugees from war/oppressive government treatment? Expanding on Pembrokes post, the citizen could look at the better conditions of a nearby civ (improvements/no war/better government treatment/higher luxuries setting) and decide to join.
A pop-up box like the culture flip could appear, saying something like, X grateful refugee(s) from the English city of _______ wish to escape tyranny and live in our city of _____________. Do you accept?
This could also work for possible survivors of a city destroyed by an invading army.
A pop-up box like the culture flip could appear, saying something like, X grateful refugee(s) from the English city of _______ wish to escape tyranny and live in our city of _____________. Do you accept?
This could also work for possible survivors of a city destroyed by an invading army.
Inhalaattori
Emperor
Nice idea Motsart. This could be releted also to some covernment system, like when some country goes to communism, there would be refugees. (This has happened in Cuba, in East- Europe and in Soviet union)
Motsart
Chieftain
q
Yeah i like the idea of being able to choose where they settle- rather than being asked if they could join city x when there's another city in much greater need of a higher population! What do you think about some of your citizens becoming unhappy with too much immigration?
well, if you needed to choose where they settle, why dont you just build a settler and move them? I think that immigration is pretty well reflected already with buying workers. In times of war, the person who you bought the workers from usually has more in the capital than usual. Plus it sounds to me that this would increase the amount of time it takes for the game to run. it goes slow enough on my computer already.
The point is that if you are going to be asked if you'd like to take refugees i'd prefer to choose where they go rather than having them join my nearest city. Buying workers- no that is if they are POWs not refugees. This wouldn't increase the amount of time it takes for a game to run as it isn't a major implementation- use a smaller map or upgrade your computer if it takes to long. I think it is a good idea and will make better use of cities. This may even save time as you wouldn't have to bombard a city to reduce its population, on taking it over you can force them to flee?
Motsart
Chieftain
How about an Immigration Center?
Nice suggestion Ian, but how about having the choice of immigration to a certain city be dependent on whether or not the city initially receiving the refugee(s) has an improvement called the Immigration Center? The presence of this improvement in this city could also serve to reduce the anger of existing citizens by reducing the effect of illegal immigration.
A new Great Wonder could also be introduced to reduce immigration impact or act as an immigration center in each city (Statue of Liberty?).
Nice suggestion Ian, but how about having the choice of immigration to a certain city be dependent on whether or not the city initially receiving the refugee(s) has an improvement called the Immigration Center? The presence of this improvement in this city could also serve to reduce the anger of existing citizens by reducing the effect of illegal immigration.
A new Great Wonder could also be introduced to reduce immigration impact or act as an immigration center in each city (Statue of Liberty?).
True, governments try to control and direct immigration. Usually however the immigrants just plain ignore them and move sooner or later where they want to. 
IMO it'd be much more challenging if you _didn't_ get to control it.
Or if you really wanted to fight the "ethnic contamination" you could have a genocide option. With appropriate consequences attached, of course.
IMO it'd be much more challenging if you _didn't_ get to control it.
Or if you really wanted to fight the "ethnic contamination" you could have a genocide option. With appropriate consequences attached, of course.
Iztvan
the Terrible
Interesting thoughts...
I think that may refugees would be created when pop-rushing and when razing enemy cities.
Another thought - Razing cities feels a bit wierd after the ancient era. Especially when a lone cavalryman razes a city of milions and the surviving natives gladly march of to build railroad.
I think that may refugees would be created when pop-rushing and when razing enemy cities.
Another thought - Razing cities feels a bit wierd after the ancient era. Especially when a lone cavalryman razes a city of milions and the surviving natives gladly march of to build railroad.
Like the idea of the Statue of Liberty- an important sign of freedom in todays world and deserves its place in Conquests. Like the idea of existing citizens becoming unhappy with mass immigration- Immigration centre sounds good too.
Originally posted by Iztvan
Interesting thoughts...
I think that may refugees would be created when pop-rushing and when razing enemy cities.
Another thought - Razing cities feels a bit wierd after the ancient era. Especially when a lone cavalryman razes a city of milions and the surviving natives gladly march of to build railroad.
I agree it is stupid having cities and people simply disappearing, this needs to be changed as at the moment it simply isn't an accurate reflection of modern combat. Maybe the UN could dictate the amount of immigrants you have to take?
Originally posted by Pembroke
True, governments try to control and direct immigration. Usually however the immigrants just plain ignore them and move sooner or later where they want to.
IMO it'd be much more challenging if you _didn't_ get to control it.
Or if you really wanted to fight the "ethnic contamination" you could have a genocide option. With appropriate consequences attached, of course.
Like the idea of being able to exterminate people. Maybe if your citizens are unhappy at the mass immigration you could make them happy by killing them. This could cause a rep hit?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
