no colonies?!?

[Drahkkael]

what happened to colonies? so now if there is a resource i need that is beyond my cultural borders i have to build a city there just to get it? even if my economy is stretched as it is? i don't like that very much...or am i missing something?

 

[blunt3d]

yeh i miss that option 2 since making alot of city's really hurts youre economy.

 

[Drahkkael]

yeah i know what you mean. i am in a situation right now where without oil i cannot possibly be the dominant military force that i have been, and the oil is located fairly far from me on the other side of japan whose dispotion towards me has never been better than annoyed (currently it is furious). i cannot afford to take over japan and the oil is not near the coast so i would have to build several cities in a row to get it connected. am i doomed? i suppose i could plow over some japanese cities but i don't raze cities unless i have to.

 

[Greybriar]

Wasn't the only version of Civilization that had colonies Civ3? So I'd say Civ4 is just returning the series to its roots. Besides not having colonies would make trading more viable.

Not that I have anything against colonies, but I seldom used colonies anyway.

 

[King Flevance]

I like colonies too. Many times I find a source of iron or something a bit far out in early games and wish I could build a colony instead of a city that cripples my economy. It might be interesting if a mod somewhere introduced them again. It would also be pretty cool if tile improvements could be upgraded to colonies that costed an upkeep and then you could 'rent' them out to other nations or something. Honestly, I would just like to see colonies come back into the game. I don't really care how personally. I thought they were a pretty groovy idea.

I do think the colonies from 3 would pose some problems in the new system somehow. They would have to change somewhat to adapt to the new system but honestly I don't have any idea as to what the new system would involve. I do find it an interesting topic though.

 

[Michelangelo]

yeah i know what you mean. i am in a situation right now where without oil i cannot possibly be the dominant military force that i have been, and the oil is located fairly far from me on the other side of japan whose dispotion towards me has never been better than annoyed (currently it is furious). i cannot afford to take over japan and the oil is not near the coast so i would have to build several cities in a row to get it connected. am i doomed? i suppose i could plow over some japanese cities but i don't raze cities unless i have to.

Don't you think a colony in this situation would be doomed. Sitting there in an industrial japan. Probably swallowed by japan's culture.

In civ3 colonies only worked at the start. Eventually you had to make sure it was within your borders otherwise an AI would annex it.

But I liked the idea. Maybe in Civ4 it could work if it would be implemented in the following way.
A colony can be build by a worker and consumes it. It would basically be a 1 tile city. It would have no culture or any other buildings, exept maybe walls or some other defense. You could later upgrade it to a full city by adding another worker. This would allow you to get the resource faster, defend it better, and in the long run cost the same amount (probably effectively even more) to build.

 

[thenooblet22]

The colony feature was most likely removed since the cultural boundaries in Civilization IV expand much faster and are more important than they were in Civilization III. Another reason is because of the ruling of no outside-territory improvements. Plus, you guys forget about how difficult it would be able to keep these colonies with the new well-adapted barbarians.

 

[Drahkkael]

i agree that civ 3 colonies wouldn't work but the concept of colonies should be looked at i think. look at what it did for denmark, england, spain, france etc...it's not like they were a minor part in civilization's development.

it would be cool if the colonies you set up were like cities, but actually run by the AI, allowing you to take resources. if you treat them unfairly *cough*american revolution *cough* or if your military presence there becomes too weak they could actually be entirely taken over by the AI and they would be up for grabs for whatever civ wanted to conquer them.

 

[thenooblet22]

i agree that civ 3 colonies wouldn't work but the concept of colonies should be looked at i think. look at what it did for denmark, england, spain, france etc...it's not like they were a minor part in civilization's development.

it would be cool if the colonies you set up were like cities, but actually run by the AI, allowing you to take resources. if you treat them unfairly *cough*american revolution *cough* or if your military presence there becomes too weak they could actually be entirely taken over by the AI and they would be up for grabs for whatever civ wanted to conquer them.

But can you imagine the slowdown that would cause for calculating the numerous individual colony AI's?

 

[Falcon02]

I got no problem with no colonies except when I think of the "One City Challenge"

How is it supposed to be done in Civ IV without colonies... to secure resources?

Even trade would be limited, since you only have a few resources to trade anyway...

Though I haven't done a OCC in Civ IV yet...

 

[notagoodname]

it would be cool if the colonies you set up were like cities, but actually run by the AI, allowing you to take resources.

Yeah it would be nice if you could found a city to an entirely new vassal state who then gives you the resources.
It'd be somewhat realistic too.