A New Dawn Beta Builds

I like the idea of fixed borders but think its current form has some problems. Wondering what anybody thinks about the following ideas. I've posted the first idea a couple times before and don't think anybody responded so maybe I'm the only one who likes the idea but figured I'd try again :D

Idea 1:

Currently there is a rule that all the tiles immediately surrounding a city within a fixed border civ are always contained within that city's civ. I think this is a problem in its current form, mainly because of the following situation: if a fixed border civ founds a city on the border of another civ, it automatically grabs those tiles of the other civ within 1 square of the new city, EVEN IF THE OTHER CIV IS A FIXED BORDER CIV and/or those tiles have uber culture from the other civ.

I propose we drop the 1 tile radius rule altogether, not sure what that has to do with fixed borders anyway. I would think the idea of fixed borders is that once a tile is in your territory it is always in your territory, rather than expands the effective radius of cities. At the very minimum make sure it doesn't steal territory from another fixed border civ (I've grabbed strategic tiles from another civ before with this technique and it seemed like an exploit as the other civ didn't even get mad).

Idea 2:

Have the founding of the UN trigger fixed borders for all civs. The notion of culture causing a shift in borders doesn't seem too prevalent in the modern age if I'm not mistaken. I think at some point in the game the borders would become fixed everywhere and the founding of the UN seems like a good time...

Idea 3:

To still have culture meaningful even with fixed borders, perhaps have the concept of revolution extend to the poor culture tiles outside of cities (I believe the Revolutions mod already ensures there are issues for the cities themselves if there is a culture issue). Make those tiles less productive unless troops are present on that tile or something like that, or disrupt the access to the resource on it. Not sure the exact implementation here, but seems something would be possible...
 
Idea 2:

Have the founding of the UN trigger fixed borders for all civs. The notion of culture causing a shift in borders doesn't seem too prevalent in the modern age if I'm not mistaken. I think at some point in the game the borders would become fixed everywhere and the founding of the UN seems like a good time...

I like this idea... curious what others think.
 
@TheDisco & @dudeSDCA

Would you believe that the problems with Fixed Borders is half the reason I made them mandatory? I proposed sweeping changes to Fixed Borders, oh, probably 1 year ago now, but they universally rejected, and the current version has been kept since. I am not a fan of some parts of it, so I figure the controversy and complaints will help me fix the issues. Diabolical, I know. ;)

1.) Excellent point. I am not against the 1 tile around the city limit, but I definitely agree that the first come first serve policy for already fixed tiles should be applied. I will change that.

I'm going to disagree with 2 & 3. I disagree that with the idea that more modern civilizations will have fixed borders, and this is reflected in the civic policies. The more modern the civilization, the more influence outside culture has on land, not less. One does not have to look hard to see that Israel is having a culture issue, the area being Palestine, and not receptive, or look at Pakistan and India, the split was over culture differences. Cultural issues are the main cause for the US Civil War as well (South accepted slavery, North did not, etc...). Culture plays more of a role today, than it has even before in the last 8000 years of civilized society. Just remember the timescale of Civ. Events that seemingly take lifetimes for us are 5 turns in game.
 
@TheDisco & @dudeSDCA

Would you believe that the problems with Fixed Borders is half the reason I made them mandatory? I proposed sweeping changes to Fixed Borders, oh, probably 1 year ago now, but they universally rejected, and the current version has been kept since. I am not a fan of some parts of it, so I figure the controversy and complaints will help me fix the issues. Diabolical, I know. ;)

1.) Excellent point. I am not against the 1 tile around the city limit, but I definitely agree that the first come first serve policy for already fixed tiles should be applied. I will change that.

I'm going to disagree with 2 & 3. I disagree that with the idea that more modern civilizations will have fixed borders, and this is reflected in the civic policies. The more modern the civilization, the more influence outside culture has on land, not less. One does not have to look hard to see that Israel is having a culture issue, the area being Palestine, and not receptive, or look at Pakistan and India, the split was over culture differences. Cultural issues are the main cause for the US Civil War as well (South accepted slavery, North did not, etc...). Culture plays more of a role today, than it has even before in the last 8000 years of civilized society. Just remember the timescale of Civ. Events that seemingly take lifetimes for us are 5 turns in game.

I definately don't disagree that culture has a big impact today at least on the pressure to change borders, but I think that concept is better reflected in a mod like Revolutions rather than simply dynamically changing the ownership of a tile once the culture hits 51%, with no ability to control this exchange of terrirory by either civ (other than generating more culture over time).

I think any border change in the real world today would occur either via military invasion, negotiated (maybe internationally via the UN for example), or occur with some form of revolution (violent or peaceful) accompanying it, and probably would include at least one major city rather than just shifting a farmland tile or coal mining area.

That is why I suggested idea #3, to have some impact in the game of culture issues on individual tiles. Meanwhile, the Revolutions mod itself should handle the cultural issues that include cities.

But I admit I haven't completely thought it through and am probably missing something with how I am thinking about it. But I thought this issue of culture influencing civs was one of the reasons the Revolutions mod was incorporated.
 
@TheDisco & @dudeSDCA

1.) Excellent point. I am not against the 1 tile around the city limit, but I definitely agree that the first come first serve policy for already fixed tiles should be applied. I will change that.

On this point, if you do keep the 1 tile around city limit as a feature, and instead only change it so it's first come first serve for fixed tiles (which I think is a good solution), I would suggest at least consider the following nuance during wartime:

If the city is created or captured while at war with the other civ, then in that case you do get the surrounding tiles even if the other civ is fixed borders. I believe this 1-tile radius rule was initially implemented just for that type of scenario, if I remember correctly from the originial Fixed Borders mod thread long ago. I think the rationale was if a fixed border civ was capturing cities, they could avoid that culture suffocation that often occurs within enemy territory.

Otherwise I don't remember what the point of the 1 tile radius feature was (maybe somebody can remind me)? Especially since there are other ways these days to grab territory (such as issue the grab territory command to a military unit and have them remain on the tile, or pillaging to add culture, or military victories add culture)

It all does get very complex to consider all the implications of changes like this. The only thing I do know though is the peacetime scenario of stealing tiles from a fixed border civ by settling a city near them is very exploitable.
 
So no fixed borders in a modern non-Authoritarian society? Not sure I think that is realistic. Wouldn't that imply for instance the USA border might take a few tiles from Canada or Mexico over the last 50 years (or vice versa).

Yes, actually.

The USA has ceded 2 regions to Mexico in the last 50 years.

In 1963 and again in 1970
 
Idea number 1 sounds good but the problem arises when you capture a city & it will get surrounded by the enemy. Maybe captured cities always get tiles around them but the rest would follow the rule mentioned in idea 1. :think:
 
Yes, actually.

The USA has ceded 2 regions to Mexico in the last 50 years.

In 1963 and again in 1970

Ha, interesting. I guess I will cede that point.

And maybe the realistic culture spread aspect will prevent weird tile exchanges that I used to find objectionable (like one tile on the other side of a river flipping in late game).
 
Idea number 1 sounds good but the problem arises when you capture a city & it will get surrounded by the enemy. Maybe captured cities always get tiles around them but the rest would follow the rule mentioned in idea 1. :think:

Yeah, this is the scenario that needs to be looked at a bit more as I posted above. I think there are a couple different ways to approach it:

1) When founding or capturing a city during a time of war, you do claim all tiles around the city despite the opposing civ having fixed borders

2) When founding or capturing a city during a time of war, you don't automatically claim all tiles around the city if the opposing civ has fixed borders. But you can PERMANENTLY claim the territory within a 1 tile radius with military units (right now you can only temporarily claim territory with military units)

Just a couple ideas on that one...

And actually both 1) and 2) could be implemented as well, as #2 would then cover the scenario of being able to expand the territory of an already existing border city that didn't already have ownership of all surrounding tiles after war is declared against a fixed border civ...
 
I posted this on the bugs thread but it's probably a question for this thread? Since the CIVIC_VASSALAGE and CIVIC_PARLIAMENT have been deleted, what would make sense to change the civpack leaders that have listed those civics as the leaders "favorite civic." I have 7 civpack leaders from the core civpack that generate errors because of this, and I was thinking maybe I will manual change:

Favorite CIVIC_VASSALAGE to CIVIC_HEREDITARY_RULE
Favorite CIVIC_PARLIAMENT to CIVIC_DEMOCRACY

-----------------------------

Ok, based on some googling and wikipedia "research" I for the most part updated the favorite civs as above for those leaders that needed updating. I made an exception for IndiraGandhi though and changed hers to CIVIC_PUBLIC_WORKS instead of CIVIC_DEMOCRACY.

Not that these things really matter much, but just in case others were trying to get other Leaders to work without errors in 1.76 I figured I'd post what looked like the most logical changes, at least to me...
 
Just curious, what time is this supposed to be played on now? I'm playing at a speed two slower then normal, and even then I'm hitting techs way earlier then I should. It seems to happen at every speed I try :/
 
Just curious, what time is this supposed to be played on now? I'm playing at a speed two slower then normal, and even then I'm hitting techs way earlier then I should. It seems to happen at every speed I try :/

There is no link between the date shown and the "tech date". It is just to hard to do for even one game speed let alone multiple game speeds. :(
 
There is no link between the date shown and the "tech date". It is just to hard to do for even one game speed let alone multiple game speeds. :(




I've been complaining about this for a very long time. I spent a few games roughly working the game speed to fit with the techs. It's quite a mess, but I've essentially got techs appearing in the right decades at best. If you're interested, I could show you the alterations. Unless the game speed info has been changed for 1.76, as I did these changes for 1.75
 
"Praetorian starts with Loyalty, March, Tactics"

What is the point of loyalty? Never reveal nationality.. praetorian is not hidden nationality unit, right?
 
Since we no longer have Animal units, you should remove Barracks bonus for Animal units. If for no other reason than to clean up the Civilopedia ;).
 
Since we no longer have Animal units, you should remove Barracks bonus for Animal units. If for no other reason than to clean up the Civilopedia ;).

You have SVN access, right? You don't need to ask me to make changes. I can always revert them if I disagree. ;)
 
I've been complaining about this for a very long time. I spent a few games roughly working the game speed to fit with the techs. It's quite a mess, but I've essentially got techs appearing in the right decades at best. If you're interested, I could show you the alterations. Unless the game speed info has been changed for 1.76, as I did these changes for 1.75

Please do share. ;)
 
I posted this on the bugs thread but it's probably a question for this thread? Since the CIVIC_VASSALAGE and CIVIC_PARLIAMENT have been deleted, what would make sense to change the civpack leaders that have listed those civics as the leaders "favorite civic." I have 7 civpack leaders from the core civpack that generate errors because of this, and I was thinking maybe I will manual change:

Favorite CIVIC_VASSALAGE to CIVIC_HEREDITARY_RULE
Favorite CIVIC_PARLIAMENT to CIVIC_DEMOCRACY

-----------------------------

Ok, based on some googling and wikipedia "research" I for the most part updated the favorite civs as above for those leaders that needed updating. I made an exception for IndiraGandhi though and changed hers to CIVIC_PUBLIC_WORKS instead of CIVIC_DEMOCRACY.

Not that these things really matter much, but just in case others were trying to get other Leaders to work without errors in 1.76 I figured I'd post what looked like the most logical changes, at least to me...

CIVIC_PARLIAMENT -> CIVIC_SENATE is the obvious switch. Senate took over the role of parliament, they were in the same category and redundant. Monarchy seems fine for the other.
 
Top Bottom