I think it would balance the peaceful and aggressive paths a bit more if units would cost food upkeep again (the early civ games had that). I don't think it would be wise to exchange gold upkeep with food upkeep, but to have this additionally. It would not scale when you advance - just 1 food per unit base cost when your troops are inside your borders at any time. However, this would scale with the distance from your nearest city. Better technology leads to a better food upkeep per distance ratio. When population loss is imminent, you are prompted with a decision to either lose 1 population in city X or lose unit Y.
This would make the ancient and classical conquering a bit harder to pull off, since your capital or second city won't grow much or may even lose population at some point if you overdo it. Also, it would make landing on another continent with a big army more costly. Maybe military engineers could build something like a supply depot to reduce upkeep. If the food is taken from the nearest city, it might be worthwhile to send internal trade routes to this city and change production focus to food if many units drain food from the same city. It would also make food more important as a resource.
Unnecessary micromanagement and too complicated rules or would it make the game more interesting and balanced?
This would make the ancient and classical conquering a bit harder to pull off, since your capital or second city won't grow much or may even lose population at some point if you overdo it. Also, it would make landing on another continent with a big army more costly. Maybe military engineers could build something like a supply depot to reduce upkeep. If the food is taken from the nearest city, it might be worthwhile to send internal trade routes to this city and change production focus to food if many units drain food from the same city. It would also make food more important as a resource.
Unnecessary micromanagement and too complicated rules or would it make the game more interesting and balanced?
Last edited: