Build a city two tiles from another civs city?

[Henrik MN]

Hi!

Is it really possible for another civ to build a city within one of my cities tiles without war being declared? If another civ puts a unit there I can demand that he remove the unit but it seems that he can build a city there. Isnt that strange?

I tested it by activating the cheat meny and made a settler two tiles from another civs city and then built a city. There was still peace between us although I built a city in his territory.

 

[Prof. Garfield]

Yes it can be done, and it is a popular method for goading another civ into war. The computer doesn't usually do it, in my experience (at least within the city limits), but if it does, subvert the city ASAP. Also, settlers will be withdrawn with the order "demand you withdraw troops," so if you catch a settler in your territory, force him out.

 

[Henrik MN]

Ok, thanks.

Hmm, I dont think that is good. You shouldnt be able to build a city in another civs territory ...

 

[Jerrymander]

Yes, that is one of the major problems with Civilization II - you can just plant cities anywhere. Zones of Control help this somewhat, but with a Caravan and a settler, you can plant a city anywhere in your opponent's country.

 

[Henrik MN]

But it never happens that the AI builds a city within any of the human players city tiles? Then I can live with it

 

[Ace]

You cannot quite plant cities anywhere. They have to be at least one hex from the nearest city. The game will not let you build a city right next to another city.

 

[Henrik MN]

Yes I know. But the AI could, in theory, build many cities in my territory (two tiles from a city) and I think that it is bad.

 

[Ace]

In theory, yes, but, in reality, the AI does not seem to do that. I do not ever remember an AI building a city in one of my city radius'. The AI favorite trick seems to be to wander into my territory and build a city on a vacant square that is in a gap between some of my cities.

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Yes I know. But the AI could, in theory, build many cities in my territory (two tiles from a city) and I think that it is bad.

Why is is bad? Doesn't it go along with the idea of securing your borders and all that jazz? It sure is helpful to be able to do it to the AI, so they should be able to do it to us as well. Only fair, right?

 

[Henrik MN]

I think that neither the human player nor the ai should be able to do it.
Maybee if doing so meant war i could accepted it.

 

[Prof. Garfield]

Complain to the makers of the game. There are a lot of annoying things in the game, like being able to keep units in ships just off someone's coast. Some might have been oversights, others might have been issues of making the game too complicated to program for their resolution. You just have to make the best of things; if someone builds a city too close to yours, subvert and disband it. Size 1 cities ought not be that expensive.

 

[Henrik MN]

All right. Thanks for the help.

 

[Grand Dad]

I agree with the Prof. . That is one of the reasons I dislike Civ II, and had stopped playing it. No other Sid's CIVs has been able to beat Civ I, despite the fact that it lacks graphic etc of the later ones


[PEACE!!!

 

[Henrik MN]

In Civ 1 a civ can't build a city within another civs city tiles?

 

[Grand Dad]

That's right Henrik MN. And that is one more reason I prefer it to the other three CIVs.


PEACE!!!

 

[Henrik MN]

Thanks alot Grand Dad!
I think I will go back to Civ 1 then ...

 

[BaconLad]

yes this can be annoying, it has happend to me twice, ironicly, americans both times.
should it be allowed? it has happend alot through out history, england/british empire were notorious for venturing into and settling in places where they just didnt belong. thats pretty much how america was founded. and then look at what the americans did to the natives.
france/spain/portugal/holland also got in on the act along with england and exploited almost all of africa. and then parts of asia.
just look at the romans and especially the vikings. in about the year 900ad, the vikings landed on france and found the city of normandy more or less straight away. normandy wasnt evan considered to be part of france untill about 1200ad or so. (might be wrong about those dates)
so in my opinion it should be allowed because its happend all through out history.

 

[alcibaides]

In Civ 1 a civ can't build a city within another civs city tiles?

As a matter of fact, in Civ 1 you can actually build a city right next to another city! In the adjacent tile!

 

[alcibaides]

in my opinion it should be allowed because its happend all through out history.

Yes, and many of the scenarios made for Civ2 include 2 cities of different civs on small islands.

 

[WildPony]

I think that neither the human player nor the ai should be able to do it.
Maybee if doing so meant war i could accepted it.

haha, it would be great if that maneuver gave the offended civ a chance to declare war. Certainly seems to be an agressive enough move to justify it.

Like the professor said, it should be cheap to subvert the size one.

And like the Duke said, it's all a part of the securing your borders thingy.

... and i dare say that the possibility of this happening makes the game even greater .

What's funny is when you can do it to somebody else . One memorable "no bribe" game i infiltrated the (human) enemy's civ with two vet defenders and a settler and built a city on a forest/river, 2 steps each from about 3 of his cities right in his very core.