City Ceding

[Napo981]

Lol!!!

I did't think I would have so much answers to my post !!

I eat my words now!!!

Some examples were good, some were just nations fighting back their independance more than "culture flipping".

Still, I wonder if all this culture flipping is bigger than reality. Maybe you could answer me, is culture flipping a usual strategy to get another city?

 

[Albow]

What do you think is happening in Iraq? What do you think they meanby 'winning hearts and minds'? Isn't that a battle of ideas, of a way of life and of governance?

 

[Napo981]

What do you think is happening in Iraq? What do you think they meanby 'winning hearts and minds'? Isn't that a battle of ideas, of a way of life and of governance?

U.S. have already conquered all cities. They are not trying to "culture flip" any Iraq city. They just trying to get off some resistance by military and propaganda strategy.

And what would attract people to U.S.? WWF?

 

[Corvex]

It would make more sense if city flipping had more to do with immigration from neighbouring civs than cultural influence. Let's be honest with ourselves; the majority of people will always think that their culture is best, regardless of how many temples or libraries their neighbours have.

 

[Napo981]

It would make more sense if city flipping had more to do with immigration from neighbouring civs than cultural influence. Let's be honest with ourselves; the majority of people will always think that their culture is best, regardless of how many temples or libraries their neighbours have.

Of course!!

Something similar is being discussed in another thread here

 

[Slax]

I don't think that "Culture" per se has actually been mentioned for Civ 4, has it? And it seems ceding is linked to happiness (which may be linked to culture).

 

[Sucha_Soorma]

Maybe rather than always cities fliping, why not declare independence and start their own nation?? OR turn into Barbarians/Renegades

 

[Napo981]

Maybe rather than always cities fliping, why not declare independence and start their own nation?? OR turn into Barbarians/Renegades

Yep, could be an interesting option.

 

[Superkrest]

i agree with sucha..ive always liked the idea of rebels...when you lose the "hearts and minds" of a certain populace..they should be able to either rebel or try to go somewhere else..but i think rebelion makes more since since they're fed up with your culture..why would they attempt to re-establish with another country..maybe an idependant country with very close ties to a rival neighbor..looking for help to acheive independence or help that civ with a war with you because they think your culturaly or millitarilly superior neighbor has more of a chance of winning..."why be on the loosing side of a fight". many smaller russian minorities oppressed by stalin joined the germans when the soviet union was invaded...thinking they would once and for all be free of stalins rule....nice trade to hittler huh?

 

[eg577]

as your nation expands, other nations will have trouble keeping the citizens happy near your borders, as they look with green envy at all that your nation has to offer. The rival nation will eventually be spending so much cash on the city to just keep the people happy that it will no longer be worth it for them to keep the city, so they may wind up seeding it to you through diplomatic terms.

They need to think this through more. It is my understanding that there is no more civil disorder in civ4. Unhappy citizens only refuse to work, so there is nothing saying you have to make the citizens happy. Why give up a city that you can keep at no expense? Ceding the city would only give your rival money and make their territory encroach even further into yours.

Even if you weren't giving the city away for free I don't see how this would work. If the situation is really that bad then being able to keep the city as a buffer zone is probably worth far more than anything your rival will offer you for it.

 

[vbraun]

They need to think this through more. It is my understanding that there is no more civil disorder in civ4. Unhappy citizens only refuse to work, so there is nothing saying you have to make the citizens happy. Why give up a city that you can keep at no expense?

Maybe with people not working they no longer produce any money therfore not paying for any improvments/units that are in the upkeep, in the end causing you to lose money?

 

[eg577]

Simply sell the improvements then. Assuming civ4 will be like all previous civ games you can always keep a city at no expense. Probably the city square will still be worked in a 100% unhappy population, so you could even be able to earn a dollar or two off a stripped down city.

Also giving up a city just means you'll have to worry about more cities becoming unhappy by being near your rival's territory. That alone would probably be worth a few gpt.

 

[searcheagle]

In real history, does any city flipped that way 'cause of culture??

I was in Quebec 3-4 years ago. Whenever I was there, one of the leaders of our group told us that this region used to be 75% English speaking 20 years ago. However, as the seperation effort geared up, speaking English was no longer acceptable. Now, 90% of people can ONLY speak French.

Granted, Quebec does not have a radically different culture from the rest of Quebec, but my story can illustrate how quickly one culture can flip from "English" Canada to "French" Canadian.

I was also in Salzburg, Austria. Pre World war II, many Austrians considered themselves Germans (Including Hilter, an Austrian Native), especially in the Salzburg Region, close to the border. After World War II, it became an insult to be considered German.

Once again, Short time span, big cultural differiation.

 

[Superkrest]

...i think the city ceading is a bad repersentation..but still a repersentation of a peacefull ,but against your will, trading of territory. larger civs in history have annexed portions of there neighbors...look at late 30's germany

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

I was also in Salzburg, Austria. Pre World war II, many Austrians considered themselves Germans (Including Hilter, an Austrian Native), especially in the Salzburg Region, close to the border. After World War II, it became an insult to be considered German.

Of course. After all, Germany had brutally inveded and occupied Austria, surpressed the native Austrians, and forced them into a war Germany lost...

 

[searcheagle]

Of course. After all, Germany had brutally inveded and occupied Austria, surpressed the native Austrians, and forced them into a war Germany lost...

The Austrians, voted to become part of Germany. I believe it was by quite a strong margin as well, like 2/3 or something like that. History glosses over that detail, but its still true. But I know what you are trying to say.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well the ideal sollution would be rebellions and alliances, in which a sufficiently unhappy city would generate military units to drive out occupiers and if it succeeded would set up its own civ and possibly ally with an existing civ, to the point of joining it. (the second being likely for reasons of survival and best long term success...the OCC's chances of victory points being maximized by joining a larger civ)

As for annexations, those are already in Civ3, ie give me CityX or else.

 

[Commander Bello]

The Austrians, voted to become part of Germany. I believe it was by quite a strong margin as well, like 2/3 or something like that. History glosses over that detail, but its still true. But I know what you are trying to say.

You should re-read that part in you history books.
In fact, the German Reichswehr invaded Austria on the 12th of March, 1938, one day before the voting about whether to join the German Reich or not should have taken place.
This was, just to avoid the voting to result in a "no".
Later - but after the Germans were IN Austria and quite some arrests had taken place - the voting was held and resulted in ~99% having voted "yes".

 

[searcheagle]

You should re-read that part in you history books.
In fact, the German Reichswehr invaded Austria on the 12th of March, 1938, one day before the voting about whether to join the German Reich or not should have taken place.
This was, just to avoid the voting to result in a "no".
Later - but after the Germans were IN Austria and quite some arrests had taken place - the voting was held and resulted in ~99% having voted "yes".

Never looked into in that much detail till now. Looks like you are right.

 

[Willem]

I see one problem with this new idea. Why would any human player give a city to the ai when he could just disband the city?

The AI may be faced with the same problems you do with that city, i.e. it costs lots of money to keep it happy. Why not give it to your competition and and have him/her deal with the burdens of maintaining it?