City Ceding

[Stephan Hoyer]

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?

But the point is that if it is given to your civ because of culture, it is not a burden but rather a serious advantage.

The only way I can see this working is if the game assigns a certain value to a city dependent on the improvements, size, resources, etc which gives you a value when you trade it to your opponent with greater culture. I.e. I can trade my city for a tech. But the way trading works in civ3, at least, the AI trades so much that most civs have nothing or little to give Decreased value to the owner of the city as the "cultural envy" goes up makes sense because it balances with the higher per turn gold cost creating an interesting balance. But I see no way to avoid getting into the mechanic of buying cities. Should I be able to trade two techs for the city that only slighly wants to join my civ? That seems potentially abusive.

 

[Akka]

Another way to make it work, is that when disbanding a city, you take a penalty for every unhappy citizen in it, thus making it trading worthwhile.

It could also be a penalty for each citizen in it, to avoid people artificially inflating their happiness slider, disbanding the city, then deflating the happiness slider.

 

[Slax]

Without culture flipping, will we see more cities built anywhere there is a resource? Will the monetary penalty be enough for a civ to give up a city which collects a strategic resource?

 

[Markus6]

Apparently you can now completely engulf a city with your culture. Therefore if the resource is not on the city square they will lose that, and will have no land to work to make the city grow.

 

[Superkrest]

i just hope that the unintelligence of the AI has been improved so we dont end up with 75 "roman"for example ,little luxemborgs all through your country

 

[MRKingpest]

I think it would be cool if the governor of the city that's unhappy contacted your civ for assistance. Covertly send money, troops whatever and the citizens fight it out with the home civ. If they win, they join you, if they lose you could be caught meddling and cost rep points or risk all out war.

 

[Crazy Eskimo]

On one hand, I'm intrigued by the system as they've set it out, and want to play it before making any judgments.

On the other, I feel odd about the decision to cede being only in the hands of the ruler. Granted, this allows for situations like Napoleon and the Louisiana Purchase, but it seems like there are many times when a ruler wouldn't 'choose' to cede the territory, so much as the citizens would decide to switch sides, regardless of what the ruler would want.

But, we shall see when the game comes out.

 

[Slax]

On the other, I feel odd about the decision to cede being only in the hands of the ruler. Granted, this allows for situations like Napoleon and the Louisiana Purchase, but it seems like there are many times when a ruler wouldn't 'choose' to cede the territory, so much as the citizens would decide to switch sides, regardless of what the ruler would want.

This is what I am afraid of.

As a gameplay element (in other words, 'realism aside'), I really like the idea of taking over cities without war.

 

[Old_Lion]

Here are some other examples of peaceful annexions or divisions :


- Germany reunified.
- Savoy joining France (through referendum)
- All of the decolonizations. (well : more or less paceful)
- India splitting creating Pakistan and Bengladesh
- Italy unifications
- French resistance could also be seen as a local cultural pressure.

 

[Superkrest]

i wouldnt call the india pakistan-bangeldesh peacefull..that split was a result of a war....the same one there still bickering about.. a better example would be the purchase of alaska from russia. marraco ceading western saharah..tibet,macau, honk kong into china.

 

[Desertsnow]

Here's an idea--divided cities (think Berlin during the Cold War). Your opinions?

 

[Kurioku]

We have heard that City Flipping has been replaced with City Ceding. An enemy civ is basically pressured into giving or trading the city to the pressuring civ.

To quote Thunderfall: "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."


I guess this solves the problem of how to deal with units in a Flipping City, they will be moved out voluntarily.

I'd really like more information on this. I thought domination by culture was a great addition to the game, albeit with problems (lost unit stacks, for example).

Will the pressures be enough for you, the human player, to give up a city?

well that and an idea i had about what percentage of population any given citizen icon can be comprised of and which ones you mayu offer to another civ or they may just migrate(image a citizen with a white flag appearing in your city. when it steps into open tile it's flag color changes to the civ color it is going to. Hence becomes a unit of that civs control.) This would leave one scattered ass map of renegade settlers no doubt. A real scream. Perhaps a mini map indicator of leaving and joining units.

 

[I am the Future]

COrvex mentioned that people will always think they are best This is called nationality so make it that culture flipping cant take place once this is discovered makes sence to me any one else?

 

[Corvex]

Nationalism prevents culture flipping...certainly makes sense to me.

 

[HourlyDaily]

Well some extreme nationalism has worked against the people who tried to bring it in.
Half of the Ukraine and Georgia for one may be considered culturally 'flipped' towards Europe rather than Russia.

While I agree that Nationalism should have an effect of lessening culture flipping, it should be good social conditions for the people that prevent it.

 

[madman1981]

This would make it a bit harder to achieve a cultural victory, no? I mean, I usually gain quite a few cities by pressuring them with my culture, building close to them etc.

And what about borders, will there still be cultural borders like now?