City state

[Stoic]

Don't you also think that the system of how city-states are managed is backwards? How can this be solved?

 

[Stoic]

I think that non-competition with other civilizations is serious.

 

[Siptah]

I‘m not able to follow. What exactly is backwards?

 

[Stoic]

I‘m not able to follow. What exactly is backwards?

a step back from other editions of Civilization

 

[stealth_nsk]

There's a competition with other civilizations while you befriend them. You could spend influence to speed up the process and it's pretty impactful.

The current system is designed for ages in mind with resets and it works pretty great with ages.

 

[Stoic]

I don't like how it's handled in civ 7.

 

[Siptah]

Nah. It’s the best it’s ever been. Less RNG with bonuses, more reward for prioritizing and being faster.

 

[Stoic]

I think it's too easy to ally with them... all the influence points I have should be allying with the city states rather than making treaties... it seems a bit unbalanced but I don't know...

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think it's too easy to ally with them... all the influence points I have should be allying with the city states rather than making treaties... it seems a bit unbalanced but I don't know...

On high difficulty levels and with recent patches it improved significantly, AI often compete with you for city states. Also, AI is now much more willing to go to war with you if you befriend city-states near them, so they conquer them from you.

But sure, there's a room for improvements, like with many other aspects of the game.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I also like the choosing from a list of benefits, rather than each being unique. Yes, it makes them have a bit less character but I could never remember who did what.

 

[Nikolai II]

I feel this system is the best CS system we've had.

 

[Krikkit1]

5 ways I could see to improve it

1. add some ongoing benefits for being at level 45 as long as you are not at war with the suzerain

2. allow liberating them

3. Increase Befriend cost slightly based on number of suzerains/Befriend projects in non-suzerains you have going

4. Balance some of the options

5. (most complicated) add a “Contest Suzerain” option.

-60 is the level needed for “First Suzerain”
90 for “Second Suzerain”, etc (as in succession, once someone is second suzerain, the first suzerain loses their suzerainity)

-If you are Befriending, you stop progressing once you are at 45 or higher and there is a suzerain

-If you are at 45 or higher and there is a suzerain, you can “Contest Suzerain” which allows you to progress until the next suzerain is declared. (the existing suzerain is notified and they can invest as well

 

[Leucarum]

I do like it... But it has issues. The big one is that the benefits from city states usually outweigh the benefits from endeavours so it has kind of cannibalized the diplomacy system. That's an internal balance issue but it's a problem.

It would also be nice if the same type of city state emerged in each spot after age transitions. Your gameplay plans do kind of affect on the sorts of city states you want.

The bolstering millitary and growing of city states currently feels very rudimentary.

Options to reinstate captured city states in war would be nice (though I imagine we'd immediately have bugs where rhey give you their bonuses again).

 

[Siptah]

I think it working good right now with influence being always scarce at the beginning of each age, because you want it for CS and for diplo. The problem is that currently, the CS bonuses are just better than diplo. But this can be changed easily. I don’t think influencer cost need to changed for that. Simply make CS play a bit weaker by reducing the bonuses, without making it useless.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think it working good right now with influence being always scarce at the beginning of each age, because you want it for CS and for diplo.

Not with continuity option. Now it allows to save 1000 influence from exploration to modern, plus one turn of production. So, you could save some influence on diplo and unleash it on your first turn. Even not starting as Greece, I was able to start befriending 3 independents on my first turn of modern in my last game (340 influence per independent with the leader diplo card, that's 1020 for 3 of them).

The problem is that currently, the CS bonuses are just better than diplo. But this can be changed easily. I don’t think influencer cost need to changed for that. Simply make CS play a bit weaker by reducing the bonuses, without making it useless.

The main disbalance I see are free tech and, in antiquity, free civic. I'd look at the following direction:

1. Replace one-time bonuses with bonuses from owning city states. Most bonuses already work like this, but we need all of them. That way just befriending city-state wouldn't help much, you'll need to be able to keep and defend them.
2. Ability to liberate city-states, with their bonus transferred to the liberator without the choice. Without one-time bonuses that should work.
3. Allow liberating city-states received as part of the peace deal.
4. Maybe give some bonuses for conquering city states, similar to dispersing independent. Wars around protecting and liberating city-states could improve the military-diplomatic layers of the game.

But again, those are just rough ideas.

 

[Leucarum]

I think the "per city state" bonuses are the biggest culprits as they can get out of hand pretty damn quickly! I'd remoce the "per city state" tag to be a flat (but generous) increase or %

And yes, influence scarcity is a first age problem so as someone who almost never plays past antiquity I'm showing my bias.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think the "per city state" bonuses are the biggest culprits as they can get out of hand pretty damn quickly! I'd remoce the "per city state" tag to be a flat (but generous) increase or %

Per city state bonuses are ok if controlling multiple city states is a real challenge, like you constantly get into wars because of them and have to protect them, that sort of things.

Another idea I just got - the ability to attack city state with the owner being able to reject war and stop being owner. Not sure how losing ownership should work, but could create an interesting dynamic.

And yes, influence scarcity is a first age problem so as someone who almost never plays past antiquity I'm showing my bias.

I think the current yields system need some careful review from Firaxis. The approach "let it grow uncontrollably, we'll just reset everything" doesn't work well, especially with all the additional continuity.

 

[Krikkit1]

Per city state bonuses are ok if controlling multiple city states is a real challenge, like you constantly get into wars because of them and have to protect them, that sort of things.

Another idea I just got - the ability to attack city state with the owner being able to reject war and stop being owner. Not sure how losing ownership should work, but could create an interesting dynamic.


I think the current yields system need some careful review from Firaxis. The approach "let it grow uncontrollably, we'll just reset everything" doesn't work well, especially with all the additional continuity.

I think Influence is one yield where it would be ok reseting to 0 on obsolete buildings…maybe hub towns could get 1 (or 2) per connected city (instead of settlement)

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think Influence is one yield where it would be ok reseting to 0 on obsolete buildings…maybe hub towns could get 1 (or 2) per connected city (instead of settlement)

This would require rebalance of buildings as well. In modern influence buildings come pretty late.