City-States appearing during ongoing game! - Please Post!

[OldmansHQ]

As you progress through ages and conquer, raze a city here and there... New City-States should be established, during ongoing game! This would add another layer of depth, some realism and open up many, many new strategies. For example Genghis Khan's ability would be of some use in the long run, and indirect weakening Siam by getting rid of City-State allies would be a valid possibility.

This is an idea that I believe is crucial and absolutely must be added to the game, I was expecting this to be included in Gods & Kings expansion, sadly it was not. We still have plenty of time to make this idea popular and show Firaxis that we want this! I would choose this over all of new civs (except for Winged Hussars they simply have to be in the game ) and new culture system.

There are many different ways in which such system could be implemented, and I am sure that there are some ways of which I have not thought of. Here are some examples:
- If a city is annexed / turned into a puppet, and its native civilization is destroyed, there is some % chance that the city will gain independence, the % decreases as time goes on.
- If a city was conquered by at least three different civilizations, the % applies.

Unhappiness could increase the % based chance of establishing City-State. These could also appear in place of razed cities or in areas which are generally empty or lack resources. The City-States would of course fit into the in-game time period of their creation. Perhaps there is even a way, to not rely on luck, without making it 'dry'.


Please post, even if you disagree.

Edit: I think you should read my next post, where I answer people, and clarify the concept. Quite big part of this I am making up on the run, because I never had any specified idea of how exactly I want this to be implemented. The concept is slowly being forged, in the end if Firaxis were to add this into the game, they would change it at least a little.

 

[InsanelyApple]

What's wrong with just having the poll options be yes, no, or other? Because I don't like the idea, but I don't play on Settler either.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Well, CS can't get razed so that problem isn't there. Having more appear unbalances the diplo victory. After all, one gets captured and a new one pops up, you liberate the first and now there are more CS in the game.

 

[Glassmage]

no thank you this would overcomplicated the map.

 

[AriochIV]

I don't see a problem with City-States appearing during play, but I don't see the need for it, either.

What's wrong with just having the poll options be yes, no, or other? Because I don't like the idea, but I don't play on Settler either.

Because he wants to discourage you from voting in a way that disagrees with his premise.

 

[Camikaze]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions, edited poll to remove inappropriate language.

 

[OldmansHQ]

First of all, I would like to say; Mr. Moderator! I like your avatar, with pride and justice!

I don't see a problem with City-States appearing during play, but I don't see the need for it, either.


Because he wants to discourage you from voting in a way that disagrees with his premise.

Well of course I want to encourage people to agree with me, since when is that wrong? In the end choice is yours! Besides, as serious as I am about the City-States, there is absolutely no need to be overly serious with the talk. And if need be...
and then >:-D

Well, CS can't get razed so that problem isn't there. Having more appear unbalances the diplo victory. After all, one gets captured and a new one pops up, you liberate the first and now there are more CS in the game.

That is a very good point! Very good indeed. What I meant and forgot to include in my first post is that I was thinking of them appearing completely on a whim of luck. If you set the game to 8 City-States then that is the number that will be in the game, so if nobody conquers them, they do not just like that appear on the map. I am pretty damn sure that adding the little button "Raze City" is five minute job, no wait - one minute!

no thank you this would overcomplicated the map.

In what way exactly? Have you ever survived until medieval game? From that point on, map is stuffed with cities, and it only gets worse. Also, I am sure you once played a game with eight City-States and one was conquered, making it seven, would it really be so much more complicated if another city appeared somewhere on the map or one city changed its owner? It is not like once you conquer a City-State, next turn another appears, that would be dry.


As I said, this could be approached from a number of ways, there has to be some middle ground, something that fits well into the game. Ohh, and we can always add the option to disable 'The Menace of Returning City-States'.

Sorry for any mistakes in my long argument, I never had talent when it comes to explaining whatever it is I am explaining . I wrote the first post late at night, this I am typing quite early in the morning. Let us have a debate, we are all 'civilized' people, right?

 

[Windsor]

CS should *only* spawn during an ongoing game, they should not be there at the start of a game at all.

 

[Naokaukodem]

CS should *only* spawn during an ongoing game, they should not be there at the start of a game at all.

Actually since you have only one city you are a city state. Once you got the ability to build more, then you are a civilization.

A little like in this idea of mine : http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=479211

Social Policies that determine your type of faction
Now in Civ5 with the new faction "City-State", there's a better variety of different types of factions, along with the already existing Barbarians, traditional civilizations and in previous Civs, mere tribes (goody huts principally, but also the reflexion about "empty land" being conquered culturally).

Beside the fact that I always wanted to uniformize all those different types of factions into one, for a more coherent, realistic and less gimmickly gammey feeling, I believe there is still major differencies between them, justificating their so great differences in the known series.

That's why I jumped to the conclusion that similar factions but with differences could be played altogether by the players, for a more varied, resulted and fun experience. I also feel that Social Policies don't push their advantages nearly enough (I suggested before Civ5 to add an incentive on small remaining countries by giving them points to spend in a second technological tree) and I think it would be the occasion to give them more sharp.

So, here are the Social Policies, or whatever they be called, that I tried to envision in order to give the players the ability to play several types of factions. As a starting idea, those SPs are still called SPs, are earned with cultural points and are cumulative. (minor some exceptions maybe -which I dislike-, still WIP, ideas are welcomed) :


* Nomadism (Basics for all)





* Barbarism

Unlocks Military Tech tree 1 (prevalent at about AD 400 if choosen at start)



* Civilization

Unlocks Agriculture / Ability to have cities beyond size 3.
Locks Pastoralism



* Organization

Unlocks Settlers / Ability to manage directly several cities
Free Settler



* Pastoralism

Unlocks Military Tech Tree 2 (prevalent at about AD 1200 if choosen as soon as possible - since Horseback Riding)
Locks Civilization


* Clans

Unlocks Clans (ability to have "allied cities")
Ability to have up to size 6 (?) cities.



Not sure if any faction would have a default SP or just anyone of the (for now) five of them in order to start.

As you probably noticed, the last one (Clans) seems pretty weak, to the point it would be needed to be introduced a new concept of "allied cities". But I feel short in term of imagination, and I'm far from the 10 different factions / SPs I wish there is.

So if you have your own ideas, please feel free to put them below.

 

[kirbdog]

I voted "Nah" just because of the prejudicial language.