Culture borders that ruin a part of the experience

[apatheist]

one thing i hated about borders expanding was that of you have a coastal city the borders grow into the water, seemingly for miles. in fact only upto 10 km of water beyond a shore line is considered part of a nations territory, rest all is international waters. the borders cause a problem especially when you have two shore lines besides each other. then the city with more culture has its borders extended into the land of the other nation.

I agree in general. First of all, I think that you should not be able to extend your borders into the ocean at all unless you have a harbor. Secondly, I don't think you should be able to work a land tile on the other side of a sea tile, regardless of whether you have a harbor and whether that tile is within your cultural radius. I'm also open to the idea that borders can only extend across coastal tiles, and not into sea or ocean tiles.

imagine if there is an important resource there, and you can't use it even though its in your part of the land because it falls into someone else's cultural border. this needs to be changed.

I don't think that one's so bad on its own. Having a water barrier is already too much of an advantage; I think that being able to reduce its power is a good thing. That said, it does seem a little inconsistent with what I said above and I would not cry if it was changed as you suggest.

Fixaris is going to make Civ their way, if you really want to do something about it, try and get a job with them. Like it or not, The border system is in Civ4. Deal with it.

I agree that Naokaukodem is wrong about borders, and I agree that he isn't addressing this constructively, but I don't think your response is productive. I want the game to be as good as it can be when it comes out. I generally support cultural borders, but there are a few things I would tweak about it that I think would improve the game (such as those suggested above). You'll always find a player who thinks that some particular game feature is poorly-designed or stupid. Often, those players are wrong or would replace it with something worse, but every now and then, someone will come up with a good improvement on the Civ we know and love. I would like to think that Firaxis is open to suggestions from the community rather than working in an ivory tower cut off from the world. That means sorting through a whole lot of crap (just look at my posting history ;-) to find a couple gems, but those gems are worth it.

Nevertheless, to make borders completely be extracted by "culture" was just the wrong way. I wouldn't mind at all having the cultural thing as an ADDITIONAL factor in the calculation, but I completely miss the military component.

How would this component work? The idea of claiming land or having zones of culture radiating from military units seems odd and fraught with complication.

As others have pointed out above, it was complete crap to roll over an opponent, take his cities to be counted by dozens, and the next turn find the city of a THIRD nation with that area!

I think there's a balance. Perhaps you can "capture" some of the city's culture.

After all, the Greeks had more culture than the Romans, and the Egypt did so as well... nevertheless the military strength of the Romans made them get hold of the whole mediterrean area ... and the Greek and Egypts just became a part of their empire as soon as the Roman legions invaded.

I don't know that you could reduce it that simply. The Romans had culture aplenty. Let's remember that culture is about more than having a Thucydides or a Plato or a Parthenon. We also don't know how to translate that into Civ terms of culture. Finally, the absorption of Greece and Egypt into the Roman Empire wasn't something that happened quickly; it was a long, drawn-out process. Greece was arguably never assimilated, which is evident in how the Greeks kept their own culture and language, with Greek re-emerging in the Byzantine era to take over the remnants of the Roman Empire which supposedly conquered them.

 

[Mutant]

Borders are a necessary evil. But I think it would be a good idea if they didn't form until a certain set of criteria were established, like:

1) Multiple cities 5-8, all a certain size, say 5

2) Tech and government at a level to warrant the management of a nation.

Until then you’re just a collection of city states.

How about then borders are established according to your government.. In a state of anarchy your borders would collapse, and the same could be the case if there were 'city state' or 'tribal council' governments.

 

[doronron]

Between borders and strategic resources, neither implemented exactly right, I can never go back to CivII or its contemporaries. Those two features alone added enough of a distinct improvement to the overall design that the previous games are no longer relevent. Now, the AI has to cope with the solid nature of soveriegn states rather than the pearl necklace of cities found in previous iterations. Now, I no longer simply go to war for the sake of war. I require particular resources to maintain parity. I need to control the land on which those resources are located. Borders need to be set and protected. Territory expanded to protect key regions vital to national security. Without these two critical features, Civ takes a massive step back, and ceases to be a true empire building game. These were necessary.

 

[Ishkamafker]

What should I have to get a job with Firaxis in order to give an opinion? You sounds like a perfect dick head, and you are one with no doubt. Return to your lurking.

luckily, I am actually a dickhead that I don't take offense to that. And you are entitled to your oppinion. I never said you wern't. Its just unlikely anyone is going to listen to your oppinion unless you were on the actual development team, because obviously here you have no support. And I do apologize for not being "productive" But I am just tired of mr NaokauodEgo, and I am sure everyone agrees that he should get off his high horse.

But my point is still moot, no matter who is right in this arguement, Civ4 has its cultural borders ala civ 3. Maybe Civ5 will be different if Naokaukodem makes the development team, but if he doesn't, its highly unlikely to the system will be thrown out the window.

And just for the record one last time, I am a dickhead.

 

[frekk]

Welcome to CFC, Ishkamafker!

Frankly, I'm surprised a mod hasn't interfered yet.

But anyway, I agree with Aussie_Luker and most of the people here that borders were indeed an improvement, largely because there is more of a "national" feel to it than the individual cities of Civ2. Similarly, during military campaigns, there is a sense of "defending the homeland." But these borders did take away one aspect from Civ2, and that was "disputed territory," or tiles that no one can really claim for sure. In Civ2, when cities of rival civs are close enough to use each other's tiles, those tiles become "disputed territory" that is fought over by the tile, with units sitting on the tiles to maintain ownership, and these confrontations often led to a lot of fighting and fort construction in these "disputed territories," an interesting aspect of gameplay that Civ3's clarity eliminates. But overall, I would still agree that borders are an improvement.

I pretty much agree with Aussie too.

I've also wondered if that method of resolving contested territory might be implementable somehow, within the border system (I don't really see why not). Imho, I don't think we'll see that, but it would be a nice surprise if we did.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Its just unlikely anyone is going to listen to your oppinion unless you were on the actual development team, because obviously here you have no support. And I do apologize for not being "productive" But I am just tired of mr NaokauodEgo, and I am sure everyone agrees that he should get off his high horse.

Oh and because i "have no support", i shouldn't stay "stubbornly" in my ideas? And because I defend my ideas, shamelessly, I'm just on a high horse? That's a ****ing amalgamate you are doing here mate, but I don't know if you are clever enough to see it, sorry to say just the TRUTH you dick head.

And just for the record one last time, I am a dickhead.