1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Disputed tiles: How will ownership be determined now culture is global?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by mjs0, Jul 2, 2010.

  1. mjs0

    mjs0 The 4th X

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2001
    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    Central Florida
    AriochIV made the following observation in the thread on city graphics (and Ddude97 highlighted it in a reply so I really noticed it).
    Which got me thinking because this really interesting and yet seemingly innocuous observation leads (in my mind) to a host of gameplay questions.

    Do cities and tiles still accrue culture locally?
    If culture is truly global and individual cities/tiles no longer accrue culture then what new mechanisms are used for tiles with disputed ownership?

    What happens at the border between when two competing cities? Does a tile stay with the first to claim or is there some way to later flip a tile that has been claimed by the other Civ? (short of war obviously)
    Can I place a small outpost city at a choke point near an opponent, defend it heavily and start buying up the prime land on his side of the choke point before his cities can grab it?
    If I capture a city that is part of a large empire then which tiles around it do I get to claim? Is it like Civ4 where the cultural power of the previous owner overwhelms the city or do I get all tiles that 'belong' to the city (whatever that means).

    Without cities and tiles accruing their own culture it is not at all clear to me how disputes like these will be settled.

    Any thoughts? Have I missed something obvious?

    (OR...maybe this is nonsense and cities/tiles still have local culture!)
     
  2. Tylerryan79

    Tylerryan79 Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    I personally haven't read or seen a statement were it said culture is no longer local. I do know they show all culture at the top of the screen, in my mind for buying policies. I know you are able to buy tiles if you so desire. I also know that a city will expand towards the prime tiles.

    In my mind culture is basicly the same as civ iv, local culture. All that has changed is that total empire culture is shown at the top, a countdown if you will(or count up), till you've reached enough for a policy. I could be wrong, as I haven't heard that much about it. What makes me think I'm right is the statement that cities will expand towards good tiles, showing that each city must generate it's own culture.

    Edit: Just to be fair, I am not sure if it said city borders expand towards the best tiles, or borders in general expand towards the best tile. If it was the latter, then it may be empire wide culture. However I think empire wide culture causes more problems, as you have described, and the old way(civ iv) works fine, and doesn't need fixing or change, I think.
     
  3. AriochIV

    AriochIV Colonial Ninja

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,963
    Location:
    Nehwon
    I believe it has been said that happiness is global, and city-flipping from culture is no longer a factor, but I haven't seen any specific statements on whether civ-specific culture is still in the game. There doesn't appear to be any indicator for it on the city screen.
     
  4. Semmel

    Semmel Large Sid Meiers Collider

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    233
    I dont know anything for sure, but this is the way I would do it in Civ5 given the things I know.

    Culture is global and there are no more shared tiles. Once a tile is owned by a civ, it isnt going to flipp back by it self. A bordering civ that could be owner of the tile if the other civ wouldnt be there, can by the tile in the diplomathy screen from the other civ. If the other civ denies, than there is no pieceful way to get it. However, it is possible to annex the tile with a unit. Of course, you would have to get to war first.

    Why I think like that? Because as I can remember from my history classes, no land was ever just given to an other kingdom or state just because there was a big city with many "wonders" in it. Land always was either gained by trade (for our amarican friends: alaska is such a kase) or it had to be claimed in a war. There was no "free" peacefull land grabbing.

    In civ 5, this would be very interesting since it would open up a lot of diplomatic possibilities, give land for an other civ to stay in peace, demand land from a weak neighbor because you are too bored to crush him.. well.. we will see how it is done in civ 5 :)
     
  5. Schuesseled

    Schuesseled Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    2,081
    yes but if the people living in the land start talking french stop paying taxes to the germans, and start accumulating all the french culture, then there not really german property anymore.
     
  6. LegioCorvus

    LegioCorvus Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    455
    Location:
    Switzerland
    Here in the part of Switzerland I live in, we speak French, and more prominently follow French culture as opposed to German culture. (Yet la Suisse romande absolutely despise the French.) There are also parts that are more closely tied to Italy that speak Italian. The difference being we all still pay taxes to the same government, and if we were to stop doing that pre-modern history, we would likely have a civil war.

    I know, I know. "Haha... The Swiss can't fight. I love stereotypes!" For most of the middle ages the Swiss mercenaries were the most feared and respected in Europe. Of course, the Germans started forming mass, cheaper imitators of 'em starting in 1490, and that's where Landsknecht come from. There was a war over that, but that's another story.

    Anyway, back on topic, I'm sure there are other examples. Civilizations are more than pockets of culture & language.
     
  7. Tylerryan79

    Tylerryan79 Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Another reason I believe it is local and not empire wide: Happiness is Empire Wide, on the city screen at the top left there is no Happiness. There is production(city not empire), there is gold(city not empire), there is science(city not empire), and there is CULTURE(city not empire).

    Also the top most bar on the screen(the one that shows happiness), besides showing happiness(empire wide), shows +science, and total gold(+gold), and Total Culture/Needed Culture (+ Culture a turn).
     
  8. Tomice

    Tomice Passionate Smart-Ass

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,349
    Location:
    Austria, EU, no kangaroos ;)
    You need local culture, else all cities would gain an additional tile in the same moment. So while I have no idea how they will do it precisely, it would be odd if cultural buildings and such have no local effect for the city they are built in.
     
  9. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I have seen nothing that supports this.

    I would expect that if an empire generating high culture is sharing borders with an empire generating low culture, the low culture empire will slowly be pushed back.

    They've already referenced the concept that different tiles will have different "cost" and that cultural expansion will be faster in easy/unclaimed directions.

    I'm guessing that what happens is that tiles with enemy culture have a high cost and are unlikely to be taken when there are unclaimed tiles, but that eventually once the unclaimed tiles are gone, your cultural expansion will allow you to start taking enemy tiles - and them to take yours.

    The simplest way for this to happen is just to continue the normal expansion; when I pass a culture threshold, I get one of your tiles, when you pass a culture threshold, you get one of mine. If I am passing thresholds faster than you, then gradually my borders push into your territory.

    If you can never get any territory controlled by another faction through culture alone, then cultural expansion is pretty lame.

    Though, I'm guessing you won't be able to directly buy enemy-controlled tiles outside of the diplomacy mechanism (unlike the ability to buy unclaimed tiles with gold).

    I don't think this is logical. there is no need for local culture here. When your empire passes a culture theshold, your empire gets a new tile somewhere. This might be happening every couple of turns; somewhere, a new tile for your empire.
    There no longer needs to be any such thing as a "city" getting culture.

    I'm not saying that there won't still be some kind of local culture, I'm saying it isn't needed for this purpose.
    The one thing where I can still see some need for local culture is that they've said when you conquer a city you get that city's surrounding area.
     
  10. Tylerryan79

    Tylerryan79 Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    In the city screen in the top left, where it shows gold culture etc, right below the culture it says it will expand one tile in one turn. If it means the whole empire will expand only one tile in one turn, or if the city will expand in one turn, I don't really know. I think it means the city will, and if you went to another city screen it may say that it will expand in 2 turns. If the city is already surrounded by other cities, then the tile may expand on the outer edge of your empire.
     
  11. Tomice

    Tomice Passionate Smart-Ass

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,349
    Location:
    Austria, EU, no kangaroos ;)
    Well, there is no 100% need, but it seems way more likely to me.

    It would be odd if it happened truly random, for two reasons. 1) Civ is traditionally rather precise and calculable. You couldn't plan your strategy. 2) Big, developed cities would not expand faster.

    If it follows a calculation, keeping track of all tiles in your empire to see which will be added may be very tiresome.

    Why should they strip the gameplay of the possibility to expand in an orderly, planned manner? Just imagine how difficult it could be to claim oil or another ressource if you can't control expansion?

    Furthermore, growth needs to be faster around big cities, to employ their high number of citizens.
     
  12. Schuesseled

    Schuesseled Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    2,081
    Yes, so troops should be deployed to enforce culture on tiles that are adopting too much of rival culture, stopping them from flipping. Farmers will stop singing the french national anthem with a blade poking in thier ribs.
     
  13. Well these are good. I would love to be able to enforce my culture through military action.

    And who says Swiss can't fight? They can fight alright, that plus the mountains is why people don't like to invade them.
     
  14. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    They've made it pretty clear that culture expansion won't be something you control directly; if you want to control which tiles you get, you have to buy them. There is a formula that determines culture expansion that for example makes it easier to expand over flatland than over hills or mountains or forests.

    Your borders can still expand faster near big cities than near small cities if the tile allocation formula takes local culture production into account, but this still need not require that the tile be "owned" by a city.

    But moving away from city-based culture is the best way to fix the problem where culture only matters on border cities. If you have big culture-boosters in the heart of your empire, this should still expand your nation's borders faster.

    How would big cities continue to "expand" culture if they are already complete surrounded by other smaller cities of yours with their own culture?

    The whole point of culture is that it is is non-military. If you want to expand your empire though military means, then go to war and conquer cities.
     
  15. But realistically you CAN force your culture on conquered peoples it keeps them from rebelling and the'll at least pretend that they have adopted your culture. It's slow but eventually the old culture is replaced with the new one.
     
  16. Schuesseled

    Schuesseled Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    2,081
    when i said enforce culture, i meant it as stopping rivals from culture flipping your territory by going facist on the farmers.
     
  17. DalekDavros

    DalekDavros Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    303
    Both Civ III and Civ Rev had some form of global culture (in Civ III, the 100k total culture win; in Civ Rev, global culture used to determine when you get great people), yet both of them still managed to have city-based culture for border expansion also. If we assume that most culture will still come from buildings in cities, it wouldn't be too hard to have the old system of culture for borders (with the new modifications for buying tiles) and then have an additional system where the total culture from cities (plus new sources like city states or puppet governments) is also counted at the civilization-wide level for the social-policy system. I'd imagine this is what we'll see in Civ 5.

    This is not as straightforward as is often assumed. I'd suggest anyone interested in this take a look at James C. Scott's book Domination and the Arts of Resistance. Farmers may stop singing La Marseillaise within earshot of the soldiers, but that doesn't automatically mean that they abandon their French identity. (And, in gameplay terms, I'd hope that, if such a mechanic does exist, the tile takes a productivity hit whenever its used.)
     
  18. Semmel

    Semmel Large Sid Meiers Collider

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    233
    Well, you also have nothing to support the opposite. Sind my thoughts are wild guess, as well as everyone else here is guessing wild, I dont see the point in arguing about the the support of our wild guesses ;-)

    Remember: I am not talking about tiles that have no ownership. I am talking about ties that are already owned by one civilization. Its just about the Civ4 concept that culture can overcome other culture to claim the ownership of a tile. Thats nowhere beeing confirmed and to be honest, I hope it is removed. I just dont like the idea to cultureflip an other city, or claim its tiles for that matter. And to just buy a tile from the other civilization without them having the chance to deny that "trade".. sounds just wrong to me.

    However, I like the Idea to trade tiles in the diplomacy screen. Or to annex them with your army if you dont want to conquer the other city just yet. that would open up some nice strategies in war time where it is more important to spread out your army to protect your borders instead of building one big bunch and march into anemy lands. It would further support the 1upt concept.
     
  19. Trias

    Trias Donkey with three behinds

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    594
    I believe it has been mentioned in one of the interviews (around GDC I think) that culture would be permanent to a city, i.e. when conquering a city you immediately gained its culture. (This in contrast to the feature of civ4 where conquered cities would be swamped in foreign culture.) This implies that culture is local to some extent, or at least that the ownership of certain tiles is bound to a particular city.
     
  20. Tomice

    Tomice Passionate Smart-Ass

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,349
    Location:
    Austria, EU, no kangaroos ;)
    Yes, I also remember that. There are still issues and unclear points assuming this is true:

    1) If you found a city close to an enemies border, will you gain some tiles, or do they belong to him forever?

    2) It is somewhat necessary to be able to handle tiles from one of your cities to another, first of all when you found new cities. What would keep you from giving all tiles to a "safe" city before the other city is conquered?

    What could work:

    - There is local culture, you gain tiles with it, money is an alternative. So every tile has an owning city.
    - If you need to, you can handle tiles from one city to another. This takes a turn or more, however, and is not free (which is realistic btw, infrastructure has to be changed, local political administration has to be adapted)
    - If you conquer a city, you gain control of all tiles that currently belong to it.
    - Troops can "conquer" the tile they stand on, if it's adjacent to your border. This could cause side effects like unhappiness or appearing of guerillas, however. This way, the fact that you "override" culture forcibly is represented.

    Just an idea, which IMHO could work ingame, and it's rather realistic, too.
     

Share This Page