I think that this should be an early game option. Don't you hate it when an AI civ makes a city right on or in your borders? Or on a slamm tip of tundra that you hadn't bothered to settle? There should be an option where you could make an agreement with a civ "I won't settle north of X if you don't settle east of X. This would make for good strategy
Dividing up unsettled territory
- Thread starter rbis4rbb
- Start date
Graadiapolistan
Gradiapolistan
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2005
- Messages
- 251
It would be cool if you could set up borders of your countries without having to have a cultural influence- the bodering civs must agree and you can't make your border within someone else's culture- if enemy civs don't like your border- war may ensue
Unless the map system is overhauled so that the game can handle it in chunks of tiles instead of individual tiles, this system would unfortunatelly just make it easier for human players to win.
The current Civ3 AIs are masters at expanding. It's one of the things that's been done right with the AI. Initially, there was a problem of the AI being too aggressive, with it settling cities inside 1 tile openings in your border. This has been fixed in subsequent patches of (vanilla civ) but the AI remains quite good at expanding.
My mantra is, don't fix what ain't broken.
The current Civ3 AIs are masters at expanding. It's one of the things that's been done right with the AI. Initially, there was a problem of the AI being too aggressive, with it settling cities inside 1 tile openings in your border. This has been fixed in subsequent patches of (vanilla civ) but the AI remains quite good at expanding.
My mantra is, don't fix what ain't broken.
Naokaukodem
Millenary King
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,305
In other terms you want that we should be able to claim territory without a settler... but you would have to be able to control this claimed territory, i other terms you should be able to defend it... with a military unit... so why not simply declare war on anything you think it is your territory, and grab the land for yourself? After all, AI is not suposed to ignore what is this feeling, and it is pretty comprehensive when it's about war.
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
There does seem to be a little discrepancy between cultural borders and national borders. I don't think you should be able to manipulate the map with your own borders, but I think in negotioations you should be able to claim ownership of areas outside your cultural borders. Say someone is moving settlers close to your borders, you could call them up and politely point out that the area those units are travellling into are claimed by your civilization (akinto the 'remove your troops from our borders' message). Similarly, this could open up more of a context for claiming cities i.e. if a german city between germany and france, france might point out to the germans that the city falls in its claimed territory and that they should hand it over or face war over the disputed zone...
lcorinth
Chieftain
You could send workers around to pee on all the rocks and trees, and other Civs' workers would sniff the scent, and pee on the other sides of all the rocks and trees, and the borders would be set...Graadiapolistan said:
WoW, Icorinth great idea...
Anyways an idea would be that you could claim certian amount of territory close to your cities if you had enough units. So Civ A claims a godd portion of the contient but Civ B has more units, so Civ B could claim alot more, and if land came in to disbute Civ A and B would be given the option to nt claim it or war.
Anyways an idea would be that you could claim certian amount of territory close to your cities if you had enough units. So Civ A claims a godd portion of the contient but Civ B has more units, so Civ B could claim alot more, and if land came in to disbute Civ A and B would be given the option to nt claim it or war.
Che Guava said:
Thats a good idea, especially in peace negotiations. But my main idea is telling the AI to not cross a certain area with settlers. the area couldn't be too far away from your borders, that would be an exploit, but it would be neat if initiated
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
@rbis4rbb
Thanx. I think this is just another reason to include a latitude/longitude for each tile on the map so there's no question as to what you claim or where you are...
Thanx. I think this is just another reason to include a latitude/longitude for each tile on the map so there's no question as to what you claim or where you are...
Well, something simliar could be that some of your units could have the ability to plant the flag and therefore claim the territory for you, of course this claim could be ignored by opposing civs and they could send in settlers.
Along these lines I would like to be given the option of attacking people who violate my territory without automatically starting a war. Of course the AI (and you of course if you enter someone elses' territory) do have the option of declaring war.
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
The way I see it, there should be THREE main routes to creating borders.
1) Cultural: This is the current method of building cities and culture as a means of growing your border. Perhaps SMAC border styles could be applied to this, so that your borders start larger as soon as you build a city, but get subsequently 'squashed in' if you lack the culture to maintain them in the face of a higher culture city.
2) Military: Outposts and Forts CAN be used to expand your borders IF you have both the troops to occupy them, and the underlying cultural strength to enforce your claim. Culture effects the maximum border size AND the maximum distance from your cultural borders that this can take effect.
3) Diplomatic: An adjunct of 1 and 2, you can give away-or ask for-forts, outposts and cities near to your respective borders, as a means of exchanging the land that lies beneath. It might also be possible, in this method, to select territory via a form of MS Paint system in the diplomacy screen-but it would rely primarily on the exchange of actual structures.
Anyway, hope that all makes sense.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
1) Cultural: This is the current method of building cities and culture as a means of growing your border. Perhaps SMAC border styles could be applied to this, so that your borders start larger as soon as you build a city, but get subsequently 'squashed in' if you lack the culture to maintain them in the face of a higher culture city.
2) Military: Outposts and Forts CAN be used to expand your borders IF you have both the troops to occupy them, and the underlying cultural strength to enforce your claim. Culture effects the maximum border size AND the maximum distance from your cultural borders that this can take effect.
3) Diplomatic: An adjunct of 1 and 2, you can give away-or ask for-forts, outposts and cities near to your respective borders, as a means of exchanging the land that lies beneath. It might also be possible, in this method, to select territory via a form of MS Paint system in the diplomacy screen-but it would rely primarily on the exchange of actual structures.
Anyway, hope that all makes sense.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
Aussie_Lurker said:
Brilliant! I like the idea of forts in particular, especially since we've been able to build fotresses since civI, and never found a real good reason to....I think i'd like to see making forts an action of military units (isn't that what fortification means??) but change it so you could have a permanent fort (for enforcing borders) and non-permanent (for in-cities and defending youself outside you territory.
Graadiapolistan
Gradiapolistan
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2005
- Messages
- 251
You should be able to claim borders. I mean, the u.s. didn't have any cities in the west, really, but they claimed the land and france couldn't stick it's damn city in the one unsettled place. I mean, depending on power and influence, I think, especially in the modern age, that there should be a border system not having to do that much with culuture or military. I also think that small nations that play like big civs pop out of nowhere and fill in the spaces between you and another great civ by the middle of the ancient age. They would be the same except be more easily manipulated, and easy to conquer, and they could surrender. An example would be, poland, south africa, canada, not really influential countries, but they fill up space.
Or if you discover a large island with no civ on it, crappy civs should crop up. Like when the Europeans got to australia, and the austrlians were nomadic. Not that their way of life was wrong, they were just conqured
Or if you discover a large island with no civ on it, crappy civs should crop up. Like when the Europeans got to australia, and the austrlians were nomadic. Not that their way of life was wrong, they were just conqured
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
As an Australian, I have to say that I am DEEPLY offended by your reference to the Aboriginals as a 'crappy' civ. Might I point out to you that they have the oldest continuous societies on the planet, having lived-unhcanged-for close to 50,000 years. The longest any other society can point to is the almost 10,000 years which can be claimed by the Middle East.
Back to the topic, though. I think it would be cool if two nations, with very similar levels of culture, can get a 'cross-over' of borders (either directly, or when a cultural border overlaps an 'enforced' border) to create 'disputed territories'. Such territories can be asked for, or given, during diplomatic talks.
Secondly, as the eras past, borders should become less porous-and that a time should come when it is effectively impossible to build new cities, within anothers borders, without the permission of that nation.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Back to the topic, though. I think it would be cool if two nations, with very similar levels of culture, can get a 'cross-over' of borders (either directly, or when a cultural border overlaps an 'enforced' border) to create 'disputed territories'. Such territories can be asked for, or given, during diplomatic talks.
Secondly, as the eras past, borders should become less porous-and that a time should come when it is effectively impossible to build new cities, within anothers borders, without the permission of that nation.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Maybe territory should be multi-layered:
1. Actual control - essentially the land around your cities and also forts and colonies (which are pretty crap in Civ III and I never bother with them - might as well build a city to claim the resource).
Like CivIII you get two squares around a city, and one square around forts and colonies - but there is that extra bit between almost touching areas of influence (so you can build forts three squares apart and have a contiguous border).
Forts should cost something though - to prevent excessive building...
2. Claimed Territory - area outside of your immediate influence, but nearby. Not sure on the mechanics of claims, but you could end up with multiple civ's claiming the same tile.
3. Culture - this should bleed out into other Civ's - so your city can be influenced by a neighbour, but they can also be influence by you. Ever been to a European border region - it isn't just German, German, German, French if you go along a straight line - there is a kind of middle ground...
I like the idea of minor Civ's (I saw this in GalCiv) and they can become vassals of the major powers, and such... not sure about them just "popping" up - what about tech? Perhaps give them a reduced economy - so then they rely on a greater power?
1. Actual control - essentially the land around your cities and also forts and colonies (which are pretty crap in Civ III and I never bother with them - might as well build a city to claim the resource).
Like CivIII you get two squares around a city, and one square around forts and colonies - but there is that extra bit between almost touching areas of influence (so you can build forts three squares apart and have a contiguous border).
Forts should cost something though - to prevent excessive building...
2. Claimed Territory - area outside of your immediate influence, but nearby. Not sure on the mechanics of claims, but you could end up with multiple civ's claiming the same tile.
3. Culture - this should bleed out into other Civ's - so your city can be influenced by a neighbour, but they can also be influence by you. Ever been to a European border region - it isn't just German, German, German, French if you go along a straight line - there is a kind of middle ground...
I like the idea of minor Civ's (I saw this in GalCiv) and they can become vassals of the major powers, and such... not sure about them just "popping" up - what about tech? Perhaps give them a reduced economy - so then they rely on a greater power?
mastertyguy
I'm tired!
I think the people living near the cultural borders could change cultural nationality, like minor culture flips. This would respect the nature of realism, and would lessen the weird effects of a bad luck with your core city flipping to your neighbour, because there is a 0.000001% probability per turn for this to happen.
Gogf
Indescribable
If there is a small stretch of land isolated from any unsettled land, and surrounded only by your land, it should become yours, to prevent annoying instances like the one you mentioned.
Similar threads
