Elemental cities

[Schmoe]

Read the forums. I have no problem with people sharing their ideas but that also means people can share their opinions which you do not seem to understand. Water cities and the like have been discussed already and there is a nomad mod in development.

I'm willing to accept the possibility that I mis-interpreted your original post. If so, sorry. Bear in mind that "How about 'No'" is a common phrase to be dismissive and condescending.

I pointed out the flavour problems I see as by now everyone knows the mechanical ones. Not to be offensive but your ideas hardly warrant a post barring your lesson in pseudoethics.

Frankly, I don't care whether you think my post meets some sort of standard of merit. Your opinion is as valuable as everyone else's here.

I would hardly wish at this point to make you look like a fool ...

You say this. And yet you go on in attempt to do the very thing you say you don't want to do.

... by mentioning the line you quoted from me deals with the Earth elementals in my previous line. The topic creator obivously understood and told me the cities were not literally of elementals (as did everyone else in the thread other than you.) You however, seem to have trouble with this. If you speak a foreign language I apologise for pointing this out but many of us here (including me) do as well.

Seems hypocritical to me. And condescending. Which is the tone from your original post I was responding to. Which, again, I admit that I may have misinterpreted. However your response here leads me to believe that you're simply spinning elitist BS.

No one is going to add a city to a mod just so for a "hall of fire" or a base for the Blackwind. Again I have no problems with ideas but I would rather discussion be realistic. Lanun workboat settlers have been proposed which does not sound bad to me but an Earth city that eats hammers? Please think about your post before you post it.

Well, I did think about my idea. I think it would be a pretty interesting idea that could add a lot to gameplay by giving players a neutral prize to pursue. The gameplay of the city would be different enough to present an interesting strategic decision, and it would be valued differently by the various civilizations. All in all, I think it's a pretty swell idea.

You seem to imply that there is something intrinsically wrong with my idea. Something that only the enlightened, such as yourself, can see.

I would say that you're being dismissive and elitist, yet again. If you're not (allowing for non-native language use), then I can give you suggestions for how to come across less so in future posts.

 

[Schmoe]

A 'Necropolis' style city. The earth here suffers from an age-old curse, causing all who die nearby to rise again as sentient undead. Food and health do nothing, and population grows only by people willingly migrating to the city (easier for evil civs, perhaps?). Starts out controlled by a horde of undead. All units built in this city recieve the 'undead' trait.

A 'City of the Rift'. A gigantic interplanar rift dominates this city's skyline - a passage trough which visitors from other worlds regularly arrive. Interplanar trade stations may be built here, granting the owner access to exotic, otherworldy trade goods. Extraplanar warriors may potentially be recruited here - at a price.

Very cool ideas.

I suppose they wouldn't need to start out as barbarians cities, on second thought. One could also allow a player's city to be transformed by wonders or event chains. The best approach, I guess, would be whatever best fits the lore for the particular concept.

Personally, I'm always very leery of transforming my civilization elements unless the transformation is a strict upgrade. I guess I see the trade-off being:

Allow city transformation via wonder or event:
- Gives more control to the player
- Gives all civilizations a chance at the city's benefits
- Just another wonder, so easier to implement
- "Just" another wonder, so not as novel
- Might require a decision to lose some benefit to gain another

Independent cities that must be conquered:
- Places more strategic emphasis on the map geography
- Can influence territorial wars
- Creates independent challenges to be overcome without interciv warfare
- Acquiring the city is nearly always strictly beneficial
- Could be more difficult to implement
- Increases novelty and sense of discovery

I'm an explorer at heart, so I always enjoy discovering rare things that I might not otherwise be able to achieve, and I prefer the latter. But I think either approach could work very well.

 

[subanark]

Here is another one:

City of Spirit
The first player to obtain 50 spirit points will have their capitol become the City of Spirit.
1 spirit point is gained each time you lose a living unit.
When a city is raised the each civ will get spirit points equal to the population of the city times their cultural influence in the city (normal round rules).

This city will get a nice bonus to culture, grants an extra 2xp to living units built, and adds happiness, but it also doubles all unhappiness expect that caused by population (including that of being taken over). If this city is raised, the populous will curse the conquering civ (possibly by causing all their units to become enraged) and adds a good chunk to the Armageddon counter.

This essentially gives a losing player an edge to help them try and make a comeback. It also gives a nice tempting "wonder" a would be conquer may want, if they can overcome the angry citizens problem (possibly by eliminating the civ).

I know, this is probably a bit too complex.