I think the way the vanilla version maintained expansion control was perfect and realistic even though it was a bit constraining for too long (the Roman empire became quite large long before the vanilla game allows such expansion). Expanding too rapidly simply cost too much in the vanilla version. It is all about finance. I could never expand beyond a couple of cities in the early game. That's why I was surprised at how easy it was to expand so early in C2C but I guess I shouldn't be with all the extra buildings with financial bonuses.
Curtailing expansion should not be about imposing artificial limits. It should be about curtailing the financial advantage.
I have noticed that the civics are a HUGE part of your financial ability to expand in C2C. This is as it should be. It is all about the balance between the financial relief on city maintenance found in civics versus how many financial buildings you can build.
Currently, this burden is relieved too quickly (too early in the game) and then there is a LONG period of time during when the burden cannot be relieved at all. The medieval financial limit goes on a bit too long.
This probably does not need to be a major focus right away. As some have suggested right now we are focusing on other things but I do have some suggestions for how to approach it when the time is right:
To give some realistic ideas on how this can be accomplished:
- Start the game with a larger financial penalty on expansion (maintenance fees), but reduce the financial burden the capital city imposes (the only thing that should really add to capital maintenance costs are wonders).
- Map size could have some relevance and may be used as a factor as wished (game option?)
- All civics should relieve the financial penalty SLOWLY. Realistically speaking here are my suggestions on era "caps" (to give an idea of how much financial penalty should be relieved). Civics discovered just before or just after the said era should financially constrain a nation to the following limits. Variations between extremes can depend on civic financial penalties:
- Prehistoric era: 2-3 city cap.
- Ancient: 4-5 city cap.
- Classical: 6-9 city cap. (Rome was probably the equivalent to 8-9 cities on a large/huge map).
- Medieval: 7-12 city cap. Very Civic dependent.
- Renaissance: Civic dependent (9-16)
- Industrial: Completely civic dependent with no real limit with three or so civics. See below.
In the late game expansion ability should be controlled entirely by civics. There are three civics that held a major expansion advantage historically: Imperialism (such as England, France, and Spain. This is somewhat different from the original Monarchy form), Democracy (such as the US) and Communism (such as Russia/USSR and China). These three civics should be available just before or just after the switch to the industrial era depending on the civic (Democracy and Imperialism just before; Communism just after).
By this point in history the issue of expansion is not a financial one. At least not with democracy and communism (with Imperialism it was... but the goal of the successful empires was to find and exploit new and valuable resources). As such, these two government types should not have such a limit (maintenance prices should be as low as possible or non-existent). Imperialism should be higher but should get extra money from bonuses, relieving the burden. Similar civics discovered with later technology (such as Federalism) should have similar restrictions (or lack of restricitions) on expansion.
ALSO: Keep in mind that with Imperialism, there should be an over-seas and distance related anger/unrest factor increasing the tendency for a revolution to be independent. This isn't due to internal unrest but rather due to ideological differences about human rights and freedoms being subverted. Other civics can alleviate this unrest. With Communism, a similar penalty should occur but only with overseas cities (for similar reasons) and may not be alleviated since communism is rather subversive of freedom by nature. In other words, certain civics that oppose the idea of communism should not be available (either because they are within the same tree or because they are disabled).
What should limit expansion in the late game (if the appropriate civics are selected) is simply foreign affairs. Unclaimed land should be fair game without any penalty. Subverting native cultures should create some hostility internally (create anger in cities, depending on other civics since they may be indoctrinated and not have an issue with imposing values... for example: cowboy indian propaganda) and should only affect international opinion based on civics (those with a more "fair" outlook should be affected negatively). Declaring war on other countries without provocation (basically for land and/or resources) should have monstrous effects internationally, having a negative affect on
ALL opponents,
particularly those with the SAME CIVIC!!! (Historical examples: China vs Russia because of competitive reasons. And the US's current "imperialistic" image among certain demographics and countries because our imposing is seen as hypocracy).
NOTE: To let people know how this compares to the current ability to expand in the game: I was able to expand to 10 cities or so by the ancient era. After the ancient era I wasn't able to expand much at all until I got to the late medieval era. I am currently in the middle of the Renaissance era with about 14 cities and am finally able to expand some. I think I will be able to add about 5-10 cities. The bottom line is that my current limit isn't bad... but I was given way too much freedom at the beginning and not enough in the middle of my game.
look out.
