Is culture a good way of expanding ?

[Naokaukodem]

I would tend to say no : why only culture should expand our frontiers when we are surrounded by nobody at the start of the game ? what can prevent anyone to get any land as long as it is not too far from the city ? Civ2 has the good mechanism IMO.

Although, stay to be cleared the fact that a guy can't work a tile 2 (Civ2) or 3 (Civ5) tiles away a city. Why is this ? What can prevent a worker to work the land say 5 tiles away and bring back its labor to the city ? Alpha Centauri has the good mechanism.

Stay to convert the working machine of AC into Civ5 workers, because workers in Civ5 cost maintenance. We could still see a resource trade as gold for other stuff, but the workers late in the game are pretty expensive. (5 gold ? 6 ?)

I think we simply should be able to set routes, and depending on the distance, you start to receive the worked stuff some turn after the creation of this route. Like for example : If the tile worked is adjacent to the city, you start to receive the worked struff immediately. IF it's two hexes away, 1 turn later. 3 tiles : 2 turns, 4 tiles, 3 turns, 5 tiles, 4 turns, 50 tiles, 49 turns later, etc... This way, it would limit distance at which you set your workers, and create the need to build closer cities from the spot you are interested in.

 

[kirbdog]

You have the option of using gold, if the culture is too slow.

There are several drawbacks of having lots of cities, but being unable to work tiles more than 3 spaces away is the drawback of having few, or one.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Not considering mechanics but logic here. Re-read please.

 

[kirbdog]

Cultural borders also let us decide who gets a tile in case two cities are close enough to work it.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Cultural borders also let us decide who gets a tile in case two cities are close enough to work it.

In Civ2 it was first there first served. Something similiar would be cool minor the constant possible variations.

 

[Smokeybear]

Not considering mechanics but logic here. Re-read please.

Not disagreeing with you, but logic does not apply to how they made the mechanics, more often than not. Most of it was just arbitrary design decisions, crafted simply to make the game do what they wanted, and have no basis in how the real world works. Classic example: your empire slows down from 'unhappiness', the more successful it is at expanding? Seriously, now. I can just see Caesar's advisors, back in ancient times, telling him "Your Highness, we HAVE to slow down our armies and stop capturing so many other civilizations! Our roman citizens are so unhappy about your successes that they are rioting in the streets and threatening to revolt!" It's patently silly, but it's just a tool to keep the player from blowing out their hapless AI all the time.

 

[kirbdog]

A lot of the criticism of Civ 1 to 3 were "landgrab early game every time until the map is filled, I want to play Civ differently." So we got the cultural border system and the maintenance (civ 4) or cultural costs / national wonders (civ 5). They're designed to reward players who don't expand to fill the map as soon as they can.

There should be a revisit of SMAC, imo, that game was great. I liked supply crawlers in that game. There should also be more TBS competition to the Civ franchise so that you would be more likely to get more of the features you want out of a TBS game. Perhaps modders can do some of it for you with the Civ 5 engine.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Not disagreeing with you, but logic does not apply to how they made the mechanics, more often than not. Most of it was just arbitrary design decisions, crafted simply to make the game do what they wanted, and have no basis in how the real world works. Classic example: your empire slows down from 'unhappiness', the more successful it is at expanding? Seriously, now. I can just see Caesar's advisors, back in ancient times, telling him "Your Highness, we HAVE to slow down our armies and stop capturing so many other civilizations! Our roman citizens are so unhappy about your successes that they are rioting in the streets and threatening to revolt!" It's patently silly, but it's just a tool to keep the player from blowing out their hapless AI all the time.

Personnally I think such mechanics are so put away from reality that they are bad. I'm sure there are plenty mechanics that can fit realism + gameplay, only if you base the gameplay on reality. After all, computers are becoming more and more powerfull, and I think that gameplay should stick more and more to reality with time.

For example, your example : I think, and i'm not the only one, that global happiness is pretty bad. Indeed, it makes players, when fully prepared to war, to delay it, for the only reason of unhappiness. It was not the case in previous Civs, and it's very, very, annoying. One of the many reasons why Civ5 is not very good since the Prince difficulty level.

A lot of the criticism of Civ 1 to 3 were "landgrab early game every time until the map is filled, I want to play Civ differently." So we got the cultural border system and the maintenance (civ 4) or cultural costs / national wonders (civ 5). They're designed to reward players who don't expand to fill the map as soon as they can.

That was a problem in a replay perspective. But it was realistic. More, it was intoxicant. Sure, after a while you began to be bored, but it's hard to imagine a system that would maintain players totally unbored after thousands of games. And to say the least, I don't think global happiness is achieving this at all. Put back GH from Civ5, like it is now with the AI, and you have over-expansion everywhere, until the map is full, even in anecdotic areas. A proof that GH does not modify things profoundly, but only on surface.

The only true factor that limits expansion and wars in Civ5, is the GH. It limits wars when you are ready, and it limits also expansion when you have settlers, arbitrarily. It means that all of the other mechanics are still favourizing over-expansion. Put a arbitrary limitation to a system designed towards over-expansion, and you have a highly FRUSTRATING joke of a system.

 

[bobbo008]

For what it's worth, there's a mod on the steam workshop that allows remote resource cultivation. I forget if it's a special unit or if it's actually a worker that sits there.

That being said, I can only imagine being surrounded by 5 AI civs, each spamming workers to take up every resource on the map within 15 turns, forcing you into constant wars just to get a new luxury resource...

 

[Ryoga]

I would tend to say no : why only culture should expand our frontiers when we are surrounded by nobody at the start of the game ?

That's where you are wrong, to say that nobody is around is the same as saying that there are giant cows in the map.

You need to imagine that there are a lot of people in every single tile of the map.

Where do you think those barbarians pop from? They aren't growing out of thin air.
When some land is left alone outside from a major civilization or city state for a while, those people will band together and form barbarian armies.

But that wouldn't be possible if there weren't people to begin with.


The cities are just cities they do not include the countryside, to make those pesky tribes in the countryside join your city and swear allegiance to you, you need culture, then they'll switch to you and their lands will become your domain, or you can buy them.

Clearly you aren't buying tiles from nobody.

As for why your workers cannot work tiles outside from the cultural borders, that's because the people in there won't let them.

 

[tomtom5858]

Clearly you aren't buying tiles from nobody.

Actually, the tooltip tells you what's going on: you're funding settlement of the area. You aren't buying land, you're expanding your culture and influence throughout it. Remember, these are cultural boundaries, not political boundaries. Of course, this does make wars slightly more scary ("I will force those of your culture to adapt to mine!"), but it certainly makes more sense

 

[Naokaukodem]

That's where you are wrong, to say that nobody is around is the same as saying that there are giant cows in the map.

You need to imagine that there are a lot of people in every single tile of the map.

Where do you think those barbarians pop from? They aren't growing out of thin air.
When some land is left alone outside from a major civilization or city state for a while, those people will band together and form barbarian armies.

But that wouldn't be possible if there weren't people to begin with.


The cities are just cities they do not include the countryside, to make those pesky tribes in the countryside join your city and swear allegiance to you, you need culture, then they'll switch to you and their lands will become your domain, or you can buy them.

Clearly you aren't buying tiles from nobody.

As for why your workers cannot work tiles outside from the cultural borders, that's because the people in there won't let them.

Killlbray... sorry, but I have absolutely no sense that the map is fully populated.

In fact, there's just nothing. Barbarians that appear randomly on unwatched lands feel just like a gamey gimmick.

If there'd be people, we could see them, and interact with them. (other than just war or random bonuses like goody huts gave)

I think you have too much imagination, seeing things that does not exist and things like that...

 

[Ryoga]

I think you have too much imagination, seeing things that does not exist and things like that...

Like I said, if you take things at a face value then cows are as big as buildings.

If you think that what you see is not what it is supposed to be in practical terms then you are using your imagination.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Like I said, if you take things at a face value then cows are as big as buildings.

At least I have a sense that there is a cow there.

If you think that what you see is not what it is supposed to be in practical terms then you are using your imagination.

You must be right, in fact population over the map is obeying to the proportions of the cities : they are there, programmed into polygons, but they are so tiny that we can't see them. My bad.

...

It's a thing to adjust proportions of something that is represented, it's another to "imagine" things that simply does not exist.

 

[Galgus]

In logical terms, perhaps cultural borders represent how far away citizens will still be loyal to the city and its culture.

Mechanically, it gives a nice bonus for players focusing on culture buildings in new cities while slowing down expansion for less cultured empires.