Lebensraum - Alternate Ideas Brainstorm

[Hosannah]

Yes, razing a city with all its population.

I think you're confusing a game play mechanism with reality. Contrary to CIV, a modern-day nuke will level a city and most likely kill each and everyone of its inhabitants. In CIV it's a big inconvenience, but nothing more. Especially if you've got bomb shelters. That part is in fact very gamey and I prefer it that way. And when razing a city in CIV, to me, it always meant that all the people were fleeing the city before it was destroyed. I never imagined that my armies where going door to door and shooting everyone, but that's just me.

 

[CppMaster]

I think you're confusing a game play mechanism with reality. Contrary to CIV, a modern-day nuke will level a city and most likely kill each and everyone of its inhabitants. In CIV it's a big inconvenience, but nothing more. Especially if you've got bomb shelters. That part is in fact very gamey and I prefer it that way. And when razing a city in CIV, to me, it always meant that all the people were fleeing the city before it was destroyed. I never imagined that my armies where going door to door and shooting everyone, but that's just me.

The population is not moved anywhere, though (not in form of a settler nor increasing population somewhere else), so it makes sense to think that it's just killed

 

[Hosannah]

We are way off topic at this point. If people want to rename something that's fine, but lets get off this tangent about how much or little VP showcases human historical cruelty, and get back to an actual MECHANICS discussion.

I will try to take this elsewhere. Didn't want to derail your thread.

 

[usadefcon1]

Call it Forced Displacement for example. It's an existing concept that can be used to describe the existing game mechanic, but in a more neutral way. It's roughly definied as: An involuntary or coerced movement of a person or people away from their home or home region as a result of persecution, conflict, generalized violence or human rights violations.

Just insert this into any SQL file:

UPDATE Language_en_US
SET Text = 'Forced Displacement'
WHERE Tag = 'TXT_KEY_POLICY_INDUSTRIAL_ESPIONAGE';

 

[pineappledan]

Aaaaanyways, I think I got the silver bullet:

Lebensraum
Retain land after you raze cities
Citadels ignore tile ownership when placed

The problem with Lebensraum is that 2 tile radius citadels does so much more than allow you to "tunnel", as you say.

• 2 tile radius means you can fight entirely inside your own land in order to get to the next citadel spot you want to place. You never have to fight in enemy land, which means you can fight with permanent +10 HP healing advantage over your enemy, and no anti-warmonger fervor
• Having your next citadel placement be inside your land also means that your GGenerals don't need to enter enemy land to plant the next citadel. This means you don't need open borders via agreement or war to keep stealing tiles. You can do this while at peace, at no risk to your GGs
• 2 tile radius means you have a 5 tile wide front where you can plant your next citadel. That basically means blocking a Lebensraum civ with your own citadels to block placement is impossible, because they can just go around you
• 2 tile radius is immune to being blocked by citadels preemptively, because having tile steal that reaches further than the NoTwoAdjacency limit means you can just steal the citadels from the enemy.

If the tile radius remains at 1, but you can plant citadels in any land adjacent to your land, regardless of ownership, you can still create chains of citadels, but you have way more limitations than now:

• an opposing citadel can actually block you, and you can't just steal it
• You have to actually fight into an enemy's land in order to get your GG in position to plant the next citadel. For at least 1 tile you actually have to dislodge a civ on their own turf
• You have to have some sort of diplomatic contact with the civ you are stealing from in order to be able to path your GGeneral onto their land in the first place. You have to be at war or have open borders in order to culture bomb inside their land

 

[usadefcon1]

Aaaaanyways, I think I got the silver bullet:

Lebensraum
Retain land after you raze cities
Citadels ignore tile ownership when placed

The problem with Lebensraum is that 2 tile radius citadels does so much more than allow you to "tunnel", as you say.

• 2 tile radius means you can fight entirely inside your own land in order to get to the next citadel spot you want to place. You never have to fight in enemy land, which means you can fight with permanent +10 HP healing advantage over your enemy, and no anti-warmonger fervor
• Having your next citadel placement be inside your land also means that your GGenerals don't need to enter enemy land to plant the next citadel. This means you don't need open borders via agreement or war to keep stealing tiles. You can do this while at peace, at no risk to your GGs
• 2 tile radius means you have a 5 tile wide front where you can plant your next citadel. That basically means blocking a Lebensraum civ with your own citadels to block placement is impossible, because they can just go around you
• 2 tile radius is immune to being blocked by citadels preemptively, because having tile steal that reaches further than the NoTwoAdjacency limit means you can just steal the citadels from the enemy.

If the tile radius remains at 1, but you can plant citadels in any land adjacent to your land, regardless of ownership, you can still create chains of citadels, but you have way more limitations than now:

• an opposing citadel can actually block you, and you can't just steal it
• You have to actually fight into an enemy's land in order to get your GG in position to plant the next citadel. For at least 1 tile you actually have to dislodge a civ on their own turf
• You have to have some sort of diplomatic contact with the civ you are stealing from in order to be able to path your GGeneral onto their land in the first place. You have to be at war or have open borders in order to culture bomb inside their land

Would this allow citadels far inside of the other territory in order to snipe strategic resources?

 

[pineappledan]

Would this allow citadels far inside of the other territory in order to snipe strategic resources?

It would still require being at least adjacent to your own land, but you can bulb GGenerals inside enemy territory as if it were neutral.

 

[FinMc]

Aaaaanyways, I think I got the silver bullet:

Lebensraum
Retain land after you raze cities
Citadels ignore tile ownership when placed

The problem with Lebensraum is that 2 tile radius citadels does so much more than allow you to "tunnel", as you say.

• 2 tile radius means you can fight entirely inside your own land in order to get to the next citadel spot you want to place. You never have to fight in enemy land, which means you can fight with permanent +10 HP healing advantage over your enemy, and no anti-warmonger fervor
• Having your next citadel placement be inside your land also means that your GGenerals don't need to enter enemy land to plant the next citadel. This means you don't need open borders via agreement or war to keep stealing tiles. You can do this while at peace, at no risk to your GGs
• 2 tile radius means you have a 5 tile wide front where you can plant your next citadel. That basically means blocking a Lebensraum civ with your own citadels to block placement is impossible, because they can just go around you
• 2 tile radius is immune to being blocked by citadels preemptively, because having tile steal that reaches further than the NoTwoAdjacency limit means you can just steal the citadels from the enemy.

If the tile radius remains at 1, but you can plant citadels in any land adjacent to your land, regardless of ownership, you can still create chains of citadels, but you have way more limitations than now:

• an opposing citadel can actually block you, and you can't just steal it
• You have to actually fight into an enemy's land in order to get your GG in position to plant the next citadel. For at least 1 tile you actually have to dislodge a civ on their own turf
• You have to have some sort of diplomatic contact with the civ you are stealing from in order to be able to path your GGeneral onto their land in the first place. You have to be at war or have open borders in order to culture bomb inside their land

This is excellent, propose it and I'll vote for it

 

[SuperNoobCamper]

Aaaaanyways, I think I got the silver bullet:

Lebensraum
Retain land after you raze cities
Citadels ignore tile ownership when placed

The problem with Lebensraum is that 2 tile radius citadels does so much more than allow you to "tunnel", as you say.

• 2 tile radius means you can fight entirely inside your own land in order to get to the next citadel spot you want to place. You never have to fight in enemy land, which means you can fight with permanent +10 HP healing advantage over your enemy, and no anti-warmonger fervor
• Having your next citadel placement be inside your land also means that your GGenerals don't need to enter enemy land to plant the next citadel. This means you don't need open borders via agreement or war to keep stealing tiles. You can do this while at peace, at no risk to your GGs
• 2 tile radius means you have a 5 tile wide front where you can plant your next citadel. That basically means blocking a Lebensraum civ with your own citadels to block placement is impossible, because they can just go around you
• 2 tile radius is immune to being blocked by citadels preemptively, because having tile steal that reaches further than the NoTwoAdjacency limit means you can just steal the citadels from the enemy.

If the tile radius remains at 1, but you can plant citadels in any land adjacent to your land, regardless of ownership, you can still create chains of citadels, but you have way more limitations than now:

• an opposing citadel can actually block you, and you can't just steal it
• You have to actually fight into an enemy's land in order to get your GG in position to plant the next citadel. For at least 1 tile you actually have to dislodge a civ on their own turf
• You have to have some sort of diplomatic contact with the civ you are stealing from in order to be able to path your GGeneral onto their land in the first place. You have to be at war or have open borders in order to culture bomb inside their land

As much as i think this proposal is good on paper, my gripe against it is this is a late game policy/tenet that is supposed to be -as with every late game unit/tenet- should be pushing every contender to their win condition as the game should be coming to an end.
I personally do not like the Riot games balance approach that is every weapon comes in a fun sized nerf gun that barely tickles the opponent and honestly i don't even think lebensraum is that OP to start with or the one tenet that is pushing autocracy's late game too much *cough Military-Industrial-Complex and Iron-Fist cough*

 

[rkkn]

still lets you citadel your way into enemy territory. just lets the victim defend themselves
it's definitely still pushing you towards victory

 

[pineappledan]

I personally do not like the Riot games balance approach that is every weapon comes in a fun sized nerf gun that barely tickles the opponent

I don’t know what this means.

 

[SuperNoobCamper]

I don’t know what this means.

My bad,i forgot to attach this.

 

[Rekk]

Being able to place citadels in enemy territory was so strong that we removed it from being generally available.

 

[CppMaster]

My bad,i forgot to attach this.
View attachment 689365

So the Riot way is the best, because it won't disturb the balance as much as the Valve way. I wouldn't even consider the Blizzard way. Is it even accurate? StarCraft 2 is very balanced. The switching is not often.