Renaming Captured Cities

Cyc

Looking for the door...
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
14,736
Location
Behind you
Hi, this thread is for discussion on the trend of renaming captured cities with names from the Citizen Registry. It has been customary for our President to name any cities caputred in war or by Culture, with either the name at the top of the list, or one close to it (DP's discretion, really. If a citizen is continually at Chats and a city is captured that they really want halfway around the globe, and the next in line is questionable, well...ok.)

I have heard rumor that some people aren't favoring the renaming of captured cities. This worries me, as in order to get through the list of citizens, we'll have to be naming every city we can get our hands on. I strongly encourage this practice and hope we put our name on everything we take this game.

How do you fell about this? :coffee:
 
I dont mind about renaming the captured cities so long as im not the one doing the tedious task ;).
 
I am hoping that since we had earlier shown interest in playing a game of noble means, city renaming will not become a hotbed issue since we will not be forcing our will upon cordial nations.

That said, I have always been decidedly against the complete homogenization of other cultures once their citizens have pledged their forced allegiance to us. Some city names should stand, whether it be a rival's city capital or cultural center(aka Wonder city). So let's not adopt this as wholesale practice, but instead consider it on a case-by-case basis.
 
I dont like to rename. I think the preservation of old names tells some of the history of the game. But I know I'm probably in the minority here, and I certainly wouldn't wish to make an issue out of it ! ;-)
 
Every captured city should be left as it is, to see easily which ones are captured and which ones aren't.

It isn't so important to get everyone have their own named city IMVHO.
 
Donovan Zoi said:
I am hoping that since we had earlier shown interest in playing a game of noble means, city renaming will not become a hotbed issue since we will not be forcing our will upon cordial nations.

That said, I have always been decidedly against the complete homogenization of other cultures once their citizens have pledged their forced allegiance to us. Some city names should stand, whether it be a rival's city capital or cultural center(aka Wonder city). So let's not adopt this as wholesale practice, but instead consider it on a case-by-case basis.

I agree entirely. The extent to which I would perfer renaming would be to spell the names slightly differently, to make them in Japanese rather than Babylonian.

Last game I felt the city renaming was horrific, not just because most of the names were not only un-French but plain weird, but also because it ruins the history. You can write about the siege of Minsk, but it doesn't mean much if now its the City of the Damned. It completely ruins the history to rename these things, not to mention makes things confusing.
 
I wonder if there is a chance we can name barbarian tribes in the game after people that violate election laws and are in general aggreessive mudslingers, so at least we can get the satisfaction of exterminating these true barbarians in the field. :)

I know we can change their name with an editor :)
 
Provolution said:
I wonder if there is a chance we can name barbarian tribes in the game after people that violate election laws and are in general aggreessive mudslingers, so at least we can get the satisfaction of exterminating these true barbarians in the field. :)

I know we can change their name with an editor :)
which editor can do this?
im not sure this would be right... because someone could see the whole map...
 
Epimethius said:
I agree entirely. The extent to which I would perfer renaming would be to spell the names slightly differently, to make them in Japanese rather than Babylonian.

Last game I felt the city renaming was horrific, not just because most of the names were not only un-French but plain weird, but also because it ruins the history. You can write about the siege of Minsk, but it doesn't mean much if now its the City of the Damned. It completely ruins the history to rename these things, not to mention makes things confusing.

Yes this would be rather confusing. How about we rename a city if we hate it enough, a hate equal to somewhere along the lines of Rome dumping salt on Carthage.
 
That would be alright.

Though they called it the same thing before and after. They just razed it to the ground. In which case, there would be no city to rename. :p
 
I say we rename all the cities we capture, by force or by Culture. We have a long list of names put forward by our list of citizens. We should use as many of those names as possible.
 
Cyc said:
I say we rename all the cities we capture, by force or by Culture. We have a long list of names put forward by our list of citizens. We should use as many of those names as possible.
i agree, then we can get as many citiy names as possible used...
 
I'm all for keeping captured cities as is - it gives more of an idea of where the game has been, and it's easier to quickly know what area a city is in.

If we do rename captured cities, I'd rather keep the national identity of at least culture flip cities.
 
I almost always keep city names as is. I will change them sometimes if I have 2 cities with similar sounding names or if there is some particular reason I want to remember them, like they have a lot of resources or something.
 
Comnenus said:
I almost always keep city names as is. I will change them sometimes if I have 2 cities with similar sounding names or if there is some particular reason I want to remember them, like they have a lot of resources or something.

Yes, but how many Demogames have you played?
 
Top Bottom