Request for End of "Buying Tiles" System

[3335d]

The system of buying tiles in Civilization V is completely absurd. From whom are the tiles being bought? They're completely unoccupied and the ability to get them should only be limited by who gets to the tile first. Purchasing tiles from other civilizations makes far more sense, and perhaps should be added as a diplomacy feature.

I was wondering if anyone with modding skills would be able to create a mod to end the absurd system of buying tiles. Perhaps a system of "tile maintenance" would make more sense, with all tiles beyond a one-tile radius of a city and lacking improvements would cost (0.1 per turn per tile * old-system cost/500)

 

[thadian]

only if i can choose what tile my culture works toward instead of having it chosen for me.

 

[3335d]

I don't have modding skills, I'm just beginning to learn how. Plus, I don't have access to a Windows computer often enough to mod right now. So that's why I made a request rather than making it myself.

 

[thadian]

understood - but if someone makes a mod that changes buying tiles to "aiming natural culture" - i would use it. XD

 

[3335d]

Certainly, that would be an important part of any mod performing what I asked for in the proposal.

 

[Pazyryk]

Governments today and throughout history pay large sums of money to resettle (by force or incentive) population to unsettled areas, thereby bringing these areas into the nation's control ("who gets to the tile first" is mostly irrelevant in real history). How else would you represent this?

 

[thadian]

I prefer the option to aim my culture at the tile so i can choose to work toward that Gems instead of the useless tile off to the desert.

I would like the ability to "trade or sell" a tile to other nations.

Tile purchasing i believe should wait until the classical era. That way city growth, like tech growth is controlled by the player, and you have decisions to make that matter.

Do i want that spices right next to me, or do i want to expand 2 tiles north and block the choke point right there?

I could even see "demanding" or "offering" control of tile X in tribute or for a fee.

 

[3335d]

Governments today and throughout history pay large sums of money to resettle (by force or incentive) population to unsettled areas, thereby bringing these areas into the nation's control ("who gets to the tile first" is mostly irrelevant in real history). How else would you represent this?

I didn't realize this, I wanted to change the system and have a gold maintenance fee based on the square root of the number of tiles in the empire, times 1.0005^(n tiles). The reason for the latter term is that it would discourage the formation of ugly, massive, 90%-of-the-planet empires in the late game, and force players to think of their acquisitions. The former term does the same thing but is much more geared to normal-sized empires. So it would initially rise as a square root but ultimately become exponential.

I think that, based on your observation, this would mirror history and the decline of massive global imperial powers. Paying 519 gold per turn merely to maintain the amount of land that you have would surely bankrupt you in the long run.

 

[thadian]

and just many empires collapse when they expand beyond their means of capacity.

an empire eventually winds up having more population than resources for that populace, causing strife and internal disparagement of it's citizens. Rome became so big that only conquest could "feed" it's "hunger" and the bigger it became the bigger the hunger became. Eventually there was nobody left to conquer, no more external resources. Rome began to collapse, as the merchants squandered the resources and nobles were sent into poverty.

As it collapsed, and as with any nation, fragments of the populace drift away into rebellion or to relocate to a place with some "pull factors". When the merchants relocate, they take the wealth with them, which leaves the nation further impoverished and eventually it falls apart.

So, a game that has something like Stability (look up RFC) to encourage a nation to not fall into the same trap would be a good thing. Some could argue that in todays age (and in the last 100 years, especially the United Fruit Company case or the case with Patrice Lamumba) the first world has found the third world to be nearly defenseless against it's technology and still relies on a form of third world slavery for its own wealth.

In theory, if a forcefield appeared to block first world access to the third world, the first would be pretty screwed pretty quickly.

To keep on track, a form of stability and emigration would be nice to see. When a citizen migrates, it would take a percentile of the treasury (relocation of wealth). This way when people leave miserable nations to happy ones, they take some of their wealth and stimulate the economy in their new homeland.

In addition to something bad for unhappiness (revolution) there would be something GOOD for happiness (golden ages) and Immigration would enhance this by causing both population (and the food that made the citizen!) and some wealth - rewarding the happier nations with noble families relocating.

 

[3335d]

Excellent! I really wonder why they decided to ignore immigration entirely throughout the series.