It was suggested somewhere in this forum that the only way to have more civs on a map is to make the map bigger, to which I suggested that it would be possible to have more civs on a maps at current map sizes by simply reducing the area of land that a city occupies - change the fat X of 21 squares to a simple square of 3x3 or 9 total squares. By reducing the area of cities, you can then pack them more tightly together, and assuming you build the same average number of cities you built before this design change, there would be "extra" map area made for additional civs... So what else changes due to this design change? The most obvious thing is that your city will have less than half the number of tiles to work than previously. You could simply boost the output of the tiles themselves, let's say doubling them, but I think that would unbalance the game by making things (population growth and production) occur at a much faster rate, until max is hit at least. Even though, doubling tile output doesn't make up for all the loss, so you will need more buildings like the forge which boost the basic resources (food, hammers, gold) of a city to make it as productive as before. In fact, I think that simply adding more buildings that boosted basic tile output rather than doubling tile output from the start would be the best way to make this work. Additionally, with cities being crammed closer together, you'd probably have to slow cultural border expansion some to compensate. Is there anything else that would need changing? Are there any downsides or upsides to this idea that I haven't seen yet? Having more civs on a map of the same size is a big plus for me as I always play with the maximum number of civs available, which does tend to slow the late game a bit.