27-10-2004 23:20									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Bad example, Vienna as the capital can not flip, Austria flipped as a whole for a reason very different of culture. I think every Austrian would be insulted to death if he would be culturally compared with a German. This works the other way as well.

But there have been numerous examples of culture flipping throughout the history. Lots of seemingly successful conquests ended up as long term failures, because the conquerors were "assimilated" by the local population. China comes to mind, which was conquered by the Mongols, but it remained to be China in the end without combat. The Mongolians simply got lost among the Chinese without countable cultural influence. Or numerous Germanic tribes conquering parts of Rome.

But this historical flipping was a long, floating process, not a sudden switch like it is implemented in Civ3. Also, it happened with conquered territory, I can't think of a single example of peaceful flipping (though there may be some, I am not a history expert). This is why I call it "poorly implemented". There are better solutions, like a slow loss of population in border cities or others. Sudden flipping is the easiest to implement, but the most annoying for the player. But the predicate unfun has never been a hinderance to implement something in Civ3.

Let's see how Civ4 works out. There have been some announcements by Mr. Johnson in his presentation, about eliminating unfun elements. But this is theory. More practical reasons like limited budget and even more limited development time will most likely strangle this noble intention.

	27-10-2004 23:45									#32
	Increase the size of your Attachments

If Firaxis is retaining the high corruption level for cities, especially for cities on the fringes of an empire, I'd favor actual shield and gold transfers from those cities rather than population transfer. These transfers would not be affected by corruption either.

If city A loses a pop. to city B, but that pop. does not really add anything to city B except another mouth to feed (because of high corruption) then there is little to gain by it.

Production and gold transfers, however, can make culture lucrative without the brazen aggrivation caused by a flip. Sorta like slowing bleeding your rival to death.

	28-10-2004 18:48									#33
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Vince278 Never liked flipping. Very unrealistic. I'd also like to hear some good historical examples that match what happens in the game.

Any city outside of the US that has a McDonald's in business is already in the first stages of culture flipping. Other symptoms include Coca Cola, Rock and Roll, and TV sitcoms. Beware.

	28-10-2004 20:00									#34
	Suffering from ads?

McDonalds now serves salads and British Rock and Roll was the cause of the Vietnam defeat.

Coke should be a new resource in Civ4...

All hail New York's Sienfeld!

	28-10-2004 20:39									#35
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Theseus Oh, Coracle?? Where are you??

Has he been here lately? I haven't popped into this forum for quite a while. I miss his

	29-10-2004 01:12									#36
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I dont find it unbalancing and it adds another dimension to the game.

Like someone previously said starve down the city and add a worker or two.

	29-10-2004 01:32									#37
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by gunkulator The problem with keeping most units outside the city is that you'll never end the resistance in any decent sized city. You need units inside the city for that. Until the resistance ends, you can't starve down the population. And just how do unarmed civilians defeat so many fighting men and not suffer even one citizen lost? I know realism isn't the end-all but come on.

When the host civ has been finally conquered, then you can garrision the city safely, and that will end the resistance.

	29-10-2004 09:06									#38
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I also never liked losing that cool stack of death when the city flips, especially when their best regular troops were unable to stop it. What happens to them? I guess the city gets them all drunk then runs around slitting throats will they are passed out.

	29-10-2004 09:40									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by hexagonian If Firaxis is retaining the high corruption level for cities, especially for cities on the fringes of an empire, I'd favor actual shield and gold transfers from those cities rather than population transfer. These transfers would not be affected by corruption either. If city A loses a pop. to city B, but that pop. does not really add anything to city B except another mouth to feed (because of high corruption) then there is little to gain by it. Production and gold transfers, however, can make culture lucrative without the brazen aggrivation caused by a flip. Sorta like slowing bleeding your rival to death.

From reading your post, it doesn't sound like you are talking about the Civ3 culture flip. Population does not move from one city to another, but cities are suddenly assimilated by the superior culture in whole. Perhaps you were thinking of that game in your head that is both more realistic and fun to play...

[edit: upps, just figured out you were responding to something Sir Ralph mentioned. BTW- flipping is more likely the closer to a capitol you are, so corruption would be that much less a factor...]

	29-10-2004 10:19									#40
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph But there have been numerous examples of culture flipping throughout the history. Lots of seemingly successful conquests ended up as long term failures, because the conquerors were "assimilated" by the local population. China comes to mind, which was conquered by the Mongols, but it remained to be China in the end without combat. The Mongolians simply got lost among the Chinese without countable cultural influence. Or numerous Germanic tribes conquering parts of Rome. But this historical flipping was a long, floating process, not a sudden switch like it is implemented in Civ3. Also, it happened with conquered territory, I can't think of a single example of peaceful flipping (though there may be some, I am not a history expert). This is why I call it "poorly implemented". There are better solutions, like a slow loss of population in border cities or others. Sudden flipping is the easiest to implement, but the most annoying for the player. But the predicate unfun has never been a hinderance to implement something in Civ3.

The Mongol comparison doesn't seem to hold water as I believe they conquered and ruled the whole of China for many generations. The Germanic tribes would be a better example as the Palace was maintained in Rome (and later 'jumped' to Constantinople ;-).

I'm not very familliar with the specifics of the Greek-Persia conflict pb2k, but being part of an invasion doesn't sound like a comperable situation.

Would the Hong Kong situation be closer to a flip or to a diplomacy 'gifting'?

I was also thinking of the USA assimilating Toronto, but couldn't put a date on the event...

	29-10-2004 11:00									#41
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Rommel2D The Mongol comparison doesn't seem to hold water as I believe they conquered and ruled the whole of China for many generations. The Germanic tribes would be a better example as the Palace was maintained in Rome (and later 'jumped' to Constantinople ;-).

So? And is it Mongolia now? Or got the Mongols expelled by force? No to both. The Mongols got integrated, swallowed by the Chinese population. It is a much better example than with the Germanic tribes.

As I said, historical cultural conversion is a long, floating process. It has nothing to do with the sudden, annoying flippage à la Firaxis.

	29-10-2004 11:08									#42
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph As I said, historical cultural conversion is a long, floating process. It has nothing to do with the sudden, annoying flippage à la Firaxis.

But if you take into account the years that pass with each turn, then early flips are exactly what you describe - they can occur a couple turns after the city has been conquered. So the process is long, taking at least 20-30 years and often much longer. Just the implementation lacks, because there are no foreshadows of the event. Later in the game the fips are simply uprisings and those are fast and violent. Sort of like the present situation in Iraq, following the American conquest...

	29-10-2004 11:46									#43
	Increase Your PM Length

Yes, let's hope the 140,000 troops suddenly disappear.

	29-10-2004 18:54									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

"I'm not very familliar with the specifics of the Greek-Persia conflict pb2k, but being part of an invasion doesn't sound like a comperable situation."

Care to elaborate why? There were many Greek city-states. The Great War(s) with Persia was(ere) imminent. Several polis abandoned their Greek brethren and joined the Persians. I'll admit it's not exactly like CivIII mechanics, but I think you're asking for too much if you expect that from anything in CivIII. Can you give me a historical example of an ROP-rape? The Pyramids putting granaries in all Egyptian cities? A unit that can move at infinite speed? Or can you accept that everything in this and any simulation game is merely an approximate abstraction of real world events?

	30-10-2004 05:20									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Well, right-of-passage agreements are the basis of the game mechanics and obvious enough. The RoP-rape is a strategy and construct of the player (but wouldn't Germany-Italy in WWII be such a situation?)

The Pyramids as a 'Wonder' indeed awed and inspired the Egyptain population. The results could readily have been increased agricultural production without the normal investment in infrastructure, IMO.

A rail transportation network is much more efficient than it's contemporary road network. The CivIII implementation of this could use serious refinement, but there are plenty of threads already dedicated to that...

Every facet of the game that I can think of seems like a (mostly) elegant abstraction of some historical reality, except for the sudden, city-based culture flip. It seems more like a clumsy, last minute idea kludged into the game to get it out the door before an Infogrames deadline...

	30-10-2004 05:37									#46
	Remove this text

I don't know, it sounds like we agree but feels like we're debating. All your examples seem like they acknowledge that the game mechanics are not directly applicable to RL. Also, you don't seen to be pointing how the Greek example is not applicable as such. Why not? It was both sudden and city-based, which seems to fit your criteria.

	30-10-2004 05:52									#47
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph Bad example, Vienna as the capital can not flip, Austria flipped as a whole for a reason very different of culture. I think every Austrian would be insulted to death if he would be culturally compared with a German. This works the other way as well.

Far be it from my to argue with someone from Germany about this point, but don't you think the difference between an Austrian and a German is pretty darn close in "civ terms". I mean, take the Zulus for example. They represent all the unique African tribes and cultures (excepting Eygpt) as there are no other African civs. Doubtful that someone from Kenya considers themself "the same" as someone from the Senegal.

I think there is a little creative leeway granted here to the makers of the game.

There are many examples of cities/regions shifting from one side to other throughout history. Exploring the specifics in detail may lead one to conclude that a particular historical example doesn't "match" what culture flipping is in civ III. But, as gunkalator stated....historical realism is not the end all. Some aspects of culture flipping could be refined, but bottom line - I tend to like the feature. Well, it's just my opinion.

	30-10-2004 05:53									#48
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph So? And is it Mongolia now? Or got the Mongols expelled by force? No to both. The Mongols got integrated, swallowed by the Chinese population. It is a much better example than with the Germanic tribes. As I said, historical cultural conversion is a long, floating process. It has nothing to do with the sudden, annoying flippage à la Firaxis.

Earlier in the same post you dismissed SG's Austria example, citing Vienna's capital status as one of the reasons. Why do you then suggest the Mongols, when China entirely lacked a capital for generations?

I'm not denying cultural assimilation happens, just that the CivIII implementation isn't remotely recognizable as such. Something along the lines of what you and Hexagonian briefly touched on sounds much more promising...

	30-10-2004 06:07									#49
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by punkbass2000 It was both sudden and city-based, which seems to fit your criteria.

But did the Greeks join the Persians because they admired their culture? It sounds like it was purely a matter of military intimidation and political scheming. There's not much room for abstraction here: your cultural advisor comes up and slaps you in the face with it.

	30-10-2004 07:46									#50
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Well, I guess the way the cultural advisor words I admit it is a little off, but if you look at a lot of the factors that make a flip possible, they are somewhat militaristic. I believe I've read that city that doesn't have a chance of flipping unless its city radius (the 21 squares) is impinged upon by another civs cultural borders or it has foreign citizens in the city. This certainly would have been the case in at least some of those Greek city states. Also, Persia would have, in fact, likely had a much higher culture than Greece (being more that twice in size and being generally a much older civilization under various names).

	30-10-2004 08:26									#51
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Nah, face it, there really has never been any such thing as 'positive' CF (i.e., a city/nation volunteers to be absorbed into another) in the RW. It's all been military or economic. People are just too ornery.

'Negative' CF, though, has a long and gloried history, in many different fashions. Again, people are just too ornery.



* Theseus the ornery guy, as opposed to Sir Ralph, the curmudgeon

	30-10-2004 12:20									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Does that represent the shame and fear the Greeks would have felt when faced with the onslaught of hordes of banana-wielding immortals, causing them to flip...?

	30-10-2004 13:54									#54
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Shogun Gunner Far be it from my to argue with someone from Germany about this point, but don't you think the difference between an Austrian and a German is pretty darn close in "civ terms". I mean, take the Zulus for example. They represent all the unique African tribes and cultures (excepting Eygpt) as there are no other African civs. Doubtful that someone from Kenya considers themself "the same" as someone from the Senegal.

Don't get me started on this nonsense. Everybody sane knows, that there are only 3 entities of people worthy to be called a civilization in Europe: romanic, slavic and germanic. A Portugese civilization, my ass. Or a Dutch. And before anyone even thinks to pull a flame on me, yes, a German is just as ridiculous. Imagine how cool and uncrowded Europe could have been.

As for the difference between Austrians and Germans, you may be right in terms of "civilization", but you could try to call an Austrian a German or vice versa. If you get away un-slapped, kudos to you. Germans are for Austrians something like monkeys, rude, uneducated and uncultured. Austrians, on the other hand, are for Germans something like a breed of garden gnomes.

	30-10-2004 18:16									#55
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Very amusing allegory.... We have a garden gnome in the California governor's mansion

However, I don't quite understand your stance. The idea of this whole game is that different tribes are rivals to each other....they all start out even, and due to choices and chance, one civilization will surge ahead of another. A different set of circumstances and the Portugese would have been a civilization worth of your respect. And maybe the Dutch haven't cultured flipped back to Germany yet!

The cultural grouping keeps the civs, chosen to be in this game, are "somewhat related" (please don't take offense ) Culturally linked starting positions would suggest that those civs are somewhat related to each other. I don't think this concept is unreasonable. I mean I guess I should be irritated that America's "cultural cousins" in this game are Aztecs and other meso-american cultures. All European nations have *some* shared history, values, bloodlines, etc.

Okay, it's not 100% perfect in implementation, but point to one thing in any version of the civ series that is 100% perfect.

	30-10-2004 19:16									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Well the Portugese never have been a civilization in the first place. If you take the arch-european civs Romanics (not Romans!), Germanics (not Germans!) and Slavics, add the Celts (which I forgot to mention in my first post) and take in account influence from other continents (Turkish, Hun, Arabic etc.), every tribe or later Nation in Europe can be explained as something like a composition of these "archetypes".

	30-10-2004 20:57									#57
	Increase the size of your Attachments

You left out the Basques!!

	30-10-2004 21:53									#58
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph Well the Portugese never have been a civilization in the first place. If you take the arch-european civs Romanics (not Romans!), Germanics (not Germans!) and Slavics, add the Celts (which I forgot to mention in my first post) and take in account influence from other continents (Turkish, Hun, Arabic etc.), every tribe or later Nation in Europe can be explained as something like a composition of these "archetypes".

As the Syrians, Lebanese, Israelis, Arabs, Hittites, Assyrians and a host of others could be derivitives from Sumerians... Designing the game, they needed to make a few decisions.

I take your point regarding RL analysis. Yes, I understand the concept of Romantic language/culture group of Europe (Spain, Italy, France, Romania). In this way, in RL, they are not seperate civilizations.

	01-11-2004 02:39									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Forgive my ignorance as a European, but if you are looking for historical examples of culture flipping, couldn't you say that Texas cultured-flipped to the United States?

	01-11-2004 04:38									#60
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

At that time it was not part of the US, it was a sovereign state. It won it sovereignty from Mexico and join the US much later.

Since it was done by war I am not sure if that quailifies as a cultural flip or not. Anyway Texas is the only state in the union that was sovereign.