 |
|  |
 |
|
adaMada
|
 |
"The Iron" Stadium, Ubergorsk, Apolytonia (C3DG)
Mar 2000 time: 00:16
|
|
I voted for it being an act of war, but I think it should be somewhere in the middle. If it's going to seriously impact your border, you should have the option of saying no, but that should seriously tick the other nation off, and if you say yes, it should make them much happier with you. In other words, a diplomacy tool... also, if they go ahead and make the city, it's an act of war. I also think it should depend on how much shifting happens -- what's unacceptable is the AI putting cities that touch your boarders in an effort to push your boarders back as far as possible, but if it'll cause a one-square push back on a city with a huge culture, then I don't think it's as big an issue. Having said that, though, that'd be hard to implement, and I don't think it's the biggest issue out there with this game, so...
-- adaMada
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jbird
|
|
I had been chewing on this idea myself, and i'm suprised and glad that someone else brought it up. I don't mind if a civ builds a town near my city. I don't mind if he builds a city, and eventually his culture is powerfull enough to push back my frontiers. I *do* mind when I build a city to harness a resource (generally within the working radius of my civ, and that tile is often *worked* by my farmers/miners, because the resource sqares have bonuses with them).
Now, I don't want to call for "real life" here, but you can't just kick the farmers of one nation out of the land they're working and not have that nation be justifyably upset. This is *exactly* the type of thing that caused wars in Earth's history, and I would like to see it modeled in Civ3 as well.
Jbird
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Malkuth
|
|
This is how you win with Culture victory though. When An AI plants it on a border thats fine thats part of the game. But when it plants it in an empty space middle of your empire thats bad, since he just gave you a free City.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Venger
|
|
Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Jan 1970 time: 23:16
|
|
The border system in Civ3 really isn't much of a border system. The border of the United States doesn't change when some Mexican squatters create a shantytown along it.
A real border system should be enforceable. Right now, the only enforcement is that you cannot buld a city directly inside a nations "border". However, you can put one right next to it and push back my border. Huh? Come on guys, there has to be a better way than this.
And that way should be that a city's border cannot retract unless the city is destroyed by another Civ. It makes ZERO sense that a city I found suddenly loses territory because the neighbor built a FRIGGIN TEMPLE. Once a border is established, only the change of ownership of a city should be able to modift those borders.
Now mind you, this still encourages building temples and cultural buildings to expand your borders until they are met, but once they meet, that's that. When the Space Needle opened we didn't suddenly expand the Canadian border...
Venger
Venger
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16. Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|