11-12-2002 16:17									#1
	How cultural flipping should have been implemented Support Apolyton

I already posted this in the thread "how to avoid cultural flipping when taking over cities" but I thought it should really be discussed in its own thread.

Many people (in particular Coracle who seems to have made an entire career out of it) have observed that cultural flipping is badly implemented, in particular because of the way entire armies simply dissappear.

Here are my thoughts on how CF should have been implemented (perhaps they could be in civ4):
(1) smuggling of produce/funds to other nation (some lost corruption&waste turns up in an enemy city as useful shields and gold)

(2) Some of the population flips: An enemy settler is created next to the city (on their go so it can move immediately). Obviously this can be stopped by stationing troops around the city (berlin wall).

(3) defecting units. one or two units dissappear and turn up across the border as traitor units. These convert-class units could be marked as such and might have a chance of flipping back. If the converts are the only units in the city then the city culturally flips. veterans have a low chance of conversion. Elites have almost no change of flipping. Elite* units never flip.

(4) sabotage by enemy patriots causes damage to units (perhaps one or two points of damage). This could result in the destruction of a unit. If there are no units left then the city CFs.

	11-12-2002 18:44									#2
	Inflate your Upload Space

I don't like 1, 2 or 3.

Number 4, on the other hand, would make more sense than the current system. That way you could keep pouring in troops to hold the city. Damage to units would need to be based on the number of foreign citizens - chance of one or two hits per citizen perhaps? Or some such. That would definitely make the flipping process more apparent and managable.

	11-12-2002 19:00									#3
	Put an end to popups!

(1) explains where all the waste/corruption goes
(2) simulates refugees/immegration
(3) is similar to civ2 style unit conversion. Capturing a capital should also have a chance of yield convert-class units (think the Battle of France: vichy French forces fought against the allies. The Royal Navy sunk french ships in the Med in order to stop them falling into Germany's hands)

	11-12-2002 19:52									#4
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

TG,

Now how do we bent Firaxis' ear to impliment your excellent ideas, without having to mod a Civ4 ?

D.

	11-12-2002 20:13									#5
	Put an end to popups!

They read pretty much all the threads here (unless you've gotten on their 'Ignore Poster' list (like Coracle)).

I don't like 1 or 3. 4 could be workable. 2 is good in theory but it won't work in practice because I'd just kill the settlers (I don't mind wars). To make it work in practice you could have them automatically join another city nearby.

	11-12-2002 21:14									#6
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by WarpStorm To make it work in practice you could have them automatically join another city nearby.

I remember that being discussed at some point... have population slowly move to a nearby city of the Civ with the better culture, decreasing the population of the original city. That seems like a decent solution.

I'd kill the setter, too.

	11-12-2002 22:35									#7
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Stuie I'd kill the setter, too.

Not if if appeared on top of any enemies camped out in the city radius. This would have to be the default.

Also the settler would be created at the beginning of enemies turn so it would get an opportunity to get a move in. This would further increase its chances of reaching safety. You can safely assume that the enemy border would be very close to the city (this IS cultural reversion we are playing) so they could do a border crossing. even if there aren't enemy troops stationed there you would have to do a trip into enemy terratory to catch them, potentially exposing you to enemy attack/bombardment.

	12-12-2002 00:19									#8
	Inflate your Upload Space

I like the CF the way it is, but if I should change it, I'd do it this way:

Each city that is under the influence of a culturally stronger civ, will have its citizens slowly and automatically convert to the other civ's nationality.
The factors in such a change would be the same as now for the flipping itself, except for the foreign nationalities, of course. Overlapping tiles wouldn't be a factor in the flipping itself, but in the citizen "defection". The CF formula would ensure that only cities that have foreign nationalities could flip.

Having more and more foreign citizens would be a warning that a culture flip may occur, and you could do something about it (right now no warning). You could bring in more troops, build some culture buildings, raise the luxury slider and so on.

I think this would be a good model for the "population migration" type of CF (for revolt-like CF there is of course the sudden flipping, which is an armed rebellion of the rezistors, after all)

	12-12-2002 02:55									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by TacticalGrace Not if if appeared on top of any enemies camped out in the city radius. This would have to be the default.

You let enemies camp outside your cities? Why?

	12-12-2002 04:26									#10
	Increase Your PM Length

I think that slight modification of exsisting system could be OK.

Then city is about to flip, you lose SEVERAL units, but not all of them. Of course, if you have just one or two units, city flips, in other cases it does not.

	12-12-2002 05:06									#11
	Tired of ads?

'in particular Coracle who seems to have made an entire career out of it'




I do agree the system should be changed, radical alterations are perhaps not the way. Perhaps warning the city may overthrow, leaving you the option of increasing military presence and fighting it, or Cutting your losses and deserting. Also there should be an in-between when it comes to 'flipping' , ie , an uprising damaging troops and buildings, but not entirely losing the city to the AI, or the city becoming independant and being left for someone to 'liberate'.

Hell, i've just suggested even more compications

	12-12-2002 07:35									#12
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Rothy Perhaps warning the city may overthrow, leaving you the option of increasing military presence and fighting it, or Cutting your losses and deserting.

I like this as it would remove a lot of the "what the hell?" factor when a city you didn't suspect was discontented flips. Most of the times I know which cities are at risk, but ocasionally one will catch me off guard.

	12-12-2002 08:16									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by TacticalGrace (1) smuggling of produce/funds to other nation (some lost corruption&waste turns up in an enemy city as useful shields and gold)

Doesn't seem powerful enough. I'm open to ideas, but I want to preserve the importance of culture and thus CF.

Besides, in cities with the most cultural problems (newly conquered) you aren't going to have any useful shields and gold anyway.

quote: (2) Some of the population flips: An enemy settler is created next to the city (on their go so it can move immediately). Obviously this can be stopped by stationing troops around the city (berlin wall).

Too weak, IMO. Besides, during wartime flips it would just generate free workers that I could add back on to the city next turn.

quote: (3) defecting units. one or two units dissappear and turn up across the border as traitor units. These convert-class units could be marked as such and might have a chance of flipping back. If the converts are the only units in the city then the city culturally flips. veterans have a low chance of conversion. Elites have almost no change of flipping. Elite* units never flip.

Interesting idea. Could work.

quote: (4) sabotage by enemy patriots causes damage to units (perhaps one or two points of damage). This could result in the destruction of a unit. If there are no units left then the city CFs.

IMO, insufficiently powerful. I would just garrison cities more heavily and be done with it.

My ideal improvement to CF (even though I love it as is) would be how it is now, but when the flip happened:

- A few units would be converted, and stay as garrison.
- All other units would be expelled 1 to 2 tiles away form the city, and they would take a few hit points of damage (possibly enough to kill some units in some cases).

	12-12-2002 12:32									#14
	Get a bigger avatar today!

As we can see here, what ever CF idea they used people would have complained about it. Just like we see with the Resources idea.

That aside, I like the simple added warning idea best.

	12-12-2002 14:20									#15
	Inflate your Upload Space

cyclotron7 , I agree to your idea on (4). Large armies just don't disappear without a fight.

Anyway, I like it the way it is now No need for big changes.

	12-12-2002 15:53									#16
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by WarpStorm You let enemies camp outside your cities? Why?

put the boot on the other foot. I do sometimes camp outside enemy cities either in preparation for invasion or for pillaging.

anyway if you think about it the troops could be 2 squares away on the other side of the cultural border. I often line my borders with infantry in the industrial age. A convert settler would be able to reach this infantry line.

	12-12-2002 16:10									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

(1) culture->corruption

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 Doesn't seem powerful enough. I'm open to ideas, but I want to preserve the importance of culture and thus CF.

it's more powerful if you allow ideas (1), (2), (3) AND (4) to be active.

quote: Besides, in cities with the most cultural problems (newly conquered) you aren't going to have any useful shields and gold anyway.

If you capture a large city you will see that the production of the city is often quite large. Problem is that all but one of the shields/gold is wasted/corrupted. I'm suggesting that the cause of the waste/corruption is culture and instead of vanishing they go across the border.

culture->convert settlers

quote: Too weak, IMO. Besides, during wartime flips it would just generate free workers that I could add back on to the city next turn.

how would you do that if:
(a) the settler could appear 2 squares away from you r city AND
(b) it didn't appear on your go?

culture->damages units

quote: IMO, insufficiently powerful. I would just garrison cities more heavily and be done with it.

which is quite realistic really.
It could be configured to be quite powerful. If every foreign pop point could do one damage point then that's 12 damage for a size 12 city. enough to knock out 4 or 5 war wearied veteran invaders.

Remember that enemy bombardment can have a big effect once people start using artillery. A big bombardment could knock the occupying forces down to 1 or 2 HP. A size 12 city could revolt against 8 or 9 such units.

	12-12-2002 16:44									#18
	Inflate your Upload Space

So just bomb them to oblivion...?

	12-12-2002 18:13									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Gen.Dragolen Now how do we bent Firaxis' ear to impliment your excellent ideas, without having to mod a Civ4 ?

Do you really think Firaxis is going to change the basics of the game?

If there is ever a Civ4, all major contributions of this and other boards will be realised in Civ4.

	12-12-2002 20:29									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I read somwhere that there will be no more patches to civ3. What wasn't fixed with 1.29f will never be. PTW is a different matter though.

	13-12-2002 03:14									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

First, a note on warning: It is, IMO, a very bad idea. First off, you could just activate WLTKD and heavily garrison the city after the age of railroads... no flips. Second, you could just move or remove a single garrison unit and reset the random seed, making a flip unlikely. Third, it is my personal opinion that the flip sould be unexpected, a sudden rebellion.

quote: Originally posted by TacticalGrace If you capture a large city you will see that the production of the city is often quite large. Problem is that all but one of the shields/gold is wasted/corrupted. I'm suggesting that the cause of the waste/corruption is culture and instead of vanishing they go across the border.

That effect would be too small to register past the ancient age. Besides, CF usually happens on borders, where corruption and waste is rampant on both sides, so the enemy wouldn't even get anything out of it.

quote: how would you do that if: (a) the settler could appear 2 squares away from you r city AND (b) it didn't appear on your go?

Well, the settler would be appearing inside my city radius... easy pickings with any mobile units. It seems pretty easy to just pick the sucker off. Besides, my main argument that the effect is too insiginificant still stands. What are they going to do with a settler, anyway, especially after the middle ages?

quote: which is quite realistic really. It could be configured to be quite powerful. If every foreign pop point could do one damage point then that's 12 damage for a size 12 city. enough to knock out 4 or 5 war wearied veteran invaders.

If this was the case, all it would do would immediately prompt me to starve the city to nothing. Instead of solving the "genocide problem" with CF, that would make it worse. There would be almost no reason to keep an enemy city if it damaged your units on a regular basis like that.

Would you care to comment on my system in my last post?

	13-12-2002 14:28									#22
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Cultural flip is cool as it is. Culture is the overall best thing they've added to Civ and to change CF would in my opinion screw over the peace loving societies that get pounded on by the military muscle head societies!

Revolution is not pretty and that is what CF attempts to reproduce. Only if when you rebuffed the rebels they would start a Civ on their own could it be better.

	13-12-2002 15:19									#23
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 My ideal improvement to CF (even though I love it as is) would be how it is now, but when the flip happened: - A few units would be converted, and stay as garrison. - All other units would be expelled 1 to 2 tiles away form the city, and they would take a few hit points of damage (possibly enough to kill some units in some cases).

I didn't comment on your idea because it is so similar to the current system.
but since you insist, I think it is an improvement on the current system, and it is the kind of thing that Firaxis should release as a patch. It would solve the biggest gripe that people have which is that they lose all their units in a flip, which
(a) doesn't make sense and
(b) makes the game less fun

your suggestion solves (b) but still suffers a little from (a).

	13-12-2002 15:36									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 That effect would be too small to register past the ancient age. Besides, CF usually happens on borders, where corruption and waste is rampant on both sides, so the enemy wouldn't even get anything out of it.

what about when you invade enemy cities? this is one of the main CF problem areas for people. Under these conditions corruption and waste is NOT rampant on the side of the enemy and is is on the side of the invader.

quote: Well, the settler would be appearing inside my city radius... easy pickings with any mobile units. It seems pretty easy to just pick the sucker off.

It appears in your terratory and moves immediately across the border. Even the AI would figure out that it would need to move an infantry unit on top of it once that has happened. So your mobile unit would get to "pick off" an infantry. You might get your citizens back but then you've still got to do the reverse yourself...

quote: Besides, my main argument that the effect is too insiginificant still stands. What are they going to do with a settler, anyway, especially after the middle ages?

perhaps. before the middle ages it would be very useful. By industrial you'd want to use them to join a city.

quote: If this was the case, all it would do would immediately prompt me to starve the city to nothing. Instead of solving the "genocide problem" with CF, that would make it worse. There would be almost no reason to keep an enemy city if it damaged your units on a regular basis like that.

It would be pretty annoying but that's the idea. It is meant to tie up troops. It would give you better feedback as to how much national unrest there was. This is more realistic than the current system and allows you to send more troops to put down the unrest.

	13-12-2002 18:37									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 There would be almost no reason to keep an enemy city if it damaged your units on a regular basis like that.

Tell that to the Russians in Chechnya.

I really like the idea of units taking damage, and having to move in fresh troops to quell the potential flip. It would create a realistic drag on your economy, and perhaps should contribute to war weariness as well.

Hmm...

	14-12-2002 01:31									#26
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by TacticalGrace but since you insist, I think it is an improvement on the current system, and it is the kind of thing that Firaxis should release as a patch.

That's ridiculous. Firaxis "should" release nothing as a patch except bug fixes. Why should Firaxis specifically change their game to implement your alteration that, to many people, is not even needed? Why Firaxis obligated to change the game to match your opinion on an issue?

quote: It would solve the biggest gripe that people have which is that they lose all their units in a flip, which (a) doesn't make sense and (b) makes the game less fun your suggestion solves (b) but still suffers a little from (a).

Most people who gripe about CF say they like it except for the dissapearing units. If we solve that, it seems like it makes perfect sense. I see no reason to change it further. As for fun, I don't pretend to know what other people find fun.

quote: what about when you invade enemy cities? this is one of the main CF problem areas for people. Under these conditions corruption and waste is NOT rampant on the side of the enemy and is is on the side of the invader.

But CF does not just occur in wartime. Your corruption idea, while interesting in wartime, is toothless in peacetime for the reasons I stated. Besdies, production in captured cities is already removed by resistors and high unhappiness. The conquerer really wouldn't be losing anything.

quote: It appears in your terratory and moves immediately across the border. Even the AI would figure out that it would need to move an infantry unit on top of it once that has happened. So your mobile unit would get to "pick off" an infantry. You might get your citizens back but then you've still got to do the reverse yourself...

Well, I would have to kill the infantry anyway if it was that close to my cities... only this time, I would get free workers. I don't see the point. Besides, getting the workers back would not be hard as I would have the advantage of controlling the roads/rails around my new city... or, like the AI does, I could just disband the workers.

quote: perhaps. before the middle ages it would be very useful. By industrial you'd want to use them to join a city.

True, but I almost never get CFs before the industrial age because borders have not grown a lot yet. As for joining a city, by the industrial age another 2 pop is a drop in the bucket.

quote: It would be pretty annoying but that's the idea. It is meant to tie up troops. It would give you better feedback as to how much national unrest there was. This is more realistic than the current system and allows you to send more troops to put down the unrest.

In what way does a "pretty annoying" feature solve your own aforementioned goal of making the game more fun?

Anyway, my point still stands that I would simply raze the city if my units kept getting killed regularly.

Stuie:

quote: Tell that to the Russians in Chechnya.

I don't care about real life examples of annoyance; I don't care for that in a game. Gameplay > realism.

Besides, the Russians have an interest in keeping it for other reasons, including oil. It's not just a dinky border city. I'm sure the Russians would raze Chechnya too and re-settle it with Russians if they could.

	14-12-2002 12:35									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

a while back i suggested something similar to 4:

rebellions or massacres, where either your unit is damaged or civilians are lost . so it would be like a regular battle but btween your units and civilians

	16-12-2002 16:15									#28
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 That's ridiculous. Firaxis "should" release nothing as a patch except bug fixes. Why should Firaxis specifically change their game to implement your alteration that, to many people, is not even needed? Why Firaxis obligated to change the game to match your opinion on an issue?

Actually I was talking about your suggestion at that point, not mine. And you got the wrong emphasis. I was suggesting that your idea (if it was to be implemented) should be released as a patch (as opposed to something that would have to wait for a later version or even an add-on pack [son of PTW])

	16-12-2002 16:48									#29
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by player1 I think that slight modification of exsisting system could be OK. Then city is about to flip, you lose SEVERAL units, but not all of them. Of course, if you have just one or two units, city flips, in other cases it does not.

My idea:
Half the population of the city temporarily turns into conscript military units, and fight against the garrison. If the garrison lose the city flips. If the garrison wins, the population of the city drops by several points.

	16-12-2002 18:37									#30
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Sounds good

I'm not sure if it will be powerful enough. What if resisting citizens could spawn two conscripts? Citizens of a different nationality should not take part in a revolt.