Borders

Oooh, that's brilliant. That way it is clear whether you are simply occupying land (during peace) or performing a hostile act.

To add...

Civ 1 claims land from a neighboring civ (civ 2) while at peace. This allows Civ 2 to valid pretext to declare war on Civ 1.

Land can also be discussed during diplomacy and if land is given up, no unit is needed to claim it.

If a city is taken, than the city (and the land it uses for resources) becomes part of your civs territory without a unit having to claim the land. Thoughts on this please...

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~

[Grier]

How did SMAC deal with borders, with regards to the last couple of posts?

[ember]

It didn't
Borders were always at the mid point of the two nearest cities, with the odd squares going to the NEWEST city (which i thought stunk, you should never be able to encroach into someone elses city radius by building a new city, without them ceeding land)

------------------
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced,
is indistinguishable from magic"
-Arthur C. Clark

[BeeBee]

ember,
your idea of military units annexing tiles of enemy land is great.
This way there's no need of taking cities in order to conquer territory. After all, also realistic !!

------------------
C'est dur etre bébé

[Grier]

quote: Originally posted by ember on 05-12-2000 08:04 AM It didn't Borders were always at the mid point of the two nearest cities, with the odd squares going to the NEWEST city (which i thought stunk, you should never be able to encroach into someone elses city radius by building a new city, without them ceeding land)

Well as long as they dont do borders like that then I will be happy.

[S. Kroeze]

quote: The idea of border is relatively new, and the ability to map out where the border should be is even newer. In the old days nations tended to just grab land when they feel like it. If somebody was already there then the parties involved settled the differences by violence. The only way to guard a border is to build forts and stick units in them. Putting sticks in empty places wouldn't work. There was no such thing as internationally recognised borders for the longest time. Nothing of that sort until the League of Nations came about. Before that, when even a few countries recognised some sort of border, nothing gauranteed other countries would follow suite.

Amen!

[The Joker]

I agree that borders should be in the game untill some "border" advance was discovered sometime in the industrial era (??). Before that there should be no such thing as borders, and things should therefor be handled much like in Civ2. After that time I think that borders should be handled much like described here by people like Grier and Ember. There are a lot of great ideas here.

[Grier]

Although it may be true that it wasnt until the 20th century before borders were internationaly recognised, they certainly did play their part in much of history. In game terms they are a visual aid and a diplomatic tool and IMO should be available to all civs from the beggining.