Support Colonies

DarkCloud · May 5, 2001, 17:47

ICS solution:

Every new city you build costs 2 times what it would cost to run wehn it is first built.

This simulates the settlers needing extra support at first from the home contry.

The farther away from a size 5 city, the more it costs:
ex:
50 squares 5 times more
40 squares 4 times more
30 squares 3 times more
etc.

And it will cost this much unitl it crows to a size three. Or a closer 5-size city grows and reduces the cost.

May 5, 2001, 22:11

They've already stopped ICS with the rule that settlers take 2 population to build, and build size 2 cities.

Zanzin · May 6, 2001, 04:05

Yeah, I mean c'mon!! We don't want to kill civ expansion too much!

Thranduil · May 6, 2001, 17:24

Settlers take 2 pop when built?

Settlers build size 2 cities?

I never knew those things had already been implemented, when did they publish that information? I suppose it's nothing but rumors, personally

DarkCloud · May 6, 2001, 20:04

... Yes, but this is another way to do it... possibly a better way (

) and it may be good for Civ IV.

EOL · May 7, 2001, 05:21

The settler taking 2 pop to build etc.. may slow down ICS a bit but isn't going to stop it. Perhaps if cities took a big happiness hit if they had more say 7 squares overlapping other cities of yours. Some kind of overcrowding factor anyway.

EOL

Adm.Naismith · May 7, 2001, 06:27

quote:

Originally posted by Thranduil on 05-06-2001 05:24 PM
Settlers take 2 pop when built?

Settlers build size 2 cities?

I never knew those things had already been implemented, when did they publish that information? I suppose it's nothing but rumors, personally

No, they are not rumors, they are info available at Firaxis official site from a couple of months now.

Do you live on some Himalayan peak, don't you?

(Just kidding, please don't take it wrong)

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

Lord_Davinator · May 7, 2001, 08:22

He doesn't but I certainly live close to it

The idea does seem a but too far fetched to be implemented in civ3...

but none the less it is a good thought

lord of the mark · May 7, 2001, 10:04

quote:

Originally posted by EOL on 05-07-2001 05:21 AM
The settler taking 2 pop to build etc.. may slow down ICS a bit but isn't going to stop it. Perhaps if cities took a big happiness hit if they had more say 7 squares overlapping other cities of yours. Some kind of overcrowding factor anyway.

EOL

I dont need to see ICS stopped. Im not that anti-ICS. SOme people enjoy playing that way, thats fine. I just dont want it so overbalanced. So that somebody tells me how easy diety is, and then i realize they play ICS. I want ICS to be one strategy of several, not the easy way to win diety. SO slowing it down is just fine.

LOTM

tniem · May 7, 2001, 17:22

Taking two away from one city and then forming a new city with pop 2 is not going to stop ICS. It will just make it slightly harder.

Say you have a city size 3, it has four heads working the field. Now you build a settler and within two turns have formed a new city. The original city is down to size 1, with two heads working the fields, while the new city has size 2, with three heads working the fields. By building the new city you have the same population but with an extra worker working the field and a greater potential to grow. So ICS is not curbed at all, just slowed down. Before building new cities, the second city will have to grow one and the first city two.

To stop ICS, the first city would take a hit of two population and build a new city with one population. So that the same amount of workers are working the field, but with a better potential to grow. This second way is the way I believe Firaxis is talking about ending ICS. After all it is the only way that actually does stop ICS.

airdrik · May 7, 2001, 19:03

Here's an idea, the more cities you have the more corruption. Even in a democracy there should be some corruption if you have too many cities (esp. if they are too close together). One way this could be implemented is you add a certain distance to a city per city generally between it and the capitol. And since in ICS you generally have a lot of cities between your capitol and your outer cities, they would be so ridden with corruption that they would have virtually no output at all.

Another idea would be to increase corruption per city/foreignly worked tile in the city square, thus if you have 4 cities in a city radius, all working tiles in that radius then that would result in 100% corruption, even in democracy.

DarkCloud · May 7, 2001, 22:13

Firaxis' idea merely proliferates the disease of ICS.

Look at this

size 3 city; 2 leave
found a size 2 city which grows to size 3 in 20 turns can build settlers.
in those ten turns the size 3 which was leveled to size 1 has now grown to size 3 again can build settlers.

Thus you merely speed up the problem of ICS rather than slowing it down.

--
My method slows down the ICS problem to a standstill

tniem · May 8, 2001, 14:41

I really believe that the Firaxis solution is what I stated above, that a new city is founded at size one. The settler takes away two sizes. That is still the only way what Firaxis says makes any sense to curbing ICS. It would also make you think twice before you build a new city as to whether you really need it or if that is the place you want it.