I think stronger Independent People + stronger Penalties for large empires would help the game a lot for countering the snowball.

The key is penalties for large empires, if it is easier just to conquer IP, then they can't be significant as anything other than roadbumps.

There can be tensions between empires for there influence on these independent states. 

What if there is world congress. 

The result will be completely random and empires will try to bring votes on there side.

There can be a cold war scenario where empires are toppling government of independent states and putting against you. Also signing defensive pacts.

Its great idea that independent cities combining and forming major minor civ which have a expansionist trait which have huge army and attacking empires.                        

             Then major minor civ collapse and forming many smaller minor empire result in change of other empire influence.

Imagine scenario if you are in majority in world congress then collapse of minor civ push you in minority.

It will promote espionage to increase our influence and it can unlock new mechanic in world congress peacekeeping mission.

Empires will join it to increase there influence/support in the minor civ and defeat the rebels supported by your rivals.

tppytel wrote:

Krikkitone wrote:
IP are only gobbled up because HK is a map painter.  There are no penalties for bigness.  If big empires had penalties, then IP could be made significant.

Agreed. IP's always get conquered/assimilated right now because it's too easy to be big. If there were a significant penalty (something heavier than the current city cap influence penalty) then they might be useful as buffer states.

At the same time, I don't want to see IP's get a whole mini-game like Civ does it. That just becomes more bean-counting for minimal effect. I think the current options of resources/armies/assimilation would be sufficient if the bigness problem were addressed.

The solution to this is easy before release of humankind there were open betas and in one open beta every unclaimed territory was occupied by independent people. 

If this thing is brought back it can be good because if player try to occupy them and surpasses city limit. 

      Then player influence will decrease to zero or negative and devs can apply negative influence penalty like collapsing of city stability.

( It will cause over expanded empire to lose most of the territory)

The game should have mechanic of espionage that empire can help rebels by funding.

In HK espionage means pillage tiles.

Abhi2410 wrote:

The solution to this is easy before release of humankind there were open betas and in one open beta every unclaimed territory was occupied by independent people. 

When did the IP's spawn? At the start of Ancient? Classical? Something else? The land's gotta be empty in Neolithic, right?

I don't want to see a carpet of IP's on the map. I like the way the early game works right now - you can make an effort to scout an area to keep it clear of IP spawns, though that still puts your scouts at risk of a relatively strong IP army coming in from an adjacent territory and starting trouble. That can be fine for a territory you plan to claim soon, but it can also be fine to leave territories unpatrolled in hopes of spawning an IP that you can assimilate/conquer later. But that also risks spawning a hostile IP too. 

The IP spawning we have now is good for the Ancient era - there's lots of productive uncertainty. But once you get into the Classical era, open up Philosophy and Small Council, and start stabilizing your borders, then there's little to keep you from snapping up those IP's immediately. 4-5 cities - intelligently spaced and managed - can control a great deal of territory.

It might be enough to nuke the city cap boost from Small Council. That would constrain early game expansion significantly and taking Small Council is too much of a no-brainer right now. And the whole government civic path with Aristocracy, etc. needs an overhaul anyway. But I'd prefer to see a more comprehensive rework of the city cap penalty.

Except City cap does not slow expansion…you expand by attaching territories to existing cities. (if you captured them then you raze them and replace with outposts to attach to existing cities)

bonuses are lazy and make it obvious the AI is cheating. this is a god game. people buy it to be one. no one wants to pay 50 schmeckles to feel cheated

IP should play by the rules. so let's have a look at them

why can armies grow bigger than the cities they belong to? because they don't eat food. so let's make them so

why can they get so far from their cities freely? use distance to capital to add a penalty to reflect a diminishing logistics and familiarity with the environment

why can major factions enter IP territories freely? make it so they can't and when they do, have them struck by illness with events, bring desertion and mutiny as a soft limit


enough with the dumb bonuses, please put some effort to it. this is supposed to be a storytelling device. it should have some semblance of internal logic and common sense

tppytel wrote:

Abhi2410 wrote:

The solution to this is easy before release of humankind there were open betas and in one open beta every unclaimed territory was occupied by independent people. 

When did the IP's spawn? At the start of Ancient? Classical? Something else? The land's gotta be empty in Neolithic, right?

I don't want to see a carpet of IP's on the map. I like the way the early game works right now - you can make an effort to scout an area to keep it clear of IP spawns, though that still puts your scouts at risk of a relatively strong IP army coming in from an adjacent territory and starting trouble. That can be fine for a territory you plan to claim soon, but it can also be fine to leave territories unpatrolled in hopes of spawning an IP that you can assimilate/conquer later. But that also risks spawning a hostile IP too. 

You are saying to assimilate/conquer IP, I totally disagree with this thing. 

IP can be used as tool of story telling like your neighbouring IP saw rise of dictator or crowning of new king then you get option to support him or not which effects your ideology.

There can also be event you promised an IP for military support and after some turns is  attacked by neighbouring IP or empire then option will come will you protect IP or not.

If you reject  the IP you promised protection will not support you.

You were saying there should be no carpet of IP in early era I agree it can spawn little in classic era but will start spreading in later eras. 

The player empires and other will look like world oldest civilization which come first. It gives a reality touch.

If IP gets strong and vibrant the espionage will get a boost.

Ex: you send 10-15 spies in enemy territory and there is option for training rebels and each spy make 5 rebel units.

Player can collapse other empires and make numerous IP and player promise them protection.

I feel like the Independent People's behavior and complexity should be brought more in line with what the narrator says about them. He says they are unique cultures that deserve to exist, and he hopes we are kind to and care for them. This contrasts sharply with the reality of their role, that being fodder for us to strengthen ourselves to prepare to face other empires/players. Currently the only purpose of their existence is to get annexed, either peacefully or violently, or get farmed for xp and military stars.