In my view i think that independent people should remain independent because there can be scenario like:

Your rival try to topple goverment which is in your favour( like in civilization 5 in city state)

Independent state with expansionist entity capture a big area  and bullying us

Your rival gives nukes to your enemy independent people

Pirates

Anti colonialist cause frequent rebel and make independent state ( it happens in other continents)

i love the concept of minor factions. i enjoy the challenge of sailing into one in distant and valuable lands and having to patronage my way into assimilation before another empire does it

i don't like some bonuses they get that go against almost the whole rule book: ir, spawning seemingly free units of tech they shouldn't posses and being able to instantly build quarters and extractors on city

they will always be inherently weaker, that's clear to me. perhaps a way around could be a hard price to pay in stability and global proximity when captured...

hopefully down the line we get to set more complex roles for them... say imagine a few IP cities located close by hitting a trigger that allows them to form a federation and becoming a major faction on their own :-)

Independent cities will always be weaker than empires, so they will always be gobbled up. Combine that with the huge cost for creating your own city, and it's inevitable that all but your first city will be former independent cities (or taken from other empires)

I do think this was intentional so it does need to be balanced if they want to make founding your own city viable.

Dayvit78 wrote:

Independent cities will always be weaker than empires, so they will always be gobbled up. Combine that with the huge cost for creating your own city, and it's inevitable that all but your first city will be former independent cities (or taken from other empires)

I do think this was intentional so it does need to be balanced if they want to make founding your own city viable.

You are saying that independent people are weak but this thread is about to make them strong. If they have big bonuses and have many cities can make game interesting. Some mechanics can only applied to independent cities.

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.

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.

I think that if territory size decreases  than players will face challenge to occupy everything and second thing is make IP stronger by special bonus which players get.

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.

Sure, but the attachment costs get reasonably heavy after the second attached territory. Plus that hits your stability. Plus you lose the faith and influence generation you get from proper city centers. I feel like the tradeoffs to attaching more outposts are reasonable and interesting. IMO, the problem is that getting a 3rd and especially 4th/5th city center is too easy too early. Right now, it's a no-brainer to take Small Council, assimilate/conquer an IP, and attach a couple territories to that cheaply. That's already a lot of power in the Ancient era. If the geopolitics work out nicely and you can take a 4th good city for 4/3 on your cap until Philosophy then you're in steamroller territory before leaving Ancient.

I would really like a between of IP and Empire , just an affinity having them influenced will give you their help in function of affinity .

Don't forget you get upvote

Arphenix wrote:

Don't forget you get upvote

Thankyou for understanding my idea and your upvote.

They're vestigial so I've been using a mod to disable them. None of the purposes these schmucks served in EL or ES2 still apply. The previous incarnations were a good way to push the player to build a military early (and then once you have it, you might as well use it against another player) but military era stars do that now. They're also an annoying way to claim territory since they do a poor job building their cities and it would usually be cheaper to just plant an outpost and merge it.

I think the thing is, like you said the IPs are a good idea but they've already been done before better in Amplitude's previous games, and not only that but those were among their most recently titles too. 

I'd like it if instead of assimilating we could at the very least make them semi-permanent settlements that would act as our Vassals, because of British and any potential future cultures/mechanics that could utilize it. I don't really get why Amplitude avoids having proper satellite states so much and forces assimilation instead, especially considering that there also tends to be a limit to how many places you can settle.

And the fact that I want an ability to carve surrendered enemy up between multiple empires, instead of grabbing it all for yourself, and add some free cities on top of it to add insult to injury has only a bit of impact on this idea.

That could also solve the problem of vassals in general, because it just seems weird to make other "players"  vassals when there are just so few of them. I think the whole vassal idea works a lot better In Paradox's grand strategy games and the more recent Total Wars because there are just so many nations that vassalizing a few of them wouldn't make much difference. Adding IPs to the mix would increase the number of potential vassals dramatically.

They should bring back independent peoples from Endless Legend 2 in a sense of they have their fortifications in various territories and assimilating them into one's empire can give it a legacy trait and access to a unit that is different from the standard unit type.

For example - Spartans give one spearmen/phalanxmen are par with the Greeks. Conquering the Balearics gives one acces to Balearic Slingers whose projectiles seemingly ignore armor at the cost of low range and low armor. Conquering the Czechs gives one a special tank unit (the Germans adopted Czech tanks and guns in WW2), and so forth and so on. There could be plenty of these peoples spread out across all eras and it would be relatively easy to mod too. To prevent spamming extra LT and UUs, the player would be limited to assimilating only one IP at a time. Unless they were an Aesthete culture or something.

Wald

It should be a reason to keep them independent, like in civ, you chose between an additional city in your empire or unique bonuses that you cant get any other way and bonuses were game-changers in some situations. At this moment they are just placeholders for territories between empires for slowing down their expansion.

I agree with developing means to try and keep independent people independent. It adds potential to how you can use them for future expansions, such as the idea of pirating which I really like. Right now I play on a huge map so I would like to use them as a buffer between my empire, I'd love to use them kind of like Putin's republic which brings me benefits, so long as I exert the greatest influence. 

I think keeping them around was an idea they were toying with in OpenDevs (vaguely recall that at least one LT was giving bonuses based on patronage over IPs), but they saw how fast and how lol-random they were gone (due to stockpiles of influence that had barely any use in early OpenDevs) and just gave up on that.

Walderschmidt wrote:
4: Barbarians/Pirates: I think there also should be barbarian/pirate independent states that should they accrue enough gold from razing cities, ransacking districts, destroying units, or plundering trade, should be able to settle their own cities that pump out roving bands of brigands or fleets of pirate ships. Diplomacy would be either impossible or limited to bribing them to leave you alone or attack someone else

I like this idea. Every so often I have Somalians and others spawn on islands and come to harass my coastlines, but an emphasised version would be even better.

Walderschmidt wrote:

Honestly, I think Humandkind should shamelessly borrow Civ V's City-States concept but improve it by making it so that there can be normal city states that have all of the various affinities and barbarian city states that manifest as roving bands of brigands (razing districts and attacking cities) and as pirates that attack player ships and trade routes, necessitating a Navy. 

Something like this:

City State Affinities, their Agendas, and Behaviors:

1. Agrarian: Seek to grow their own food and sell excess. Tend to build more farmers quarters and seek to be left alone. Generally don't have more than one territory. Defensive military in nature but don't mind if people pass through. Will seek to resolve disputes through diplomacy if possible.

2. Militarist/Expansionist: Seek to fight, sell themselves as mercenaries, and conquer more land. Intent on expansion through conquest or settling empty territories. Can act as pirates. Hostile to outsiders unless paid off. Will retaliate immediately in kind of one attacks, pillages, or razes them. Diplomacy? What diplomacy?

3. Merchant/Aesthete: Self-interested, seek to control market and resources. Primary concern is money. Will hire mercenaries to take out trade competitors and protect own trade routes and retaliate against plundering. Will retaliate to the extent they can afford it. If really rich, they'll bribe other nations to attack you.

4: Barbarians/Pirates: I think there also should be barbarian/pirate independent states that should they accrue enough gold from razing cities, ransacking districts, destroying units, or plundering trade, should be able to settle their own cities that pump out roving bands of brigands or fleets of pirate ships. Diplomacy would be either impossible or limited to bribing them to leave you alone or attack someone else.


Wald

That would be perfect honestly. Instead of just the peaceful and aggressive types that we got. 

FullScreenLurking wrote:

Maybe they should be more like minor factions in Amplitude's previous games and have access to stronger unique units that make them as much of a challenge as their EL and ES counterparts. Also like those factions they should allow you  to recruit those unique units upon allying or conquering them. Like the minor factions in Endless Legend, they could also give each IP a unique bonus that you get upon conquering, assimilating or allying with them. Come to think of it, that would be a good way of representing the unique cultures of the IPs that the narrator keeps yammering on about. Continuing on with this idea, perhaps they can add interactions with the civics as well, such as monoculturalism disabling the unique the bonuses you'd get from controlling the IPs' cities. 

This is what makes this game a disappointment to me. I expected things like this. 

DNLH wrote:

I'd like it if instead of assimilating we could at the very least make them semi-permanent settlements that would act as our Vassals, because of British and any potential future cultures/mechanics that could utilize it. I don't really get why Amplitude avoids having proper satellite states so much and forces assimilation instead, especially considering that there also tends to be a limit to how many places you can settle.

And the fact that I want an ability to carve surrendered enemy up between multiple empires, instead of grabbing it all for yourself, and add some free cities on top of it to add insult to injury has only a bit of impact on this idea.

That is also what I would like, making these states your vassals. That combined with them having unique units and different types would make the independent people more then just rando's that you or someone else eventually assimilates. Would be cool to also give them territory.

DNLH wrote:

I'd like it if instead of assimilating we could at the very least make them semi-permanent settlements that would act as our Vassals, because of British and any potential future cultures/mechanics that could utilize it. I don't really get why Amplitude avoids having proper satellite states so much and forces assimilation instead, especially considering that there also tends to be a limit to how many places you can settle.

And the fact that I want an ability to carve surrendered enemy up between multiple empires, instead of grabbing it all for yourself, and add some free cities on top of it to add insult to injury has only a bit of impact on this idea.

That is also what I would like, making these states your vassals. That combined with them having unique units and different types would make the independent people more then just rando's that you or someone else eventually assimilates. Would be cool to also give them territory.

On the topic of rebels, I think they need to split them off from Independent People and into their own category with their own unique behaviors. At the very least they should normally only target the empire they spawned from and leave you only. People are reporting now that other empires' rebels are nonsensically targeting them while leaving the AI alone. 

It'd be nice if you could ally and support them or manipulate them using espionage, and if they functioned like minor factions in many other 4X games, in that you could diplomatically interact with them, but I feel that is something for the future that can be covered in a DLC. For now I think all they need to do is change their behavior and perhaps recategorize if necessary.