This is the second of what I plan to be a total of three larger posts with some outlines for ideas on how to revamp three areas of Humankind that I think could help the game reach its full potential.  The three posts will focus on revamping (1) military production and maintenance (posted on 12/28/2021), (2) city management/expansion/exploitation, and (3) culture changing/evolution.

My first post, titled “Revamp of Military Production and Maintenance,” included some ideas which would (1) separate production from early-era unit production and instead have food/gold be the main upkeep resources of a standing army, (2) in early eras, more directly connect military units to the cities and territories from which they originate, until the upkeep of the military gradually becomes a more national endeavor in later eras, (3) introduce a “lifespan” mechanic and modify the ways upgrades work to ensure that archers fighting tanks are a thing of the past, (4) have the production of “machines of war” like ships, tanks and planes separate from the recruitment and training of soldiers, and have their deployment rely upon being staffed by sailors, pilots, etc., and (5) introducing the concept of “national military bases.”  That post can be found here: https://www.games2gether.com/amplitude-studios/humankind/forums/169-game-design-and-ideas/threads/47180-revamp-of-military-production-and-maintenance?page=1#post-347215

This post will focus on my ideas on how to revamp the ways cities interact with the map, including resource exploitation, district placement (and upgrading), and territory expansion, as well as how early sieges and city-capturing should work.  The hardest part of any large-scale suggestions like these (besides programming, of course, which I have precisely zero experience in) are the minutiae of balancing the numbers and formulas involved in making all this work across different eras, game speeds, and map settings…so I won’t even try (at least not yet)!  Instead, this is just meant to serve as a broad outline of a different way that the developers can consider experimenting with (and hopefully [and selfishly] implementing) in future updates or DLCs.

THE SCOPE, REACH AND ROLE OF CITIES

In my first post surrounding units, I stated that one of the main goals was to make it so that initially units were really tied in many ways to the cities from where they came (based primarily on food upkeep, availability of strategic resources which would limit specialization options, etc.), and would gradually become part of a more nationally-supplied standing army.  In some ways, that is the focus of this city-revamp as well – to begin from a very local city-centric place where permanent and unchallenged control initially does not extend far beyond the City Walls, and then gradually have the reach of a City go beyond its initial geographical footprint and territory.

However, my real impetus for these ideas was my dislike of two core parts of what seems to be the new-norm in 4X district-based city-building: (1) how large the geographical footprint of the actual cities grew in comparison to the map size (just too many districts!), and (2) the mixing-and-matching district-type placement game that I think is unfun, unnecessarily gamey, and one of the worst carryovers from Civ (although, as you will see, SOME adjacency bonuses can be good and encourage nicer and more natural looking cohesive cities).  In my opinion, the “walled-in” part of a City should really be a somewhat compact area in comparison to the size of the world map, even if its resource exploitation (represented graphically by cottages and homes populating the area around the City Walls, and then eventually suburbs, all of which I love) and influence reach extends far beyond its walls.

What I envision are, especially in the early eras, geographically smaller (but not toosmall) “cities” and additional smaller resource extractor nodes (“keeps,” “towns,” “camps,” whatever) spread throughout the City’s initial territory, and ultimately its adjacent territories.  Initially, the City itself will be the main center of the extraction of all FIMS, as it is now.  However, as the game goes on the City should evolve from the primary SOURCE of food and industry to the primary CONSUMER of those resources, and instead become the primary SOURCE of money and science.

“CITY DISTRICTS” – THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF A CITY

So, how to accomplish this?  First, very likely controversially, I propose mostly doing away with building resource-specific districts directly in the cities themselves, or really more specifically, Farmers Quarters and Makers Quarters.  These types of districts (or their equivalents) will still have essential uses elsewhere in the territory, but instead cities will initially be made up primarily of the Main Plaza and generic “City Districts” which must be built (1) adjacent to the Main Plaza or other City Districts (or upgraded City Districts, see below), and (2) one moveable tile away for generic land units.

What do I mean by one moveable tile away?  Think of a City you found in a valley between two ranges of cliffs – even though those cliffs are adjacent to the Main Plaza, they would not be valid build locations for a City District because you cannot move directly from the Main Plaza to them without taking another route and traversing additional tiles.  In this way, the “walled-in” footprint of a City becomes a contiguous area (although the yields from those cliffs will still be exploited if within range).

These generic City Districts are meant to be thought of as the basic building blocks for what the City will eventually become and initially serve mainly to set the foundation and initial footprint of the City.  City Districts will exploit all food and industry on the tile on which it is built and surrounding it, just as Main Plazas do now.  I also think Main Plazas and City Districts should exploit money and science yields from tiles, but maybe not until reaching the appropriate technology and/or building certain infrastructure.

So far, this is just sounding like over-simplifying city-building and making each one generic…and at first, yes, that is true!  Initially, each City will be somewhat similar, just with different yields depending on terrain (although Emblematic Districts will still add some diversity, as we will see).  Early on, I think this is ok because the entire point in the initial era of the game is to set the building blocks of what your civilization will be.  The fun comes as the City grows and needs to expand and eventually exploit the resources beyond the confines of the City.

There are a couple important changes that (hopefully) make all of this work – Main Plazas will NOT have specialist slots for food, ONLY for production, money and science, and generic City Districts (again, think of these as basic building blocks) will only have a single specialist slot for production (but will exploit both food and industry from the tile under it and surrounding tiles).  What this means is that settling your initial cities on fertile lands becomes extremely important for growth but will likely be more difficult to defend than food-starved but production-heavy cities founded in and around the mountains.

Upgrading City Districts into “Specialized Quarters”

Now we get to the part where we find out how cities finally start slowly growing into dense urban centers.  As I keep emphasizing, the generic “City District” is the mere building block of a City, and there will be hard and soft limits to how many City Districts you can build.  For example, just as it is now, each City District will decrease stability.  Additionally, there will be a hard limit of City Districts based upon the existing infrastructure in a City, and certain infrastructure will not be available until you have either built a certain number of City Districts…or UPGRADED a City District to a “Specialized Quarter.”

These Specialized Quarters will provide one or more additional specialist slots depending on which one you upgrade the City District to.  My initial suggestions for early-era Specialized Quarters are pretty much in line with the other generic districts that are currently in the game (note – I am not tied to the specific number or types of specialists of what these quarters provide, this is a concept only) – a Market Quarter, which will add one trader specialist slot in addition to the existing production specialist; a Research Quarter, which will provide for one researcher and one trader while removing the production specialist; and lastly, a new type of district, the Religious Quarter which will add two priest specialist slots, who will provide smaller amounts of faith as compared to a Holy Site and increase stability.

As is probably obvious, Religious Quarters can serve as a possible alternative to Garrisons and an early-game replacement for the Commons Quarter, which will still be a type of Specialized Quarter that provides stability only but no additional specialist slots (although perhaps can be further upgraded to an Advanced District or Urban Center version that does so – see below).  Notably, none of these generic quarters provide farmer specialists (which we will call “food producers” for reasons that will soon become apparent), although certain Emblematic Districts may, as we will see.

Beyond Specialized Quarters – “Advanced Quarters,” “Urban Centers,” and Emblematic Districts

Furthermore, Specialized Quarters will be further upgradable into “Advanced Quarters” and then “Urban Centers” (perhaps someone can do better with these names), subject to certain limit restrictions again relating to stability hits, necessary infrastructure, and number of total City Districts (including upgraded districts).  So, for example, a Market Quarter (Specialized Quarter) may upgrade into a Trading Center (Advanced Quarter) which adds another 2 trader specialist slots, a Research Quarter (Specialized Quarter) may upgrade into a Science Academy (Advanced Quarter) which adds an additional researcher slot and a production specialist, and a Religious Quarter (Specialized Quarter) may upgrade into a Temple Complex(Advanced Quarter) which adds an additional priest slot and a trader slot (again, all of these specialist slots could be fundamentally changed, or perhaps also changed/improved based on civics, cultures, infrastructure, etc., as well as based on adjacency bonuses as described below).  And, eventually, Advanced Quarters could upgrade into incredibly powerful Urban Centers.

Additionally, the food and production yields directly beneath a generic Specialized Quarter no longer benefit from terrain-specific bonuses of infrastructure.  So for example, if you upgraded a City District to a Market Quarter on top of a forest with a river, which gives a base of 1 food and 2 production, and prior to upgrading to the Market Quarter you had built a Lumber Yard (+1 production to the forest) and Flood Irrigation (+2 food to the river) so that the tile was now yielding 3 food and 3 production, once the Market Quarter was completed the base tile yields would revert to 1 food and 2 production.  Once an Specialized Quarter is upgraded to an Advanced Quarter, it ceases to exploit the food and production resources beneath it at all but may still gain other bonuses based on terrain (such as the obvious one of increased gold from Market Quarters on rivers), whereas the powerful Urban Centers will not gain any terrain bonuses at all.

I also envision most, or at least many of the current “Emblematic Districts” to be different types of City Districts, Specialized Quarters, Advanced Quarters, or Urban Centers (or perhaps even Main Plazas).  So, for example, the Harrapans’ Canal Network could be either a City District or an Specialized Quarter that could only be built on a river tile and would provide one or two food producers (which are unattainable through the construction of generic City Districts) as well as more efficient exploitation of food on all river tiles exploited by the City.  The Mayan K’uh Nah could be a Specialized Quarter that provides a priest and a production specialist and increases the efficiency of “Production Communities” (I’ll get to these in a moment) in its and adjacent territories.  However, I also see many other current Emblematic Districts as structures that can be built beyond the City Walls, as many already are.

Keeping the City Center Dense – Placement Restrictions and New Adjacency Bonuses

Another important aspect to these Specialized Quarters is that they can only be built either next to the Main Plaza or next to another Specialized Quarter.  The purpose of this is to have a dense City Center that expands naturally from its core (although, importantly, the look and exploitation of the City will still expand beyond its walls).  The further upgrades of these Specialized Quarters will have similar placement limits – a Specialized Quarter can only be upgraded to an Advanced Quarter if it is either (1) adjacent to the Main Plaza, (2) adjacent to another Advanced Quarter, or (3) adjacent to two or more Specialized Quarters.  Similarly, an Advanced Quarter can only be upgraded to an Urban Center if it is either (1) adjacent to the Main Plaza, (2) adjacent to another Urban Center, (3) adjacent to two or moreAdvanced Quarters, or (3) adjacent to four or more Specialized Quarters.

City Districts, Specialized Quarters, Advanced Quarters, and Urban Centers will also give and receive adjacency bonuses that are more dependent on their level rather than their type.  For example, a Market Quarter may gain +1 gold per adjacent City District, or a Trading Center may gain an additional +3 gold per adjacent Specialized Quarters (of any type) and +1 gold per adjacent City District.  You could also encourage building towards the coast by having things like +2 gold per adjacent coastal tile, +1 gold per adjacent river tile, etc.

Importantly, you could also have powerful adjacency bonuses for upgrading the City Districts directly adjacent to the Main Plaza in the form of additional specialist slots – so a Religious Quarter next to the Main Plaza gets +1 priest slot, a Temple Complex next to the Main Plaza gets +2 priest slots, etc.

These adjacency bonuses could also boost certain Emblematic Districts that are meant to be in the City Center.  For example, the Franks Scriptorium could be an Advanced District which could be upgraded from EITHER a Research Quarter or a Religious Quarter which adds specialist slots for a researcher and priest and provides an influence boost based upon adjacent City Districts, and perhaps doubles its specialist slots if built next to the Main Plaza.  I expect to have more of these types of examples once I post my revamp of the change/evolution of cultures.

Encouraging Coastal Cities

This could also finally lead to Main Plazas being built on or at least close to the coast in order to have these powerful adjacency bonuses apply to harbors.  I still think that harbors should be able to be built as they are now, meaning disconnected from the other districts of a City.  However, I think in order for harbors to be UPGRADED, they must be connected to other City Districts.  Furthermore, upgraded harbors will provide a large amount of specialist slots, including food producers.

Upgrading Emblematic Districts – Legacy Traits

One last thing before we leave the cities – what to do with early-era Emblematic Districts built in City Centers that are now modernizing around them?  I propose giving each Emblematic District two additional traits – a “legacy trait” and an “upgrade path.”  For example, let’s say you’ve built a Harappan Canal Network that is now becoming outdated given the modernization of the City it is in.  Upon researching certain technologies, the Canal Network could be upgraded into the “Advanced Quarter” version of the Commons Quarter, which for now we will call the “Residential Quarter.”  Let’s say that normally, a Residential Quarter would simply provide one production specialist slot and increased stability as compared to the Commons Quarter.  If upgraded from a Canal Network, however, it would get the “Former Canal Network” status which also grants it a food producer specialist slot (and perhaps two if built next to the Main Plaza), but it now loses its bonuses to river exploitation.  Additionally, it may grant bonus influence or stability.  Hopefully these could even have distinct graphics as well!

I also think that once Emblematic Districts are two or more eras removed from their original era (so the Medieval Era for Emblematic Districts built in the Ancient Era), they should grant bonus influence and/or stability (or maybe even fame?) for each era they remain un-upgraded, which could provide an interesting choice in city development.  This will work very well with some of my revamp ideas for the change/evolution of cultures, the focus of which will be choosing (or really purchasing with influence) only PORTIONS of a culture based on certain factors and requirements.

Finally, I also propose the option of completely “redeveloping” City Districts, including Emblematic Districts.  It should be up to the God-like ruler of the Empire whether he or she wants to pave over their glorious history.  To do so, a district is completely downgraded to a generic City District and can be built back up, but it loses any legacy traits if it used to be an Emblematic District.

FEEDING THE CITY – FARMING AND MINING COMMUNITIES

So then, how do we feed our ever-growing cities if there is a shortage of food producing options within the cities themselves?  By bleeding dry the resources of the residents of the countryside, of course!

Farming and Mining “Communities”

Farmers Quarters (which we will now call a “Farming Community”) will now ONLY be able to be built beyond the reach of the cities and, if built within a City’s initial territory, will provide all of its excess food to the City.  Just as they do now, a Farming Community will provide one food producer (formerly farmer) specialist slot and exploit the food resources beneath it and immediately adjacent, and more efficiently than the Cities themselves.  Furthermore, the efficiency of this exploitation can increase with civics, technologies, and infrastructure.  Just as with City Districts, building a Farming Community reduces the stability of the City in its territory.  I also think there are opportunities for civics or technologies to add to what resources these communities extract and provide.  For example, you can implement a taxation civic to extract gold from these communities, perhaps with a hit to stability.

Besides Farming Communities, you will also be able to build “Mining Communities” (basically, the old Makers Quarters) beyond the city limits.  I’m not crazy about the name because in addition to building these in and around mountains and strategic resources, you will also be building them in and around forests and woodlands (which should then be called Forestry Communities or something, but those are just details).  These work the same way as Farming Communities – one tile districts (initially, although never much more than two or three tiles in total) which provide a production specialist and exploit the surrounding production-producing terrain at a more efficient rate than the City, which can be made to be even more efficient through civics, technologies, and infrastructure.

I also think there is room for a “Fishing Village” – these would be special districts which can be built adjacent to harbors that are not already within the walled areas of City Districts and would provide a mixture of food, production, and money (though lowers amounts than a Farming or Mining Community).  I haven’t quite worked this out as well so I will focus my discussion on just Farming and Mining Communities.

Populations Beyond the City – How Do They Behave?

One of the most important aspects of this concept is that there will be small population centers outside of the City itself.  There are a number of important rules by which these population centers will function:

(1) the Farming Community and Mining Community will only exploit terrain tiles if there is at least one specialist assigned to work;

(2) certain technologies/civics will allow for the construction of an additional adjacent Farming or Mining Community, which will add another specialist slot and provide an adjacency bonus;

(3) certain technologies/civics will also allow for the exploitable range of these communities to extend one tile further but only if two specialists are working;

(4) eventually, I envision later era technologies that would allow for the construction of a third adjacent district that may serve an extra purpose, such as also providing a science or money bonus (like an Agricultural School or a Food Processing Center);

(5) garrisons can (and should, as you will see) be built adjacent to these communities, but the terrain underneath the garrison will not be exploited;

(6) even though there are specialists working these areas, they WILL NOT automatically defend if attacked by enemy forces – instead, if enemy forces ransack these communities, their populations automatically retreat to the City (or Town, see below) that they were supplying.  I will expand upon this when I discuss how pillaging and sieges will work.

What I hope this will accomplish is having the City be the main population center and its main producer of money and science, as well as eventually a secondary producer of industry, while smaller communities provide its food and the bulk of its industry (think raw goods).

More Opportunities for Non-City Emblematic Districts

I also think this opens up the possibility for more meaningful Emblematic Districts outside the City Walls.  As may already be apparent (but if not, will be made obvious below), these communities are both vital to the City and incredibly vulnerable because, as a rule, the generic version of these communities will NOT have the ability to construct walls.  However, certain Emblematic Districts could change this.  The obvious example would be the English Stronghold (although this may be better as a “Town Center” replacement, see below), which in addition to exploiting food would also automatically construct a wall (perhaps only a palisades) around its exploitable area.  This will be invaluable when the Hunnic and Mongol Hordes come to ravage your countryside and try to starve out your glorious walled cities for tribute…

TERRITORIAL EXPANSION – SLOWING DOWN THE PROCESS AND THE CONCEPT OF “TOWNS”

With these changes, how will further expansion and attaching territories work?

Border (Un)control

The first thing to know is that no longer will the territory in which a City is founded automatically be closed to other empires – that will not happen until the Classical Era technology of Fortifications is researched.  However, even after researching Fortifications, only the territory in which the City is founded will be closed off, meaning attached territories can still be crossed.  These attached territories will not have their borders closed until you research the Medieval technology of Feudalism.

Claiming Territories – Contested Control

Second, the way in which claiming territories will also change slightly.  Nothing will change in terms of claiming territories in the Neolithic Era – your troops throw down an outpost using influence, and you claim it.  Nor will anything change in terms of upgrading one of those first outposts into a City.  However, starting in the Ancient Era in order to permanently and exclusively claim a territory, that territory must be either adjacent to another territory under your exclusive control or else on a different landmass or continent (I expect these rules to be modified based upon researching certain technologies, or allow certain cultures to completely break them altogether).

Furthermore, in order to claim exclusive control of a territory you must satisfy three requirements:

(1) your outpost must be the only established outpost in that territory for 5 consecutive turns,

(2) you must maintain a troop presence in that territory for those 5 turns, AND

(3) you must ensure that no other non-Independent empire has any units in that territory at the END of any of those 5 turns (which means you cannot stop someone from claiming a territory just by quickly entering and exiting it).

Only then will your exclusive claim to that territory be recognized.

What this means is that it is possible for a territory to have contested control – there can be multiple outposts from different empires within the same territory until someone claims and attains exclusive control of the territory.  There are three goals here: (1) slow down the early-era territory expansion rush, (2) encourage the build up of armies to maintain control of these territories (but discourage being able to group them into one army since you have to prevent intruders from several geographical areas, and (3) have a reason to engage in these early-era skirmishes besides just doing it because you can.

Unattached Outposts Can Provide Resources

One important change to what an unattached outpost can do.  Even without attaching it to a city, you can choose to have its resources sent directly to a nearby city, at a cost to efficiency.  If the outpost is in a territory adjacent to a territory attached to a City, then 50% of the resources extracted by the outpost are sent to the city.  If it is one territory removed from a territory attached to a city, then 25% of the resources make it to that city (but you can choose to have its resources go to a closer city if you’d like).  Outposts cannot direct their resources to Cities any further away than the above.

Attaching Territories

Additionally, attaching territories will also work differently.  As stated above, until Fortifications is researched, only the City itself is off-limits to other empires – the rest of the territory can be freely traversed, and until Feudalism is researched only the territory of a City itself is closed.  The process to attach a territory to a City will be similar to claiming a territory – after paying the required influence cost, the 5-turn process of attaching begins.  In order for it to complete, you must satisfy another two requirements:

(1) one of your military units must always be stationed on top of the outpost at the end of those 5 consecutive turns (to “convince” its inhabitants of the benefits of ceding their independence to the City), and

(2) you must ensure that no other non-Independent empire has any units in that territory at the END of any of those 5 turns (which, again, means you cannot stop a City from attaching a territory just by quickly entering and exiting it).

Just as it works now, each territory that gets attached to a City will add to instability, but I also think that territories immediately adjacent to the City’s starting territory should have less of a stability cost than those one or more territories removed.  The more removed a territory is from the City’s starting territory, the greater the stability hit.  This will be a good impetus for evolving far-flung “Towns” (see below) into Cities unto themselves.

Territorial expansion should be slow, deliberate, and highly contested.  Laying claim to an entire continent in the early-eras should be nearly impossible, and certainly not without an absurd investment into one’s military at the expense of growing your population centers (because, as discussed in my Military revamp, each military unit now has the same food upkeep as a citizen).

“Towns”

Once a territory is attached to a City, some of the same important things as now happen, as well as some additional options.  First, the outpost becomes a “Town Center” with one food producer and one production specialist slot and can no longer be relocated.  Second, generic “Town Districts” can be built adjacent to the Town Center, which will add one available trader specialist slot and will exploit the food and production resources on its own and adjacent tiles.  There will be a hard limit to the number of these districts which can be built, starting with 1 and likely an ultimate max of 3 (achievable as additional technologies are researched or infrastructure is built).  Finally, the excess food resources of a Town go to the City to support its growth (after sustaining its own population).

Once again, I think these “Town Centers” and/or “Town Districts” are ripe for being Emblematic Districts to help differentiate cultures that have their power concentrated in their Cities, and others that have them spread throughout their lands.  For example, the Assyrian Dunnu, the Persian Satrap Palace, and the Polish Barbican all seem like prime candidates for Town Center replacements.  I’m sure others will have ideas for Emblematic Districts that could replace the generic Town Districts as well.

A territory can only ever have a single City or Town, but once a territory is attached to a City you will be able to build Farming and Mining Communities within it.  Establishing a Farming Community or a Mining Community will cost both production and influence (in addition to the stability hit).  However, the food from a Farming Community will be split between supporting its own population, the population of the Town of the territory it is in, as well as its controlling City.  Additionally, each community of the same type built in the same territory will cost an exponentially higher amount of influence and will be a larger stability hit each time.  Perhaps there should also be hard limits based on infrastructure, civics, and technologies.

Founding New Cities – Evolving Towns and “Independent Towns”

Finally, we get to the process of founding new cities.  Beyond the empire’s initial Capital City, I see the founding of new cities as something of a natural process which could occur in one of two ways.

The first is the natural evolution of a Town currently under the control of a City into a City unto itself.  A Town which has at least one Town District built can be upgraded into a City at the cost of influence and production.  If the player chooses to do this, once the process is complete the Town becomes a City with identical infrastructure to the City from which it came.  The original City retains all of its other territory besides the territory in which the Town is found UNLESS there is a territory which is completely disconnected from the City’s remaining territory (meaning you would have to pass through the Town’s territory to reach that territory).  Under those circumstances, that territory now comes under the new City’s (former Town’s) control.  I also think you should be able to directly transfer other territories between these Cities at an influence cost.

The second way is allowing an outpost to independently build its way up to a Town, and then eventually a City.  As stated above, you can have the option of diverting the resources of an outpost to a nearby City.  Alternatively, you can choose to have the outpost choose to retain its resources and evolve into a Town, which costs a large amount of food and production and which cannot be supplemented by other Cities via a Shared Project until later-era technologies are researched.  Additionally, your influence generation takes a significant hit during this process.

Once the outpost becomes an “Independent Town” (meaning, a Town unattached to any City), you can build limited infrastructure, recruit basic military units (again, see my post on Revamping Military Unit Production and Maintenance), and, if specialized resources are available, train those units into specialized military units, but you are limited to building generic Town Districts and are further limited by the cap on the number of those districts.  You can also build one Farming Community and one Mining Community in the territory (which you will want to do given what I envision to be the cost of upgrading to a City).  Once you build one Town District and have built certain basic infrastructure, you can choose to build that Town into a full-fledged City, which again is a major investment in food, production, and influence per turn.

PILLAGING LANDS AND SIEGING CITIES

So, that is how I propose Cities (and Towns, and Communities) to interact with the land…but now how will military units interact with those population centers?

Fleeing the Ravaged Countryside – Refugees

When I discussed above how these population centers would react when attacked by military units, the last essential rule was that the populations of Farming Communities, Mining Communities, and now Towns, will not automatically defend themselves if ransacked – they will instead flee to the City or Town they were supplying.  A similar rule applies to the citizens of an Independent Town – if ransacked, they will flee to the closest City.

This mechanic is vital for what I am trying to accomplish – the importance of keeping your military forces close to home in the early stages of the game to defend against raids and looting.  When enemy forces ransack these communities, their populations automatically retreat to the City or Town that they were supplying (or the nearest City in the case of an Independent Town).  If there are specialist slots available to work at the destination to which they are fleeing, then they will work.  If not, then they will become “refugees” and will become a drain on the food and stability of the City/Town.  What I envision is the pillaging of a City’s countryside in preparation for a prolonged siege, in which the enemy forces can choose to starve out the City rather than engage in a costly direct assault.

Sieging a City – Changes to What Units Can Do

And that is because part of this revamp also includes changing the ways in which the direct assault of a City works, and to make taking a walled, supplied, and garrisoned City incredibly difficult, as it should be.  The first change is slight but consequential – melee forces can no longer attack one another across the walls of a City.  Instead, the only way for a melee unit to attack units within a City Wall is to scale it and get inside (with the same mechanics as they exist – they must start their turn directly next to the City Wall and there must be a traversable open space to go to).

Second, the units automatically created during a City Siege have their combat strength reduced but are now ranged units with a range of 2 when attacking from within the City Walls against units outside the City Walls, and otherwise have a range of 1 (either if they sortie beyond the walls or if they are attacking units which have breached the walls).

Third, ranged units do dramatically less damage to units garrisoned within the City Walls.  The whole point of this is that (1) siege units should be NECESSARY for a successful full-on siege, and (2) sorties should only occur when the defending City has a pronounced military presence within its walls…otherwise they should be waiting for help or else suffer through the siege.

Sieging a City – Pillage Then Starve, A City’s Food Stores

The strategy then is to pillage the countryside and force the entire population into a City, which you then surround and starve out.  The attacker then has two options.  The first is they can either sustain the siege long enough for the City to surrender on its own accord based on sustained low stability (which can now happen regardless of whether its owner wants to surrender).  If this occurs, the attacker gains a large sum of money and perhaps population from the City as well (as “slaves,” which can then be settled into their own Cities, Towns, or in some cases and for some cultures, outposts - this is what I envision the Huns and the Mongols doing to City after City).  The City then becomes an Independent People over which the attacker has a leg up on influence should they want to eventually assimilate them (I’d also love an Independent People Revamp, but I will save that for a later time).

The attacker’s second option is to directly assault the weakened City when the time is ripe and before reinforcements come from the rear to break the siege.  There are a few new mechanics to keep in mind that make all this work.  The first is that Cities will now have “food stores.”  The amount of possible storage will be based on infrastructure (which can thus be upgraded with additional infrastructure) and which are filled based on the food production a City, including its sources from beyond its walls like Towns, Farming Communities and Fishing Communities, and are depleted based on the upkeep of the citizens currently within the City (which can increase when refugees coming rushing in) and the military units supplied by the City.

As discussed in my revamp of Military Production and Upkeep, both citizens and military units require a per-turn food upkeep.  If, during a siege, a City is completely cut-off from all other sources of food AND they deplete their food stores, two things happen: (1) citizens start dying off and (2) military units gain the “malnourished” status and have their combat strength reduced.  Each turn a military unit has the “malnourished” status, there is a % chance it gains the “starved” status the next turn (although only one unit can gain the “starved” status per turn).  Each turn a military unit has the “starved” status, there is a high % chance it is destroyed at the start of the next turn.  Furthermore, all military units in a City which is being seized and is completely cut-off from all other sources of food are considered for the time being to be supplied by that City, and this becomes an additional drain on its food stores.

Sieging a City – Cut off the Supply Through “Extended Zones of Control”

I keep using this phrase “cut off from all other sources of food,” and that is because there is a chance for a City to still be supplied depending on certain terrain and districts.  The most important of which is a harbor within the “core” of the City (meaning connected to its City Districts).  If a City has a harbor connected to its City Districts, then during a siege, other Cities can divert their food production to that City using sea trade routes.  Thus, a successful siege of a Coastal City requires both a land and a sea component.

The second way a City can continue to be supplied is through an existing land route which is unaffected by the sieging army’s “extended zone of control” and is a little tough to explain without visuals, but I will try.  Each besieging army will have an “extended zone of control” which extends one space beyond its position for each unit that makes up the army.  So, if the army is composed of 4 units, its extended zone of control extends 4 spaces the space it occupies.  Tiles outside the City Walls which are within this extended zone of control cannot be exploited by the city, and routes into and out of the City (which could otherwise supply much needed food) that lie within this extended zone of control are closed off.

A few more notable rules – the extended zone of control only extends in the same way the ground units normally move – what this means is that even if a cliff is immediately adjacent to an attacking army, the extended zone of control only reaches that cliff if it is actually 4 traversable tiles away from the army.  It also does not go through the City Walls.  So, think of a City in a valley lined on both sides by cliffs – in order to completely cut off that City, you would need to have an army at both entrances to that City.

Finally, land units cannot have their extended zones of control reach into the water, but naval units CAN have their extended zones of control reach, at most, two tiles onto land based on the number of units in the fleet.  Thus, in order to completely off a City with a connected harbor, you need your fleet docked in its harbor.

WRAP UP AND NEXT UP

So those are my ideas for revamping how Cities work.  One thing that comes to mind is that with the likely reduced footprint of especially early-cities, and thus some engagement zones, there may be simply too many units fielded during battles.  One additional idea I had was the ability to combine like-units unto “Corps” at the start of the battle, which would then act as a single powered-up unit during the battle (but would be killed individually based on the damage it received).  I think I’d probably like this feature regardless.

My next and last post (which will take some time) will be about revamping how the change in culture mechanic occurs.  I envision a much more gradual shift and mish-mash of certain cultures, the individual aspects of which are purchased by influence after researching certain technologies or choosing certain civics.  However, I also see certain cultures, like the Huns and Mongols, as “total conversion” cultures which must be adopted in full.  Anyway, stay tuned for that and thanks for reading!

ADDENDUM (POSTED 1/4/2022)

While I was working out some thoughts on the specifics of my Revamp of Culture Changing/Evolution, it occurred to me that there were some more specifics about certain mechanics that I thought should be included here.  One, surrounding the upgrading of Main Plaza, I expect to be uncontroversial (at least to the extent that the entire revamp of building up Cities could be considered controversial).  Another, involving the ways in which Cities can (or really, can’t) directly change hands I expect to be met with some vitriol for those who want to use their military might to paint the entire map (a group of which I am often a part!).

I should also note that one thing that has become obvious to me is that in order for many of my ideas to work there needs to be (1) an increase in the importance and uses of money, and (2) a revamp of Independent Peoples as well.  One of the main reasons why an improved Independent Peoples system is needed is because of my proposal for changing the way City capturing and razing works.  As has been pointed out in the comments below, there should be some differences between the way an Attila the Hun conquers versus a Ghengis Khan versus an Augustus versus a Spanish Conquistador versus a modern-day peacekeeper.  I’ll address this in some more detail below.

Upgrading Main Plazas

While not stated specifically above, in addition to upgrading City Districts I believe that the Main Plaza of a City should also be upgradable, subject to certain threshold requirements.  These threshold requirements would be things like certain minimum levels of infrastructure and total numbers of City Districts and upgraded districts. Upgraded Main Plazas would also further unlock the ability to build more City Districts, and for the City to maintain a greater number of upgraded City Districts.

In addition to unlocking further City expansion possibilities, upgrading the Main Plaza would lead to certain aesthetic changes based on your current cultural situation, which I also think leads to the possibility of some great story-telling events.  The specifics of this relies upon the idea in my forthcoming Cultural Revamp, but here are some of the essential points.

At the start of the game (or perhaps upon entering the Ancient Era), you would choose the look of your people (South Asian, African, European, etc.), and that would remain constant throughout the game in terms of the unit portraits and graphics.  Then, at the start of each era rather than have a full-fledged culture change, you would have the ability to choose a legacy trait based upon your actions in the prior era, as well as your affinity for the upcoming era.  Your choice of affinity would have multiple implications, including which legacy traits could be chosen at the end of the era, and changing affinities will have era-long stability implications (with more severe stability hits based upon more extreme affinity changes – think a greater stability malus for going from Agrarian to Militarist than Expansionist to Militarist, and perhaps a stability bonus for maintaining the same affinity from one era to the next).

Your affinity choice has a number of additional implications, including the Emblematic Districts and Emblematic Units that are available for you to purchase with Influence during that era once certain technologies are reached.  Based on the way my Cultural Revamp would work, you could then have African-looking samurais, or South Asian-looking Jaguar Warriors (and corresponding warning messages of cultural appropriation…I’m kidding, of course [I think?]).

Most crucial for the current discussion is that the Emblematic District you choose for that era determines the architectural look of any upgrades you make to your Cities and Towns until you choose your next Emblematic District (which in most cases will occur in the following era).  For example, let’s say you choose to unlock the Confucian School in the Ancient Era.  Any Main Plazas, City Districts, Towns, Communities, etc. which you build or upgrade following either unlocking the Confucian School or building your first one (I’m not sure which yet) will have the East Asian architectural style.  Then let’s say you choose the Greek Amphitheatron in the Classical Era.  Once you do so, any Main Plazas, City Districts, Towns, Communities, etc. which you build or upgrade will instead have the European architectural style.

Additionally, the way in which Cities are named would be more restrictive and controlled by aspects of this same mechanic.  If you upgraded your Main Plaza, you would also have the option to change the name of the City to a Greek name or choose to keep it as is, but importantly, we would no longer have the ability to freely change city names.  Instead, the City would retain a history of its prior names (think Istanbul/Constantinople).

Thus, only if you kept a City District or Emblematic District unupgraded would it retain its original historical cultural flavor.  As mentioned in my main post above, I also propose that there be an influence, stability, and/or fame per-turn bonus after a certain number of eras to simulate tourism, which would be amplified if the district is next to your Main Plaza (thereby forgoing the powerful adjacency bonuses upgraded City Districts get from being adjacent to the Main Plaza).  This could represent “historical districts” remaining in certain old Cities.

Keeping Cities Wonder-Full

Another idea related to making Cities unique and vibrant is to change the build requirements of certain districts, Emblematic Districts (alluded to in my original post) and Wonders (as well as proposed wonders).  In some ways, Wonders could be a super-upgrade for certain district-types that could no longer be modified.

For example, you could have Notre Dame only buildable on top of a Specialized Religious Quarter (thereby replacing it but retaining and adding to all of its bonuses and specialists) which is adjacent to at least two other Specialized Quarters or better (meaning Advanced Quarters, Urban Center, or Emblematic Districts which count as Specialized Quarters or better) or to a Main Plaza.  Or you could have the Empire State Building only buildable on top of an Advanced Market Quarter (again, replacing it but keeping its specialist slots, etc, and adding some significant bonuses) which is adjacent to an Urban Center.  This would again encourage diversity and mega-structures within the Cities themselves.

You could also have certain terrain-specific Wonders for the countryside.  For example, you can have something like the Giant Magellan Telescope which can only be built on the highest elevation on the continent (or at least at a minimum elevation) and a certain distance away from any City Districts.

When City Meets Country

I also wanted to point out that I haven’t quite worked out the ways to limit placement of Farming and Mining Communities, but I did want the ability to do one or two things if the City Districts reached those communities.  I think there should be the option to “urbanize” those districts if they became adjacent to the City Districts, but doing so would cause the food and production yields would either cease or drop dramatically.  Alternatively, perhaps you could surround those districts with your city, allowing them to continue exploiting the food on their own tiles but not the surrounding tiles (which would be occupied by City Districts).  Again, still working through this.

Merging Cities

One last point about peaceful City development.  I’m not a big fan of the current Merge Cities mechanic as it currently – something about it just seems artificial and a way to deal with the City cap (which, based on how much more effort establishing Cities would require given my proposals, I’d hope to simply eliminate).  Instead, the only way I think Cities can merge is if their actual districts meet one another at the border of their territories.  Then, if the Cities are merged, that becomes a permanent decision that combines those two territories for so long as that City still exists.  As discussed above, there are already other ways to attach territories and Towns, but merging of two actual Cities is a decision that I think should be rare and unchangeable.

Conquering and Assimilating Cities

Here is where I expect a lot of pushback.  I think City conquering, especially early era-City conquering, should change.  The main thing is this – until you reach a certain technology or perhaps civic (likely in the Industrial Era or later), taking a city by DIRECT force, meaning you have attacked the City with your units and siege engines rather than wait out the siege and force the City to surrender, is simply not an option.  If you assault the city, breach its walls, and kill the inhabitants who have risen against your advances, the City and all its Districts are, as a rule, razed to the ground.

There are a couple of reasons for this.  First, as I’ve stated before, I want early-era total control of a continent to be actually or nearly impossible.  It is currently far too easy to establish complete and unchallenged control over a continent within or soon after the Ancient Era.  By combining this forced-razing mechanic with my proposals for how new Cities are established and gradually built up from Outpost to Town to City (requiring much more time and resources than currently), I believe it will slow the early-game map painting to a pace that will allow for more rises-and-falls on each continent throughout the earlier eras.

Another reason is to create more late-game storytelling opportunities.  Although the City is razed to the ground, I think that its ruins should provide for production bonuses to any Outpost or Town founded on top of it, but those bonuses should only apply when the Outpost is dedicating its resources towards upgrading itself into a Town, or a Town into a City.  Perhaps there could also be some bonuses to the production of certain infrastructure in the newly built City based upon what existed in the razed City.  In later eras, you could also have story-events for archeological sites found within the City limits which could create opportunities for influence/fame generation or even unique legacy traits.

Instead, if you want to directly control that City (rather than rebuild from scratch), you must force it to surrender against the will of its original owner through an extended siege.  In my original post, I stated that this would be done through dropping its stability, but as I’ve thought about it more, especially with my ideas for the Cultural Revamp (I promise, I will actually post it soon-ish), I actually think there should be a separate measure for this, called “City Resilience,” which starts during a siege and which can be affected both positively or negatively by its stability levels.

However, once the City surrenders, it is still not yours directly but becomes an Independent People City.  The Empire who won that siege gets a large gold and perhaps population payout, as well as a clear advantage of assimilating the City, which should also be a more involved process.  Again, all of this requires the Independent Peoples system to be more robust than it is now.  The reason I think “City Resilience” should be a separate mechanic is because I envision the act of razing a City to the ground as having an effect on the Resilience of other Cities in the no-longer-existing-City’s Empire.

This becomes more important with how I propose certain unique cultures, like the Huns and Mongols, will work in my Cultural Revamp, one of the goals of which is to introduce ways to have asymmetrical gameplay throughout the game.  In most cases, certain aspects of cultures could be mixed and matched, which would create an infinite number of possible culture combinations.  However, I also see a few cultures (such as the Huns and the Mongols) as “total conversion” cultures, which means you adopt them in their entirety assuming you have met certain threshold conditions.

I think that the Cities which surrender to the Huns and Mongols should have a unique status applied to them rather than convert to Independent People City’s as normal (for example, something like “Khanate City” or something for the Mongols).  But I’m getting ahead of myself, this will be explored more once I post those ideas in their entirety!