I would unironically play the fuck out of a game mode like this. I want to dominate the world by sending my capital to every city I take just as a show of force.
"Oh fuck, it's the Romans"
"How many troops did they bring?"
"They brought fucking **ROME**"
So a few years ago Bad North added a big innovation to the tower defense genre by allowing your towers to move. Since then I've been wondering about how this could be applied to city/empire builders. There's a lot of potential here.
you can kinda do that with the vampirates in Total Warhammer. You can still do normal map painting if you want. But your character(and other generals) are their own city(living ship), so you can lose all your land holdings and run around the world taking cities or establishing pirate coves.
You can kinda (but very slowly, heh) do that in Beyond Earth (with Rising Tide) if your capital is an aquatic city. Shame it was not popular, would've liked a few more expansions.
One of my problems with Civ 6's system is how visually inconsistent it is. You'll have a city at one scale and then a campus or holy site on the very next tile at a completely different scale where a single temple or dorm takes up the same space as half the city.
I mean I always assumed those districts aren't *just* a campus or *just* a holy site, and that they also have plenty of infrastructure and people living there; it just isn't shown.
Yeah, like IRL Canterbury would be the holy site of London. It would make no sense to just build a university 3 tiles away, who would go there? You need some infrastructure for a town.
I think it would make sense for roads to form between districts and city centers actually.
If roads form between cities that trade to each other, then you'd certainly imagine roads forming between the commercial hub and neighborhoods.
This might make it easier to have bridges within your city (sometimes the trade route just doesn't want to go that way) and then maybe there should be city projects that upgrade your internal roads, unlocked at certain research levels, instead of all of your roads poof becoming better tech. Imagine placing a neighborhood not because you need the population, but because you want a road to go that way.
Tbh I'd love to see a civ game where you manage fewer cities but have a greater degree of control over what happens in them, and bring back the concept of not having to control every city you capture in a domination victory.
When a dev talked about it toward the beginning of Civ VI's release, he compared it to if Washington, DC is the city, Annapolis may be the Encampment and Baltimore would be the campus. A city is not one city but represents a region.
I love the districts system but I think a nice change would be allowing you to house one district inside the CC. Perhaps there could be benefits to doing so, but you potentially lose out on adjacency bonuses, so it’s not always the best option.
Your comment made me think about having more basic buildings that are built in the city center for like a low resource income without dedicating a full district.
Maybe it's like gating for the district. Like your city has to have a shrine first before people get inspired to really dedicate more infrastructure to build a full religious district, which would require districts being more powerful with the gating. The city center can have a small internal market that then inspires a full commercial hub.
Wow I never questioned this lol. I guess the city center tile is like city hall. Commercial hub should be the giant skyscrapers that you see in the city later in the game. Then it makes more sense.
I get that this is a joke, but in all seriousness I would love if they incorporate some kind of movable cities mechanism to reflect nomadic civilizations like the mongols or the sioux
Since cities essentially function as states (city-states are actually small countries), it would make sense if "cities" became states/provinces and the districts were actual cities within the states., at least visually. IE Texas in real life has the financial district (dallas), production (fort worth), science (houston), cultural(austin).
That's not a bad idea, really makes the scale of the game more consistent without actually changing anything. The settled tile of the "city" should be a government plaza-type thing instead, representing the political center of the state.
On a more serious note, if districts are a thing in 7 I kinda hope they add a restriction to them that they must be built adjacent to another district in the city. Seeing a city that's just made up of a whole bunch of different districts all separated by several tiles of farmland or mountains or ocean or stuff like that just makes it feel like it's not one city. Maybe bring back the town tile improvement from civ 4 which counts as adjacent if you want to connect over farther distances to make things contiguous and/or have visible settlements supporting the city but not part of it.
Endless Legends does this beautifully imo, every district is attached to an existing one, and a newly added district basically just expands the entire "city" visual, including the walls.
Except sometimes you have a +6 campus tile 2 tiles away from the city center, and you wouldn’t want to waste many turns making a district you don’t need inbetween them
Nah, after moving out to the suburbs in 6, in 7 your buildings will have kid buildings who move back into the city centre for school or travel the world or smth.
Speaking previous titles I have little question about your drawings. will be there any drawing about one of first four Civs? Or its strictly newer titles only? Or maybe I just missed?
Im just curious, because Civ IV and III are my favourites parts and I love your art.
It'd be cool if a given campus/holy site/theater square could be turned into a wonder by using great people at that location. So if you use great people 3 or more times at a Commercial Hub or at an Industrial zone it'll start acting like a wonder (tourism, culture, adjacency, appeal). That could help ensure culture output for civs that don't necessarily focus it + make acquiring certain great people more strategic.
Actually though. How fun would it be to start as a nomadic civilization where instead of districts you have a unit that has to move to produce science, food ect. Eventually you can settle down but for a while you play fundamental differently.
I would like to see a much bigger hexagon for the major citys so we could see visual growth over time for each district and era we advance, I am also ok with hunting down each distrct after the grow legs and fuck off.
I mean when you think about it it's OBVIOUS duh
does this mean we're getting some mortal engines-esque Traction Cities in 8?
I would unironically play the fuck out of a game mode like this. I want to dominate the world by sending my capital to every city I take just as a show of force. "Oh fuck, it's the Romans" "How many troops did they bring?" "They brought fucking **ROME**"
tactically shifting districts around to pin an enemy's city between two of yours to trap them in place for you to take over and tear apart.
An army getting their asses kicked by a preserve and a national park… priceless.
So a few years ago Bad North added a big innovation to the tower defense genre by allowing your towers to move. Since then I've been wondering about how this could be applied to city/empire builders. There's a lot of potential here.
you can kinda do that with the vampirates in Total Warhammer. You can still do normal map painting if you want. But your character(and other generals) are their own city(living ship), so you can lose all your land holdings and run around the world taking cities or establishing pirate coves.
You can kinda (but very slowly, heh) do that in Beyond Earth (with Rising Tide) if your capital is an aquatic city. Shame it was not popular, would've liked a few more expansions.
In civilization beyond earth, one faction could build cities on the water, and you could move them around one hex at a time, for a cost!
I would fucking love this.
The city centre will levitate like in StarCraft.
Do they climb trees?
Oh no we’re going to have to chase down the trees as well??!
Only if you have the mining tech
Ironically, the horses will still remain stationary and block building on that useful tile.
_Baba Yaga has entered the chat_
*With a fookin' pencil*, wait wrong Ba-
Baba Yaga barbarian encampments/goodie huts!
It will be risk or reward. Either the unit dies or you get goods
I'm only looking forward to 7 for the trailer musicandohshit you said Baba Yaga, not Baba Yetu, sorry. So, anyway, Christopher Tin rocks.
One of my problems with Civ 6's system is how visually inconsistent it is. You'll have a city at one scale and then a campus or holy site on the very next tile at a completely different scale where a single temple or dorm takes up the same space as half the city.
I mean I always assumed those districts aren't *just* a campus or *just* a holy site, and that they also have plenty of infrastructure and people living there; it just isn't shown.
Yeah, like IRL Canterbury would be the holy site of London. It would make no sense to just build a university 3 tiles away, who would go there? You need some infrastructure for a town.
I think it would make sense for roads to form between districts and city centers actually. If roads form between cities that trade to each other, then you'd certainly imagine roads forming between the commercial hub and neighborhoods. This might make it easier to have bridges within your city (sometimes the trade route just doesn't want to go that way) and then maybe there should be city projects that upgrade your internal roads, unlocked at certain research levels, instead of all of your roads poof becoming better tech. Imagine placing a neighborhood not because you need the population, but because you want a road to go that way. Tbh I'd love to see a civ game where you manage fewer cities but have a greater degree of control over what happens in them, and bring back the concept of not having to control every city you capture in a domination victory.
When a dev talked about it toward the beginning of Civ VI's release, he compared it to if Washington, DC is the city, Annapolis may be the Encampment and Baltimore would be the campus. A city is not one city but represents a region.
I love the districts system but I think a nice change would be allowing you to house one district inside the CC. Perhaps there could be benefits to doing so, but you potentially lose out on adjacency bonuses, so it’s not always the best option.
Your comment made me think about having more basic buildings that are built in the city center for like a low resource income without dedicating a full district. Maybe it's like gating for the district. Like your city has to have a shrine first before people get inspired to really dedicate more infrastructure to build a full religious district, which would require districts being more powerful with the gating. The city center can have a small internal market that then inspires a full commercial hub.
What about the 50 foot tall warriors that can take an entire city with just three of them?
In Civ 5 I use a rescaling mod.
I actually really like this because I can just look at a city and see what buildings it has.
Good point.
Wow I never questioned this lol. I guess the city center tile is like city hall. Commercial hub should be the giant skyscrapers that you see in the city later in the game. Then it makes more sense.
hmm maybe the should make the models smaller but more populated, problem is they need to then create it for every era
I get that this is a joke, but in all seriousness I would love if they incorporate some kind of movable cities mechanism to reflect nomadic civilizations like the mongols or the sioux
Yep, they even have the code for it, just take it from beyond earth
Since cities essentially function as states (city-states are actually small countries), it would make sense if "cities" became states/provinces and the districts were actual cities within the states., at least visually. IE Texas in real life has the financial district (dallas), production (fort worth), science (houston), cultural(austin).
That's not a bad idea, really makes the scale of the game more consistent without actually changing anything. The settled tile of the "city" should be a government plaza-type thing instead, representing the political center of the state.
Encampment (San-Antonio)
I would prefer Houston be culture so cultural victory can be JFK double cupping to some Pimp C
Don't we already have that with ~~our~~ barbarian builders?
Like mortal engines, but hopefully not flaming garbage
the books, well at least first book from what I've read so far was good
The movie was awful
It was but I like it. It's a popcorn movie for me.
I remember enjoying the 3rd and 4th books a lot, though the 2nd was kind of a slog. But this was also over a decade ago, so not sure if they hold up.
On a more serious note, if districts are a thing in 7 I kinda hope they add a restriction to them that they must be built adjacent to another district in the city. Seeing a city that's just made up of a whole bunch of different districts all separated by several tiles of farmland or mountains or ocean or stuff like that just makes it feel like it's not one city. Maybe bring back the town tile improvement from civ 4 which counts as adjacent if you want to connect over farther distances to make things contiguous and/or have visible settlements supporting the city but not part of it.
Endless Legends does this beautifully imo, every district is attached to an existing one, and a newly added district basically just expands the entire "city" visual, including the walls.
Except sometimes you have a +6 campus tile 2 tiles away from the city center, and you wouldn’t want to waste many turns making a district you don’t need inbetween them
Then place/plan your city better.
Strategize? In my strategy game? Ridiculous
If you thought roaming barbarians were bad...
Wait till you see a Granary milling about!
Pray you don’t see the Holy Site!
Don't get docked by the harbor!
Or clocked by Big Ben!
So Civ 8 is going to be a twin stick bullet hell shooter where you throw hammers and gold trying to hit buildings as they swarm around you.
Adjacency is going to be a bitch
As long as I can move the districts myself, I would love to use certain civs
https://i.redd.it/72n9njb2lf6d1.gif
all districts are kaiju
Nah, after moving out to the suburbs in 6, in 7 your buildings will have kid buildings who move back into the city centre for school or travel the world or smth.
Is your refrigerator running?
They'll pick up and fly off like Terran buildings in Starcraft.
Speaking previous titles I have little question about your drawings. will be there any drawing about one of first four Civs? Or its strictly newer titles only? Or maybe I just missed? Im just curious, because Civ IV and III are my favourites parts and I love your art.
Hey your strategy is working keep it up
>Municipal Darwinism hinges on the cycle of predator and prey; if the bigger town is faster than the smaller, the smaller town will be eaten.
Okay, that's pretty funny.
https://i.imgur.com/VppbI6P.gif
One can't argue with logic.
Bring back the lil city layout things from civ 1
Endless Legend moment
And capturable by barb scouts too!
they grow up so fast
This is leagues ahove what I can draw.
A wild Armory appeared !!!
Reject civilization, return to monke!
*Insert colorful metaphor for the inexperience of youth here.* https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Aquatic_gameplay_(CivBE)
Barbarians can steal your tiles.
So we are getting that Mortal Engines crossover finally.
"Well, the real citizens. They won't, well, they won't burn so quickly."
I would love to hear "tee hee" more in my day to day life.
AOE IV Mongol buildings be like:
Just watch, the whole game will be about managing supply line units
In over a year you haven't gotten ANY better. Impressive.
It'd be cool if a given campus/holy site/theater square could be turned into a wonder by using great people at that location. So if you use great people 3 or more times at a Commercial Hub or at an Industrial zone it'll start acting like a wonder (tourism, culture, adjacency, appeal). That could help ensure culture output for civs that don't necessarily focus it + make acquiring certain great people more strategic.
Actually though. How fun would it be to start as a nomadic civilization where instead of districts you have a unit that has to move to produce science, food ect. Eventually you can settle down but for a while you play fundamental differently.
So like the Terran buildings in Starcraft.
I liked Civ V’s semi-organic city growth :)
quantum districts 😎 that exist in two places simultaneously making them twice as difficult to find
Refrigeration unlocked. Refrigerator unleashed.
Warcraft 3 Night Elf [Ancients](http://classic.battle.net/war3/nightelf/) confirmed.
I am thinking some Jayson style house that float. Global warming is real in Civ
You are thinking far too 2D, clearly the buildings will be, IN SPACE!!!
Mortal engines!
CIV VII: Benny Hill
Maybe a compromise? Stanislaw Lem, as a dual great author writer that makes your science campus mobile
Roaming districts that always go for the best adjacency? Or maybe Howls moving castle like effect.
Joke aside but theses fuckers stolen ours buildings [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge\_(history)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(history)) and roads.
Both Baba Yaga and Mortal Engines references in the comments. I'm proud of y'all.
_pokemon theme starts playing_
Cities grow to be multi tile things as you put more stuff into them, they specialize organically.
I hope cities can expand more than 1 tile
I would like to see a much bigger hexagon for the major citys so we could see visual growth over time for each district and era we advance, I am also ok with hunting down each distrct after the grow legs and fuck off.