Apolyton CS: Civilization III: The List v1: Borders

BORDERS
-Summarized by Yin-
namk26@hotmail.com

1. DIPLOMACY    TOP

Looking at the responses, there can be little doubt that gamers want borders to be negotiable. In short, borders should reflect complex diplomatic relations.

1.1) FIXING BORDERS: "There needs to be a provision for fixing the borders diplomatically so the constant land-grabbing isn't possible. This should only be possible in relatively modern times, as borders should get more and more fixed as time and technology move forward" (Bell).

1.1a) Agreed: "I think fixed borders should be available at anytime either as a diplomatic option, or even better: Something automatic between two countries with a peace treaty. Land-snatching would then be limited to countries at war" (Isle).

1.1b) Set in stone: "Once a city is established, its production radius should be set in stone and counted as the border. Borders as in SMAC would be set up between cities, but the cities themselves would have their own borders" (HolyWarrior).

1.2) SEA YOU SEA ME: "Perhaps a passing of a 'Law of the Sea' type resolution would automatically grant all nations a 200 mile control of the seas around their nation, say 2-3 squares surrounding any land square in their nation" (NotLikeTea).

1.3) PEACE and WAR: "When you have peace, the borders are automatically sealed between your two countries. No one may gain territory of the other side. Non-aggression will automatically cause a 'Border region' when both countries have ANY sort of claim on that area (in the 8 square part of every nation), while the 3 square radius of a city production always stays in the older city owner hands. The border region is a dead area, none may enter it or build upon it. In war, it's all game along the border line" (Harel).

1.3a) War? Only if you're caught: "I don't think entering enemy territory should be a declaration of war; I think being spotted in enemy territory should be a declaration of war. Otherwise there's no sneak attacks. Which brings me back to the ever observant armed border guards . . ." (Bell).

1.3b) Perhaps only special units can cross without being seen?: "You can't enter a nation with a legion and NOT be noticed. Entering an enemy space with a normal unit will cause war. For sneak attacks, use sneak units: spies, guerrilla-type units" (Harel).

1.3c) Well, we should be era specific and add the element of chance: "In the days of yore, you could easily move in and silence the local populace without alerting the country's military or leadership. As late as the mid 1800's you could land a large army and keep it from being officially noticed until it attacked. Maybe if there was a random chance every turn you across the border that your unit would be discovered?" (Bell).

1.4) BORDERS AS A NEGOTIABLE COMMODITY: "I think borders should be another bargaining tool. In the diplomat screen you should be able to move the boards around and offer the new arrangement to the other civilization. (i.e. you move the border) so you have more land (maybe including a city or two) in exchange for something" (Blue Waldo).

1.4a) Land, therefore, a commodity: "Allow buying, selling, and trading individual pieces of land. This would allow simulation of: The Louisiana Purchase, The Gadsden Purchase, The Polish Corridor, The Alaska Purchase, etc." (HolyWarrior).

1.4b) And the cities on that land…:"I believe there should be the ability to buy land and cities from other civilizations and sell it as well…maybe even set up an auction of sort for the cities…You should be able to enter into diplomatic talks and set new borders; these might, or might not, include cities" (Cartagia the Great).

1.5) AIR DIPLOMACY: "I think that borders should also extend to air units. That means that you aren't allowed to fly through another civilization's territory without an alliance or permission from them" (Mo).

1.6) PARTITIONING: "This would be a temporary alliance between two or more nations that would be used to divide up another civilization. Under the agreement each would set up borders in this new civilization representing what they wish to take. Then there would be a temporary alliance between the nations as each went to grab these cities" (Cartagia the Great).

1.7) EXPLORATION: "…borders resulting from exploration of a territory. Any foreign military unit crossing them should be considered as an act of war. That also would help the diplomatic contacts: Instead of bringing your diplomats to a city, you should open negotiations when it touches the border. Any other diplomat incursion should be considered as a spying act" (parclet).

2. ARMED BORDERS    TOP

In keeping with the spirit of giving borders more meaning, players debated the idea of arming their borders:

2.1) BORDER TROOPS: "You should be able (for a cost) to monitor borders with a small detachment of troops. These troops don't show up on the screen but function as spotters and maybe a tripwire force that can cause minor damage to an enemy unit crossing the border. On the turn after the border has been breached at a certain square, though, it returns to a normal border and units can pass without harm. That part of the border will not 're-arm' until all enemy units are out of your territory. Also, to keep people from overusing armed borders, in addition to the cost there is a random chance (that increases as time passes) of one of your troops taking some pot shots across the fence and causing a diplomatic incident. The effects of this depend on your diplomatic relationship with the other country, ranging from a slight hit to relations to the beginning of a war" (Bell).

2.1a) But is that redundant?: "I succeed in doing the same thing by building a fort and sticking a unit there. That protects three squares. One problem that I see is deciding who gets what square when arguing with an AI civilization. If only one square is overlapped by two opposing civilizations, who gets it? Is that area declared 'No-Man's Land'?" (CormacMacArt).

2.1b) Redundant?: "This allows you to watchdog your entire border without tying up your troops or sending them out of your cities (and thus making your people unhappy). Also, there's no ZOC involved in them, and there isn't a full-scale battle involved if someone tries to enter your empire. Think of it as a cheaper, weaker, automated way of posting a unit and fortress every three squares around your border" (Bell). [Working in Korea, I've seen the importance of a DMZ as a means both of deterrence and potential diplomatic disaster. Such situations would add great depth to the game. (Yin).]

3. GOVERNMENTS/TECHNOLOGY AND BORDERS    TOP

3.1) GOVERNMENT DETERMINES BORDER BEHAVIOR: "At the beginning of the game, you have Ancient government types. There are no borders under these governments. Next, you move to Medieval governments. These introduce borders, but they are similar to the ones in SMAC and are thus fairly flexible. It is possible to fix borders between two civilizations with at least Medieval-level governments, but they will still move when a city is taken. Also, you can appropriate a square of territory by moving a military unit over the border and giving it a conquer order. You can not arm borders under these governments, but you can order intruders to leave, like in SMAC. Finally, Republic, Democracy, Marxist, Fundamentalist, and Fascist governments are considered Modern. Under these governments, borders are flexible only when they would extend into unclaimed territory (by the time you reach these governments, your borders with other civilizations should be fairly well defended anyway). You can not conquer individual squares under these governments, but taking a city still moves the borders. You can also arm your borders although this incurs a slight diplomatic penalty. For any border between two civilizations with different levels of government type, the more advanced one takes precedence in the stability of borders. However, no matter what the government on the other side of the border is, only Medieval governments can conquer territory, and only Modern governments can arm borders" (Bell).

3.1a) Another vote for borders by era:

· Ancient: 3 squares land 1 sea.
· Renaissance: 5 land 2 sea.
· Modern: 7 land 3 sea (ember).

3.1b) A bit more detailed: "What happens to cities from different nations that are only 6 squares apart (a perfectly allowable distance for the 'ancient' distances) when the period changes? One possible solution would be for those borders to remain in place, while only uncontested borders would be allowed to expand. Another question is whether an advance or time triggers the border expansion, and whether it applies to all civilizations at the same time, or civilization by civilization as the technology is discovered. IMO, it should be triggered by an advance and be based on a civilization to civilization basis. The first civilization to discover the advance, be it radio or telescope or whatever, should have the benefit of having their borders expand first" (mhistbuff).

3.1c) Are borders possible before Map-Making?: "It would make it a lot easier to discuss borders in diplomatic relations..." (NotLikeTea).

3.1d) Border Tech a "Red Herring"?: "In the early game, nobody is going to care if there are somewhat overlapping borders at the outskirts. When it really matters, they will become important and the technology will be there. That is, unless you 'grab' too much and tick off your neighbors. This conflict is fun."

3.2) WHAT CAUSES BORDER SHIFTS IN THE MODERN ERA?: "(1) Wars, and capturing territories, (2) Diplomacy, trading land for peace, dividing up a conquered territory among victors, (3) Civil wars, and (4) Merging of states. Only #1 is present in SMAC, with a slight version of #2 (giving up a colony for a cease-fire). #3 and #4 are the most important these days, and are totally un-represented in any CIVILIZATION game" (NotLikeTea).

3.3) SEA BASES ALL AROUND?: "An inland base/city could not, at least in olden times, control the sea, since it would not be able to get any ships out in case of aggression. So, how about, until the advent of advanced diplomatic relations, only coastal cities could control sea borders? If you want to be REALLY strict, you could restrict it further - in Ancient times, only coastal bases with a port could control sea borders" (Chowlett).

3.3a) A different take: "In SMAC, land and sea borders were considered separate. This is bogus. All cities had control of offshore waters even in ancient times. A city's radius is the same, regardless of land or sea" (HolyWarrior).

4. BORDERS AND TERRAIN    TOP

4.1) GO WITH THE FLOW: "How about having borders conform to terrain features, i.e. rivers and mountain ranges? These natural barriers are things that are defensible by the 'armed border' guards as suggested by Bell. For example, when you build a city/fortress/outpost in a valley, you gain claim to that whole area (within reason). In order to gain more land on the other side of the river, you have to build a settlement on that side" (russellw).

4.1a) Conforming to the landscape: (assuming that the border is with unclaimed space.) "A city will establish borders in an 8 square radius around it on a featureless plain. The smallest a radius can be is 3 squares. No matter what terrain is within three squares, it is claimed by that city. Between 3 and 8 squares, a border will conform to a river that exits the 8 square radius. So, if a river is 4 squares away, your territory will stop at that river. The same goes for mountain ranges. The first square or line of mountains within 8 squares is inside your territory, but beyond that, it's free land. Borders also extend into the sea for 2 squares off the coast (or bombardment range, if it is over 2 squares.) A sea border can not be armed, but trespassing is handled just like a land border. Sea borders extend from any piece of land you have claimed. No other land types have an impact on borders" (Bell).

4.2) OCEAN BORDERS-A WEAK LINK?: "How many times have I built a fleet, sailed it into the heart of a rival empire and right up to their capital and blown them away? No reaction from the target civilization as I deploy, even though the assault force (particularly the carriers and transports) is extremely vulnerable. Need to fix this, even though it will mean giving up a pet tactic" (Alexander's Horse).

5. A MODEST PROPOSAL    TOP

5a) Cities, forts, or airfields should mark Borders.

5b) You should be told when any unit crosses your border.

5c) You should be able to have a border guard, like the Canadian Mounties, that can act as spies on passing units and help you see a few blocks past your border.

5d) Borders should be locked from change between nations at peace or when allied unless a specific diplomatic deal is made.

5e) Borders should start from Day 1. Even ancient civilizations knew when they were crossing into foreign territory.

5f) The borders should be visible by outlines in your nation's color, and should be able to be turned off/on like the map grid. (reddawg151)

6. BORDERS AND SCENARIO PLAY     TOP

6a) "If you play Germany in WW2, you want to have your real borders" (crusher).


Apolyton Civilization Site Copyright © Robert Plomp and Jeroen Schweitzer All trademarks and trade names are the properties of their respective owners