Should/will players be allowed to build cities on mountain hexes?

[Addled Platypus]

lots might be over stating the fact

very steep on some, but not all (lived,travelled throughout there for a while)

a great way to learn to drive a clucth car !

then there is City Antioch, more homes going up on San Bruno mountain, but not much elese

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Platypus Rex
a great way to learn to drive a clucth car !

that just gave me an idea.. maybe the urban city sprawl might grow up the hills and into the mountains (like teheran, rio, and other similar cities). that could look really cool

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by sabrewolf


that just gave me an idea.. maybe the urban city sprawl might grow up the hills and into the mountains (like teheran, rio, and other similar cities). that could look really cool

Done deal, me thinks.

I was surprised to see this sort of 'sprawling' as well.

[sabrewolf]

oh wow, beautiful

[Addled Platypus]

gota agree

thanks for the link

[Provost Harrison]

It's looking good...I do have pretty high expectations...once I confirm a release date I will have to have a day or so off work

[Ecthy]

Not 60 hours again, like with SMAC?

[sabrewolf]

60 hours of what?

[Provost Harrison]

My longest period of no sleep was due to SMAC...62 hours

[sabrewolf]

really? wow!

i think my "best" was 36 hours or so when my parents cut the power so i'd finally go to bed

[Yarco_TW]

Originally posted by sophist

I think going beyond three levels is excessive. Even that might be too much. Still, I favor:
1) dirt road (no tech): travel cost is 1/3 the tile's normal travel cost. Plains goes from 1 to 1/3. Hills go from 2 to 2/3. Etc. Takes (let's say) 4 turns for an ordinary worker to build.
2) paved road (construction): travel cost is 1/3 everywhere. Takes 10 turns for an ordinary worker to build.
3) highway (automobile): travel cost is 1/12 everywhere. Takes 30 turns for an ordinary worker to build.

[Yarco_TW]

Originally posted by GeoModder
Can you imagine a million people in a city on a mountain?

Well, very many Inca cities are extremely highly located

Tiahuanaco - 3,962m (once capital of civ)
Cuzco 3,471m (capital)
Quito 2850 m
Cajamarca 2,750m
Machu Picchu 2,430 m

All are in a list by Civ3 author.

Also Aztecs and Maya had highly located cities:
Mexico 2,240 m
Teuakan 2,500 m
Tlaxcala 2,400m
Teotihuacan 2,300 m
Cholula 2,135m
Tula (Tollan) 1,340m

Quetzaltenango 2,333m
Guatemala city 1,493m

And Tibet: Lhasa (Tibet capital) 3,700 m

Considering current cities we also have
Denver, Colorado (1,609 m)
La Paz (capital of Bolivia) - 3,650m (center)

So far cities do exist in the mountains. The problem is that they might lack resources. Here I am interested in having food penalty, when building on a mountain top.

Currently the world is all populated, even though it is not worth having large cities in tundra. For strategic purposes we have built Norilsk, Murmansk, Anadyr, Clondike (mountain/tundra), etc.

So, the realism should be that if you build a town in tundra, it will never grow above the size of 3. And polar seas should give 0 food (unless they have whales) and +1 after ice-breaking ships can be built.

Also there should be some kind of "mountain plains" terrain with it's own resources (potatoes, llamas) to represent Altiplano in Peru and Mexico valley in Mexico.

And when it comes to barbarians :-((( they are just poorly made in Civ3 (much worse than in Civ2).

[GeoModder]

Nice list of heights, but I still don't see a million+ sized city ON a mountain.

Edit: no, I have to admit being wrong here. I guess Quito counts as that.

[sabrewolf]

mexico city is pretty high.

but then as all other cases, it is not ON a mountain but in a high area.

[LordShiva]

Well, in any case, all of the big cities in high areas/tundra were only built recently (modern age); perhaps a late tech should unlock this ability, before the discovery of which it should be off limits.