The city states idea.

[Dinner]

I understand that in addition to the regular civs in the game there will also be a few independent city states which players can conquer much like they could conquer barbarian cities in Civ4. My question is does anyone have an idea of how this might work? I mean if you go to war with a city state and they conquer one of your cities then does it get to keep it or does it raze the city? If a city state can have multiple cities then it seems like they could become defacto civs rather then just city states. Also Firaxis seems to be talking a lot about the new and improved diplomacy system so I'm wondering if we can trade with city states just like we can with other civs. In civ4 the barbarian cities wouldn't trade with you but will these new city states do so?

[OzzyKP]

Yea. Apparently there will be barbarians and city states. City states you can negotiate with, barbs you can't. Both can own cities. I think city states can only have one city each. So I suppose they would raze your cities. Though maybe they have something wired where they only fight defensive wars. I'm not sure.

But yea you can trade with them. Those allied/vassalized can gift you units and resources.

[Victor Galis]

I don't see why city states couldn't own other cities. I mean from a historical perspective, Athens had colonies. Venice owned decent bits of the Adriatic coast. They'd just have to have some sort of penalty in their second cities to differentiate them from actual civs.

[OzzyKP]

Probably an area where gameplay trumps realism.

[TimeTraveler]

What if city states, if after getting a colony or two, gained the mindset of a full-fledged empire? A player? Could we be playing something where if city states are left unchecked, they may become true opponents?

[Felch]

My guess is that city states won't capture enemy towns. They might force you to pay a steep tribute or watch the city burn. They really shouldn't be able to threaten your cities though.

I remember hearing that they can be trading partners. Wasn't that in one of the previews?

[SpencerH]

If you play the revolutions mod with barbarian cities and all civs starting as "minor civs", there tends to be some independent "city state" or small civs throughout the early expansion/colonization phase of the game that havent managed to grow. Eventually, they all become "vassalized" though by the civs that have managed to expand in the face of the constant warfare.

[Concrete Donkey]

There are assumptions that City States will have military units of their own to attack and take cities. Has this been confirmed? Cities can defend themselves in Civ V according to what I read so maybe the city will just have higher defences than a normal player.

[iamakka]

I do like the look of this, and many of the great empires (Roman, Persian, Arab, Mongul, etc) were built more on the conquest or subversion of other cities and weaker nations then on the foundation of new cities (at least initially).

[Kropotkin]

A lot of people in this thread thinks and wants the city states to be able to do a lot of things. I can understand that sentiment, in some ways I share them. However, sometimes less is more. As I see it it might be better if the city states don´t try to do to much. City states that produce units, conquer and in pretty much all aspects acts as just any other civilization is probably not the point.

[Concrete Donkey]

The way I picture City states, without having read too much on them, is that they have no units but are well defended. You can trade with them and as time goes on peacefully incorporate them into your empire through negotiations, cultural influence, performing some kind of task or quest for them or aggressively take control. Either way will give some unique benefit to your nation as a whole (ie all mounted units begin with combat upgrades or marketplaces give +1 gold or maybe a unique great leader like unit) and benefit's should be different depending on which way you go.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

my favourite city state is Rome

[Ming]

It will be interesting to see how they handle the difference between city states and other civs.

I have no problem if city states create armies and go on the offensive if the situation calls for it.
But like others, I hope they are different from other civs so that the distinction is meaningful.

[Dinner]

I'd like to see successful city states possibly grow into real civs.