BORDERS (ver1.0): Hosted by Lancer

[yin26]

-=*MOVING THE THREAD UP*=-

[mhistbuff]

The one problem with changing the distance of borders as time passes is 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, only uncontested borders would be allowed to expand. This of course would be accurate from the point of view of Europe which has borders left over from the middle ages. Another question is whether the border expansion is triggered by an advance or a time, and whether it applies to all civs at the same time, or civ by civ as the technology is discovered. IMO, it should be triggered by an advance and be based on a civ to civ basis. The first civ to discover the advance, be it radio or telescope or whatever, should have the benefit of having thier borders expand first and that the other civs have to discover the tech before theirs do.

[Alexander's Horse]

Should borders extend into the sea (maybe based on the city radius)? 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 civ 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.

[paraclet]

I am in favor of borders resulting of exploration of a territory totally unexplored by any of your units like long time ago explorers just place a national flag to claim a territory...Like that you have the fun to explore the world fast to claim as many terriotories as possible
The borders should be a line of the colour of your civ, and any foreign military unit crossing it
should be considered as an act of war.
It is totally unacceptable right now to see a foreign settler creating a city in the middle of your civilisation...Try to do that in the Nevada desert if you are the mexican governement...
And we all saw that england didn't let Argentina take the Falkland islands...
That also would help the diplomatic contacts...Instead of bringing your diplomats to a city, you should open negotiations when it touch the border...Any other diplomat incursion shpould be considered as a spying act...(and it is usually...)

[crusher]

One problem I think will be caused by brians ideas of borders are caused by scenarios.If you play germany in world war two you want to have your real borders.

------------------
"War does not determine who is right,It determines who is left."
-Crusher-

[yin26]

-=*MOVING THREAD UP*=-

[yin26]

-=*MOVING THREAD UP*=-

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

i haven't read this whole thread, so sorry if i am redundant. I think that in the early part if the game, you should have a border of two or three spaces from your city, then when you send out explorers, they increase the border along whatever territory the unit can see. You territory will be seen on your screen as a dotted line of your color. You can not see the dotted lines of other nations that you have not had contact with. When ever you make contact with another civ his dotted borders are revealed to you, and if any of his borders are inside yours, then that territory becomes disputed, and wars or treaties would be needed to make a firm boundry, then that would show up as a solid line. Maybe instead of on the screen you could keep track of this in a separate map window.

Units of yours that wish to pass into the borders of other civs would then need to ask permission, or risk diplomatic consequences.

Any thoughts?

------------------
"When Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset, people DIE!"
- Dr. Evil

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

These disputed areas that I mentioned above would simulate areas like Kashmir today.

[Robert]

This Thread has been closes down.
You can continue the discussion on borders <a href = "http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum28/HTML/000131.html">HERE</a>

CyberShy
*NEW* Temp thread head of the borders thread