What Happens if...

[The Andy-Man]

In Civ3 there is a new border thing etc, so what happens if in a war, you land troops right in the middle of your opponents empire and take a city. this city is in the middle of the AI territory, and miles away from your boarder.. do you sort of grew a new border or something.

[player1]

Of course!

Like Vatikan or San Marino inside Italy.

[Inverse Icarus]

based on the city's cultural rating (probably with a considerable loss), you get a bubble of your own borders within their territory.

then culture ratings will force those borders to expand/contract.

I THINK MILITARY UNITS SHOULD BE ABLE TO MODIFY BORDERS.

[Dauphin]

Maybe, but then ultimately it is culture that defines the borders. Else it is similar to an occupation.

If you are in a contentious area culturally (eg Alsace-Lorraine) then military units can define the border, else it is a military occupation with detrimental effects. Eg Nazi occupation of Paris.

[Madine]

Yes, but:

That city will be under a high risk of cultural takeover.

You won't gain cultural benefits from the buildings that already exist in that city. You also won't gain benefits from the foreign citizens intially.

[aebbeka]

How do you prevent a cultural takeover? Do you have to have a whole lotta military units in the city?

I THINK MILITARY UNITS SHOULD BE ABLE TO MODIFY BORDERS.

They can't do it for that long of course. Culture is a far more unifying force. Go down to south Texas. There may be an official border with checkpoints and police, but one side of the border is much like the other and most people have relationships (familial and friendly) with people on both sides. Makes perfect sense.

[jdd2007]

Question-
If you are allied with a civ that has a city near one of your own cities, could u "assimilate" the city? I hope u can only assimilate enemy cities...you dont see chunks of Canada becoming the 51st state...

[saracen31]

Agreed, allies should not be included in the mix. Cultural warfare should only occur with enemies or non-allies.

[Warm Beer]

you dont see chunks of Canada becoming the 51st state...

That would be due to Canadian culture being on a par with American Culture.

I believe that a city is taken over culturally only if the cultural "attacker" has a much higher culture rating than the "defender". It's there to make you think twice before settling a new city directly on the border of France, so to speak, where the strength of the existing culture would envelop the young settlement.

[Xmudder]

Originally posted by jdd2007
Question-
If you are allied with a civ that has a city near one of your own cities, could u "assimilate" the city? I hope u can only assimilate enemy cities...you dont see chunks of Canada becoming the 51st state...

I though Canada already *WAS* the 51st state...
(They just haven't realised it yet)


But if you want to see the resilience of culture, look no further than Quebec.

[sekong]

Good question!
According to info we have, the city you just aquired should have 0 culcure value, therefore size 0. If you want it to generate culture value, you have to get some building by yourself..
But somehow this seems weird.

[Inverse Icarus]

i honestly dont understand why if i have 3 legions in enemy terriroty, how they can control that land, and use it effectively.

there should be a war-based way of border expansion.

[Madine]

I would assume that if a hostile military unit occupies a square it can't be worked as in all other civ games.

The primary method of military units to influence borders is and always has been to capture cities.

Also a militarily strong nation will probably have more success in diplomatically adjusting borders.

[ajbera]

Does anyone know if forts have effects on borders? I can understand military units not affecting them, but I think a fortress should act as a one-square area of your civ, stretching your border if the fortress is close enough (say within 2 tiles of the border.)

Or perhaps a colony/fortress combination. Is that allowable on a single tile? Or are only fortified units allowed on a colony space?

[Inverse Icarus]

Dan said workers do not violate territory tresspassing, so i think building a fortess in enemy land is a bit of a no no

[Simpleton]

Originally posted by Xmudder


I though Canada already *WAS* the 51st state...
(They just haven't realised it yet)


But if you want to see the resilience of culture, look no further than Quebec.

Blasphemer!!! I have been to the US many times and I find Canada and the US similar but they have significant differences. (ie. a lot less guns and fewer kooks who use them!, its colder here!!, we love hockey and to the US it's only a fad,we over react when someone says we're the 51st state.) I could go on and on.... but thankfully the polite Canadian in me won't....

PS: I think the US should become the 11th Canadian province!!!!

[Inverse Icarus]

if canada was a us state then you damned draft dodging panzies wouldn't be able to wimp out of a war so easily...

[mactbone]

They'd run to Mexico with all the banditos and their fritos

[The Andy-Man]

in WW2 (on the euro theatre) i beleive that canada lost more troops then the US (and dont forget the defeat at diep, i beleive that was a regiment 30,000 canadians, all killed or captured)


so i wouldnt be so quick to call canadians panzies.....

[randomturn]

poor soldiers, then?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
in WW2 (on the euro theatre) i beleive that canada lost more troops then the US (and dont forget the defeat at diep, i beleive that was a regiment 30,000 canadians, all killed or captured)


so i wouldnt be so quick to call canadians panzies.....

You're off by a factor of at least5 on the Dieppe losses. There were ~6000 troops (5000 can., 1000 amer.) who took part in the raid.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by randomturn
poor soldiers, then?

Go ask the Dutch if they were...

Or the folks who were at Vimy or Ypres.

Seriously, though, the Dieppe raid was a classic example of bad planning and inexperience on the par of the commanding officers. Landing an amphibious assault at a heavily defended port turned out not to be the best idea.

[Rakki]

You gotta have mistakes to learn from if you want to learn from your mistakes. Just imagine if some geriatric in a wheelchair decided that it was the "right stuff" to go for Pas de Calais instead of Nromandy.... check out World War I.

[Your.Master]

Originally posted by randomturn
poor soldiers, then?

You run the risk of insulting people extremely much. Think about what you just said. I'm not insulted, but many would be.

I think Uber was talking about American draft dodgers, not Canadians who just aren't drafted in the first place (only at the VERY ends of the World Wars, which pissed us off mightily).

Want a mini-history lesson? Can you tell I have huge Canadian pride?

Anyhoo, Canadians were considered the "Storm Troopers" (Insert Star Wars "Empire's March" theme) in the World Wars because they were just plain good at killing people. The battles where we lost were generally due to the incompetence of high-ranking British generals who considered Australian and Canadian "colonists" as "cannon-fodder" (I bet you had no idea how many words you use actually refer to Canadians ). Vimy ridge was a very proud Canadian battle in France, where many attacks by coalition forces including 200 000 Brit and American troops couldn't capture it but on a different occasion about 100 000 Canadian troops managed to make huge gains and capture the lines while the enemy breakfast was still warm...on the second (!) line of defense. I am told that Vimy ridge is considered Canadian territory now (post-war gift from the French government).

By the way, Canuck is a term that originates from another wartime nickname like "Storm Troopers" - "Crazy Canucks".

WWI is Canada's famous war (yeah, us peace loving canucks are like badgers. You poke us, and we evolve over millions of years into humans and make you extinct through pollution), and though it never formally declared war (Britain did that for us) we got to sign the treaty of Versailles.