Quoting vieuxchat, reply 77The problem of limited tiles for cities isn't still taken care of.
Cities are spammed because :
You need more resources
You need more gold, then you create more cities for the roads that are created
You need to control a chokepoint on the map
You need to expand your zone of influence
So, if for all of those reason the player has a better way to achieve that, he won't spam cities.
What cities are for ?
More population, in order to get more research points, more units to train
Zone of influence
So, some ideas :
More resources and zone of control : you can only tap improvements that are within your control borders, but you can only expand your control borders with a special building that you can only build a limited times. BUT, you can expand that number with research (infinite research). Each new city would only control the city hub and the 8 tiles around it. You couldn't build on a land that isn't revived, but you have no cap to the number of buildings you can build around a city, thus YOU can decide how big the city need to be. Or maybe a soft limitation like number of housing and population like now.
Gold and caravans : Caravans shouldn't be created for every new city hub you build. But only from cities with at least : 2 housing, 1 market and 1 building that produce thing (like a farm, a wood, a forge, something that can create things you can sell). Automatically only cities that are well developped would produce enough gold, then city spamming would hurt your wallet. Morover, with the "you can only build on revived area, but cities don't expand automatically without a special building (limited in number)" you can't have a lot of well developped cities.
Chokepoints : What about improvements that player can create ? A fortress ? An outpost ? Walls ? Maybe engineer units could create "defensive place" or "offensive place" where you could then place an improvement (if at the right distance from a city) like a fort, an outpost, a trebuchet, a magical gardian, a firethrower, a lightning tower, a magic hub, etc. Defensive improvements would need a "defensive place" and offensive improvements woudl need an "offensive place"
My 2 cts.
As always a nice structured and well thought out reply from vieuxchat. I approve.
On the governor system boogiebac proposes: if you can assign heroes as governors - which is something I like very much indeed - I also see a system where you can assigh heroes not only as governors but also as count - or whatever noble title may be more applicable - of an entire region. It would be very nice indeed to have bonusses to overall stats to an entire region if you can assign a hero as lord of a region. Maybe this should have drawbacks as well, for example in the sense that you can then only tell a region what you want it to do in terms of paying taxes and delivering swords or troops, but you lose full autonomy.
I am unsure if this would be a very good idea or if it carries a bit too far to go that way, but it sure would be fun to have options like these.
And why not creating a system of regions ? After some times you can create a region : it would be composed of some cities and some area you design around it. then you can sassign governor not only to cities but also to regions. you could have then some more options to control your towns : give them general orders or get a synergy bonus or some wall around region, or lesser maintenance, better resistance against enemy culture spread, things like that. Mid or late game you would have a map divided in regions like in total war for instance (or hearts of iron)
You would have country borders that would slowly be set in stone (like todays countries) and get more option to govern your cities. Maybe options where you can "attach" little settlements to big cities and control them as one entity.
Wow, I should stop dreaming.
This basically is what I meant to say. These regions could get synergies like these and others, like a capitol for each region which would affect maintenance costs and such, at the cost of some drawbacks like reduced control over that region.
Then in the end you can decide for yourelf what you need more: control or lesser maintenance + other bonusses for having grouped regions.
I think that we could be really be on to something here. Domintation victories would be really easier if there also would be some system where you could unite non-nationcapitol regions under your banner, so that creating a region of your own would get you two regions, the one with your capitol and the new region. The one region you created might then be assimilated by another nation so you theoretically run the risk of losing the region. That way you may really spread your efforts and influence to unite regions rather than spreading your power by the sword.
IN the end for the system to be cool and for it to work, there is a need to really encourage the player to create regions because it has some major benefits, and also there should be drawbacks like running the risk of losing the allegance of the region and reduced control over the region.