Meh doesn't bother me. People will find exploits regardless, I think its a waste of time if your changing things just because people exploit it in a single player game. Now  memory usage is a far better reason for any change to city management in my opinion.

Agreed, only reason I would "allow" this without too much harrang.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Well as long as as the separate screen to display the tile art can be turned off then I'll be happy.  I would never use it anyway since it is just fluff unless it has some game purpose. I like the one tile city concept it will make the maps look so much better and less 'gamie'

So since you are taking this out could you put in walls in tactical combat?

I HATE this idea.  I really like planning out city expansion to grab those extra goodies or block off areas of the map so that the enemies need to go through a chokepoint.  The City snakes are a good idea, and they make sense.  Look at actual cities developed during war time in ancient times.  They also snaked and were built strategically to block off important resources from their potential enemies.  I still don't understand peoples issues with this.  If you want a perfectly square and pretty city, then build one.  If you want a more functional city, then stop complaining about the snaking.  It makes the game better, not worse.  We don't need to dumb this game down any more than it already is!

I am angered that this is even being considered to be honest.  I like the game, although it is missing some of the great things about the original (population as a resource - fantastic idea; dynasties - also very fun).  I don't understand why the best parts of WOM weren't included in this game, but it is fun anyway.  I really liked the overpowered monsters in Beta 1 that kept races from expanding too much until they were strong enough to kill the monsters, and am disappointed that is gone from the game.  It was a novel way to fight the normal rapid land grab early in 4X games, without making it tedious or unfun late game (like civs way of adding corruption the more cities you have).

I can because it looks better than the snake cities mess the game has now

You can create a city any way you want.  The AI doesn't seem to snake their cities much, so I have no idea what this problem is for you.  You can create the city as pretty or ugly as you want.  Why do you want everyone to have to make their cities pretty?  Maybe I want an ugly snake of a city.  How does that hurt you at all?

The tiles can be just as detailed when zoomed in as it is now.

This is likely true, although performance isn't really an issue now.  I usually get crashes when I reload an older save and continue on that save for a while, but other than that it is relatively stable and even at turn 500 (where my current game is) on a large map with 10 AI, turns are very fast.

I don't agree with this.  Maybe if you want the world to seem larger, or the cities to seem smaller.  Cities should have a sense of size, and large ones should look particularly larger than small ones.  I like the way it looks on the map now, and I can tell at a glance what my best cities are just by the size of them.  I like the scale of the cities in comparison to the world.  I don't want that to change.  A larger world map would be better than smaller cities to increase the scale of the world.
-Better gameplay

In what way?  This seems counter intuitive to me.  As it is, you can plan out your assaults on cities much better than a single tile, because you have the tactical options of where to attack it from.  I might have champions on both sides of the city that are 20 tiles apart, but because the city is so large they are nearly the same distance from the city.  They cannot join up to attack, but could attack it seperately, and that is a strategic decision for you to make.

Again, this doesn't make sense to me.  You can see the people in city better with larger cities than one tile cities. 

Most of these points are already in the city view screen that already exists.

I can see this being like HoMM, but the tactical battles are already set up similar to that.  I would like there to be a bigger difference between fights inside a city and out, like you have in HoMM, but I REALLY don't want to change the tile mechanics of cities as they are to a single tile.  I HATE that idea with a passion.
 

Even if I build my cities in a nice circle or square (which I often do) they are still too big on the map. I mean it does not take long on a Large map (let alone smaller maps) to have the feeling that you in one huge cicties with a bunch of suburbs instaead of a wilderness map. 

I have to agree. I wouldn't mind seeing building on the map if it was scaled much smaller, it just envelops the whole landmass much to quickly. Perhaps, instead of 4 small/1 large per strategic grid square, if it were 16 small/4 large per grid square. Or perhaps this is better, increase moves/turn, and just make the squares smaller.

Either way, without some major change, I can't really see any way I'd want to keep the current building on strategic map system and not move to a 1 tile city.

Greetings Martimus. You seem to be passion about the game, but it may be the only thing we have in common. 

I do not try to persuade you a one tile city system is better, but perhaps I should explain the list I made before in greater detail. I seem to have understated many things.

-More Detailed Tiles: You see, currently the number of objects a given tile can have is extremely limited because of the memory requirements of having them on the map. In a one tile system they would only be generated when one views the city view screen. This means we can use tons more objects when making a tile without memory constraints. This is very important for modders and users that want to play on large maps. There are several features that could be implemented if we only had more memory to work with.

-Better Game Performance: As said above, the memory requirements would be greatly reduced. That means more of other things can be put on the map, like monsters that have more than one unit in the army. People with slower computers will be able to play larger maps. Currently the endgame is sluggish for almost everyone. The large cites are the greatest contributor.

-Better Scale: Scale, as has been hashed through many a times by me, is all about measurements matching up. A single tile is hundreds of square miles. It is hard to justify a city taking up more than one tile. Sure, some things like rivers and cities are representationally larger on this kind of map, but the don't take up 50% of the map. If we want choke points, there are better ways to make them. Use magic to create mountainous walls, give units an ZoC on the main map to slow enemies, allow massive walls to be constructed in strategic areas. There are many solutions that work within the current scale of the game. City snaking is a gamy solution to strategic play.

-Sieges: Sieges are not a design option, as stated by the devs, in the current system because of several constraints. It would be easier to implement alongside a one tile system. It creates a view screen that could show the player a siege without rendering it on the strategic map. This is not my area of expertise, but generally Hf is right about these things.

-People shown in the tiles: This is a kickback to the good old days when we had a bustling city with lots of little people walking about. I really want this back. It was removed as an option due to memory constraints. Never Forget.

-Whole new dimension of effect possibilities for this screen: Magic can be seen affecting cities, Sieges can be viewed here from season to season, destructible buildings and walls: Once again, we are not understanding each other. I mean they can create magical graphic effects for the city. A city could be frozen over by a water spell. That spell would visibly show up on the city, freezing the people and buildings. This cannot be done until we have a city view screen. There are dozens of things that could be done on a city view screen that cannot be done otherwise.

You seem to get the last point and you skipped over gameplay, so I'll end with this; The one city tile will not be a generic icon. You can assume that the number of objects used to create the tile will allow for a very intricate and beautiful design. The tile already changes at higher levels. The new tiles will likely change based on what faction you are and how you specialize a city. The one tile system will also not be one tile exactly. You will get a few tiles from leveling that make a city look larger as it increases in level. It will just be more to scale now. I was hoping a short list of points would be sufficient.

Go Martimus, Go Martimus...

My only problem with the current cities is it leaves some mechanics to be changed by the game creators to be perfect, my biggest problem with 1 tile cities is, I have seen that so many times before >_<

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

One of the biggest issues with snaking is the cheesy tactic of using city snakes to teleport units.  Insert them one tentacle, take them out a different one on the same turn.

Snaking to resources I'm less concerned about, though it's still a little funky.

So, maybe make a "city gate" tile that's buildable and takes up one tile on the map?  You get one city gate for free with the city hub, but then you can only have troops enter/exit the city through city gates in specific places that you place.  And sieges/attacks can only happen at city gates as well.

I appreciate the comments.  I still disagree with many, but I did not mean to make this a fight.  I was upset when I read that they were planning on moving to a 1 tile system though as I really like the current city mechanics.

I don't see each tile as hundreds of miles.  If that were the case then there would be no way the units we have could actually travel as far as they do each turn.  Plus I really don't like that large scale forced upon a game of this type with small scale quests and events at a lower than macro level.  I like seeing each tile as maybe a square mile at most, as it fits in with the setting much more of settlers huddling together to settle a barren world.

I don't see an issue with the end game looking more like a collection of cities than a big wilderness, since it is indeed the end game and the world should be colonized by then.  The early game the world is still very full of Wilderness and monsters.  It isn't until late that the other races start to dominate the land.

The cheese of "teleportation" is a minor issue to me, and is more of a city building tactic.  There are times when this is a problem as well, as cities only hold so many people and you can get an army stuck on one side of the city until you move out the army within the city.  I feel that adding more options that give you bonuses for building in different ways would be better than to take away the benefit to building outward. 

While it would have been easier to build my city in the Imperium with single tile cities, it wouldn't have been as fun.  I had to declare war on two friends and raze their close by cities to get my prize (since they were within the 8 tile limit between cities).  I like that game mechanic.  Plus it allows me to build my city toward a resource to try to get it before an opponent throws an outpost on it.  The city building mechanic is far better in this game than it was in any Civilization game, and I would far prefer to expand on it than to contract what is already there.

Have you ever walked a mile? It doesn't take 3 months. Assuming a unit is not walking in a straight line through a tile and that a flat tile can be traversed in 3 months, the tile must be very large indeed. Of course you are free to imagine the tiles being smaller, but then you can imagine just about anything if you really want to. It shouldn't be the primary factor in this discussion.

A new and unique solution must be devised because:

• The 1 tile city idea has been done so much it has been burnt to a crisp. Playing another game with this mechanic would be akin to eating only a raw brick of plain tofu for every meal.  If I want to play Civ (FfH), I'll play it.
• Capping the number of improvements a city could construct is artificial and gamey, and is better suited to a console or smart phone game.
• The current system is unique but has many basic flaws which have been expressed in these forums far too many times to repeat.

More detailed art always comes at a trade-off in memory. Just because it isn't shown on the screen all the time also doesn't mean it isn't in memory. In order to have a quick transition between map and cities you'll either have to use more memory or the quality will suffer.

Do you like waits for loading screens? Having another engine and pop up box for more detailed city art means longer loading times. This is not better game performance. Now if you're just making a crude Civilization style city screen it can be relatively quick... and gamey.

This is ridiculously subjective to what you think the scale of the game is. I personally never viewed the map as a "planet map" so it wasn't an issue. Also, one person walking a distance is far different from trying to lead a group together. Again though, highly subjective and variable.

Again subjective. If you can code it on a single tile, you can code it on multiple tiles. Before you can say one is better for sieges than the other, you have to actually have a plan on how sieges would work. Otherwise it becomes a war of hypotheticals.

I haven't forgotten and it was nice. It was also only available when zoomed in to max. Anyways see before, all memory discussions at this point are a matter of hypotheticals. If you increase the graphics demand on memory, you'll only make it worse.

Already possible, and in my opinion breaks immersion less when you don't have to cut to a cut scene or the miniscule effects on a single tile city to do it. Surrounding my uniquely shaped city with a fire wall is a lot more realistic and interesting than a city cut scene fire wall or a single tile city.

This whole thing is still using a cannon ball (Complete city revamp) to swat a fly (snaking). First consider why do people make snaked cities? What is the root cause? Can it be addressed without blowing up cities as they existed in beta 2? One could address resource distribution on the map. How mountains and canyons cut off buildable areas, etc. Revamping the entire city mechanic is an incredibly drastic change to address so specific a problem.

Just a quick thing about the map scale, and trying to make things make sense: If a tile is hundreds of square miles, how does two tiny group of adventurers always run smack into one another when they are in the same tile? Or heck, your long is a "season" anyway? I suppose that would depend on how long a year is... which you could basically say is anything you want seeing as how this isn't even happening on Earth. So pretty much all the premise behind distance and time is subjective (unless Brad wants to jump in here?).

The question you should be asking isn't what makes sense, because there will always be some flaws to point out, but rather what would be more fun... because last I checked, this is still a game. 1 tile cities, we all know how those work... it's functional, but is it really fun for anyone? The current system could use some spicing up, no doubt about it, but there are many who do find it fun even in its current state. Why throw it away when you can fix it?

Well Rishkith, most of the stuff you say is hypothetical, is actually me repeating what the devs have stated on several occasions. I feel most people have said there peace on the issue and I certainly can't bring much more to it by debating scale or other benefits, so I'll leave the discussion. But it does look like it will be happening. Enjoy enormous cities while you can. 

The basis of me stopping to arguing about this, is that when you like the old cities and come with a really good way to solve some of the problems, no one listens...

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Frogboy, with all due respect, your 1-tile cities look boring.  There was a previous WOM phenomena which required cities to have an enclosed 4x4 tile for the "escape spell" to function.  Such a tile creates at least a 7 single unit cluster (hub) to reduce early sprawl  I would much rather see this implemented than a 1-tile city.  Since it is something which has already been implemented it shouldn't cost much to re-implement.

Whether you find a way to get rid of snaking or not, the current scale of buildings is way off.

You need to either massively reduce the size of building squares, which will result in a much larger wilderness (which is what you need)

... or go for the 1 tile cities.

I really don't see any point in placing buildings aside from snaking, and I think you should avoid going down the path where building placement makes a different. That is pandoras box, and the game focus is not simcity.

If you decide to go for buildings on the map and you need a mechanic to stop snaking, just have a zone of influence for the city (based on population) and you have to build within that zone. That allows a little bit of stretching in certain directions, but not over the top snaking.

Some (previously unmentioned) points why I will miss city snakes.

Combat:

■ Great difficulty blocking advancing armies in (wider) chokepoints.

-A one tile city just doesn't cut it unless maybe on a hex grid.  Self explanatory.

Modding:

■  Can it be modded back in?

■ Unable to directly connect cities to resources.

-I planned one mod where you have to snake a city directly connected to a gold mine as a prerequisite required to build specific structures.  Not important to the game itself but a nice plus for modders.

I think it's all solved right there.

• Players still get to see the city buildings from the main map.
• Building placement is automatic so no snaking occurs.
• The ability to build walls, plus having buildings that affect resource production means that snaking won't be needed or missed.

You might also consider adding more techs, buildings, or spells that expand the zone borders of a city, so that snaking wouldn't be needed as much to get at resources. But as Cruxador said, there's already outposts.

A very elegant solution.

There is only one problem with city sprawling (aka 'snaking') and that is teleportation.  And this is not being addressed.