Yes ! Machiavelli the prince ! That's it ! Great memories

I quit reading modules for the most part in the mid '80s on account of being lucky enough to know refs who liked to write their own stuff. My fantasy novel thinking is probably a bit limited too, now that you remind me to think a bit more. I've never read much of anything with a (tm) on the cover, and my greatest favorites all shared a tendency to have maps more like Tolkien's LotR, with just a handful of true cities. For all I know, that's a 'minority' thing in the genre these days.

Do the numerous cities in those novels you mention manage to maintain some individuality, even if it's mostly cosmetic like the detailing for the city-states in Jordan's Wheel of Time?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRnSVN_ITdg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yV3JswQi48

Fallout 3 had very unique settlements. I think it had to do with the whole theme of the game. The only people that were friendly existed in tiny pockets of civilization. Every place seemed so unique, because there were so few settlements that were even large enough to call a town.  Each new experience was fresh and well recieved, like a gift or treat to add to your already unique experience.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf-8R4UAD1w

This should convince you that Morrowind has great cities. Almost every single city has unique architecture, armor for guards, lore, and quests, plus the inhabitants are always doing something. Although a lot of the NPC actions don't make sense, its still cool to see people doing something rather than just walk and give you the death stare when you pass by. Whether it is talking to someone else, buying goods, going on patrol, or looking for their lost pet, there is always at least one NPC doing something that will spark your curiousity for atleast a few brief moments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO4_889zBjI

From 3:17 on.

Mass Effect had some of the most unique interactions with cities/colonies I have ever seen. Every planet had a completely different group of people with their own problems and quests to finish. You really felt like you impacted the world because of the vast amount of options and quest types which were all very different(all though some specific quests where quite grindy). The worlds had their own stories and obstacles that you had to surpass. Short descriptions of where you were also added to the city immersion. You felt like you had knowledge of where you were, like it wasn't some generic town you had to quest grind in yet again. Fallout 3 also did this, as you could talk to people to gain knowledge of other, more distant areas. By the time you found some new city or town, you had a pretty good idea as to what set it apart from other towns and cities.

Most 4x games that I have played lack these features completely, probably because that kind of immersion is simply not possible in a completely 4x game. 4x games are more about feeling like a ruler over a vast empire, so I am glad to see that Elemental is adding RPG elements beyond what I have seen in the past, because that will definitely help with the city immersion. The more rpgs elements there are, the more city immersion one will experience.

The Warcraft III Campaigns had amazing cities and towns/villages. The Campaigns were pretty lengthy once you played all the bonus campaigns etc. It was really really good, primarily because of all the cities you could set up with the editor. That would be amazing if Elemental included an editor such as that of the WCIII series that allows for such easy use. I'd love to make an rpg/campaign WCIII style with elemental. If you can't get the city immersion correct for normal gameplay, the modders could refine it.

I think it's great that this is something you guys are going to focus on in design. But don't try to learn lessons from RPG cities -- those are carefully controlled aesthetic experiences which the design team can craft down to the smallest details. TBS cities are much more functional, in that they don't preexist in some game world -- you build them in order to advance your own game. So we should be thinking about how cities are memorable/bland in other TBS, and the best example is Civ 4.

As Cauldtyh pointed out, terrain is crucial.* In Civ, that fertile city-site with all the floodplains and the river becomes your empire's breadbasket. The fortress city barricading a mountain pass seals off your terrain from invasion (I find choke points deeply satisfying -- something about defining your play space). My most memorable Civ 4 city was actually a fortress (which can be used to hangar planes). I built one just off the coast of a hostile Japan, and used it to fly dozens of bombing raids with my B-22s; I named the fort Pianosa in honor of Catch-22. That was a cool moment for me, mostly because Pianosa had such a clearly defined purpose.

And so it is with those other cities I imagined: you build a granary in your bread basket, walls and barracks in your mountain stronghold, etc. Civ 4's failing is how generic these cities become in the late game. Early on, when you're scrapping for resources and can only build a few improvements, every city has a lot of personality, because you can't build everything. But as time goes on, more and more cities get crammed with every available improvement, because why not? So every city has a hospital, a library, etc., and thanks to your workers landscaping efforts, the map is an indistinguishable mess of roads and mines. As a result, I never play much past the mid-game.

So, my suggestion: give the player game mechanics to legitimize the kind of storytelling they'll do anyway. For instance, I'm the kind of guy who spends tons of time coming up with appropriate names for my cities. I'd love to be able to give the city more than just a name -- how about an identity? I'm envisioning a city planning screen, where you can do many of the things you do with your sovereign. I always thought it strange you just run a settler out and PLOP -- there's your new city. Anyway, here's an example of what I'd like to see.

Let's imagine that chokepoint city everyone loves to build. You've got this huge mountain range, and have planted your city in the only pass. You name it something like Portcullis. When you first found the city, I'd like a screen where you can pick out its traits and abilities, spending a certain number of skill points -- just like building a character in an RPG. So let's say I select the "Hardy" trait, to reflect the kind of fierce independent mountainfolk that will inhabit this town. Now any units I build there will get a modest bonus to defense. On the other hand, the city will be more prone to revolt, since they don't appreciate my sovereign's bureaucratic meddlings. And you could have negative traits, too, which give you more skill points to work with. "Den of Thieves" would mean a thief guild set up shop in your city and skims some of the gold produced there.

Considering how crucial cities are in a 4x -- you're checking in on them every few turns, after all -- I don't think players would mind this initial time investment.

* In fact, if you have great terrain generation, the city thing solves itself. A plains city with two cows in its BFC, gold right beside a river, isthmuses and mountain ranges -- these allow emergent narratives.

I was thinking of something : there could be two kind of cities, ordinary and special ones.

Tes "twist" is the special ones can only be built by someone ... special. Sovereign or heroes. Those special town would get access to things like political chambers, dynasties, special structures, buildings, etc. As a drawback those cities would get some limited independance : you don't choose what they build, but what path they want (civilization, warfare, exploration, etc...) and the hero/sovereign who build it would be the governor that would give bonuses to growth/prodction/etc.

When a special city is captured, it falls in the "ordinary" pool, but they still have the buildings already built. After enough turns you can call a governor and the city will be again a special one.

Well, in general both worlds have their really important cities which their own personality (building style, races, ocupations, leadership style,...), and then lots of "generic fantasy towns".

This reminded me of Dark Sun, not many cities, but each one was pretty different

Yep, cities should be separate in two kind : special ones and ordinary ones. the special ones would be able to get some kind of government or a chamber lik ein venice or a guild, things like that. But it would cost a limit independancy for them : you don't choose what you build, but what kind of things the city should focus on (like Warfare/civilization/etc..)

So here's something important: name things!

The names of mountains, forests etc on the map is great. Why not do the same for cities?

If you have an order of paladins in the city, they need a randomly generated name (Order of the [Pious Sounding Object e.g. Sacred Heart, Divine Rose, etc.]). If you build an inn, it needs a unique name. Yes, for every inn!

Name roads. Name blacksmiths? Name districts?  There is a lot of scope here for generating memorable cities simply by making sure you have a good long list of memorable names.

My most memorial cities:

The goblin free cities of WoW.  Basically semi-neutral zones where you can trade the rarest stuff---even stuff that the other sides use that you wouldn't be able to get otherwise. A.k.a. a black market whose independence is only guaranteed by its own militia, but could turn into a battleground.

The Oblivion capital city.  Basically like a very old colony, a New Amsterdam (Long Island) settled on a much older ruin of an ancient city, with huge hacking relics buried in the undercity, plus a giant phallic ruin in the center (LOLOL).

Neo-Renaissance Italy cities, like in WoW, etc..  Lots of plazzas, guilds, shopping, like they were made in some city-building game.

Also, free cities that evolve from escaped serfs. Maybe even multi-cultural, like some alpine Swiss medieval city.

Generally, a lot of fantasy cities are very un-Civilization like.  I.e. they pre-exist the story by time immemorial, where founded by the gods etc..  I.e. they weren't founded by some player's settler and slowly grown, but are like a part of landscape.  Something I think Elemental should include-----truly ancient cities that start off as independent.

That last bit couldn't be more crucial to forming a good city atmosphere. It reminds me most of cities described in the Silmarillion and Lord of The Rings. The cities need to form histories, they need to become a part of the land and it's people.

I absolutely second this. There could be a mechanism where the number of allowed city sizes is tied to number of current cities in your empire or mapsize - although I'd prefer the first option if such a system were implemented.

So for example you could have - depending on the number of cities:

1. 1 Unlimited city
2. 1 Unlimited city + 1 village (size up to 3)
3. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city (size up to 9) + 1 village (size up to 3)
4. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 2 villages
5. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 3 villages
6. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 1 small city (size up to 6) + 3 villages
7. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 1 small city + 4 villages
8. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 1 small city + 5 villages
9. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 1 small city + 6 villages
10. 1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 2 small cities + 6 villages
11. and so on

Note: the numbers are comletely made up just for the sake of the example.

If your number of cities decreases or you capture a bigger city than this table would allow, one of the concerned cities can't grow any further. You could even have a mechanism for relocating people in your empire to switch city sizes if required.

Artificial size limits in cities doesn't sound fun (and realistic? ). Cities being limited by placement and resources, that sounds better.

From all I remember, all population growth is only based on Prestige (aka people coming from the wilds to join you), which by itself seems a bad idea to me.

I0d prefer that during the first X turns (where X is not 10 in roman numbers...) population is solely based on Prestige but after those turns, people coming from the wilds decreases slowly to 0. During those same turns, population can continue to increase in two other ways:

1. Prestige affects people from nearby cities to make them leave their original cities for the one with higher prestige in the area.
2. Baby boom. It's impossible to have infinite population waiting in the wilds (at least sounds silly) so in somepoint, you are going to need to start the reproduction machine.

Goods like food are a critical element and things like Prestige, salubrity or security (just to mention some) have a serious influence too. I always liked the system in Lords of the Realms with crops, cows and sheeps, as well as the inmigration details.

Hard limits on number/size of cities is a big no to me.

For instance, suppose you are here:

1 Unlimited city + 1 medium city + 1 small city + 3 villages

Someone destroys/conquers one of your villages. Does your small city shrink to village size? The limit can be circumvented by building more and razing/letting others raze/steal your cities. So, from a gaming perspective, I think it can't work.

Furthermore, I dislike the idea of arbitrary limits. Population should go to a city if there's something to do there, if there's enough food, and that's about it. Cities already requite essence to be built, so there shouldn't be plenty of these because most of the land is ruined.

The game settings is that most of the world is almost uninhabitable, since you need to invest magic to bring life to the land. Therefore, expecting many hamlets and villages seems weird. Of course, the question of where city inhabitants find food in this barren world remains open.