[Freeciv] Re: Some questions

["Bobby D. Bryant" <bdbryant@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul Dean wrote:

> "Mike Jing" <miky40@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > As far as I can see, removing the free city center goes right to the heart
> > of the problem.  Of course, I would be very glad to hear any counter
> > arguments.
>
> Someone pointed out to me a potential problem with it - that players
> will always build on mountains and hills because they don't have to
> use the center square.  This may make warfare unfeasibly difficult
> because defense will be so much more effective than offense.

In prehistoric times, people often did prefer to found their villages on
hilltops, and for exactly the reason you mention.  Europe is peppered with Iron
Age "hilltop forts" which served as refuges for small prehistoric communities.

I'm not sure how well that maps onto cities that survived into historic times.
Athens, Corinth, and Jerusalem come to mind, and were surely established as
hilltop settlements for defensive purposes.  ("Acropolis" means "high city", and
was usually an elevated fortified refuge at the heart of the older Greek cities.
The Athenian acropolis served that function as recently as the Persian Wars, and
the Acrocorinth was used by occupation troops to control the Corinthians during
the Peloponessian Wars.)

The Incan mountain city also comes to mind.  Masada might be thought of as a
"civic fortress" as well.

However, I'm having trouble thinking of lots of other modern cities that are
sited on hills for similar historical reasons.  Sites seem to correlate more 
with
flowing water than with elevated ground.

Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas