if asked why out of the five things to put on the new ideas thread why would this idea belong? what are the greatest strength in adding this idea? and what if any weaknesses or exploits does this idea have?

I absolutely agree with you! This was just another of your many great ideas, which always make sense and would add realism to this game.

The problem is that most people, like Stefu, are by nature conservative. They are afraid of every inovation and only consider the threats it will present to the way they have played Civ so far.

Many have so far pointed out the weaknesses of the 21-square city system, which in an absurd way favours small cities, while allowing linear growth rates. Yet most posters don's seem to be capable to imagine a Civ-game without the 21-square city structure!

If the city radius itself does not expand, have the squares that can be used for production dependent upon the population, so the larger the population, the more squares that can be managed/used by the city.

Maybe as cities grow, if two cities were close together, they might be able to grow together (e.g. Dallas/Ft. Worth).

I see the 'expanding' city idea as real life. One of the goals of Civ is to make it real world, and the fact that cities expand is very realistic.

If two cities did become one, the choice could be given to combine the two, at which point the city would cover a large area. If this happened, duplicate improvements could be sold off automatically and all production would go toward one item. However, the city should be able to support 2 times the number of units permitted.

good idea except i do not agree with this

quote: If this happened, duplicate improvements could be sold off automatically and all production would go toward one item. However, the city should be able to support 2 times the number of units permitted.

Twice the support and only half the improvements? that would make those cities too powerful in some ways...also as cities grow larger shouldn't they be able to produce more items per turn? limiting their productions makes them too weak in other ways...if they are part too strong and part too weak it would probably open them up to explotation and make them unbalanced...that's my opinion take it for what it's worth

How about something like this:-

With sufficient technology:-

Automobile + Mass production + Refrigeration + ????? tech.

And the existance of the required buildable improvements:-

Sewer system + Mass transit + Super highways
+ ?????

The gamer can then research a new technology, say call it "Metropolitan expansion"

When this is researched successfully, and all the above prerequisites above are satisfied, the gamer has a new menu option
"pick suburb square"

After this has been selected, the cursor changes shape to a hollow square [] and the gamer chooses a square contiguous to the existing city square and clicks on it.

That square then changes its appearance to that of a city, and overall it looks like the city has literally grown organically, covering 2 squares instead of one.

The new city square now has extra squares within 2 spaces, and these are now available for production.

The extra city square acts as an extra production centre with a separate build queue.

You can distribute squares between the old city and the new suburb as you wish, but can only use squares according to the population currently available in the "production square."

The gamer has the option to move population at the rate of 1 per turn ( 2 turns?) from the old city to the new suburb.

The suburb increases in population also in the old fashioned way of food accumulation.

The new suburb should share some of the improvements of the old city, e.g.

Power station, Aqueduct, Sewer system, courthouse.

BUT you still have to build factory, production plant, temple, market place, bank,
at the new suburb.

I think that this could be a powerfull new way of using up wasted squares, and making advanced cities cabable of "Multitasking" with multiple build queues.

This is an excellent way to punish ICS, as these new super cities become true game breakers.

Does this make the game more complex? more micro-management prone?

Yes but stick a 15 item build queue into Civ 3 and imagine the power!

Now a high tech civ can belt out production in a balenced way, some cheap units at slow production squares and heavy, expensive ones
at the most powerfull cities.

The Industrial Powerhouse of the USA can now be modelled for a WWII scenario.

Stalingrad can be modelled as a 3 or 4 square
giant city complex spread along the Volga..

The exact rule set, required techs would need play testing. Perhaps cities could grow
to two squares in the industrial age and 3 in the early 20th century..

Oh well just a thought..