Author Topic: [Discussion] City Expansion  (Read 1655 times)

Offline ptarth

  • Arcen Volunteer
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,166
  • I'm probably joking.
[Discussion] City Expansion
« on: May 05, 2015, 11:25:20 pm »
Currently I don't feel encouraged to create new cities. Chris's vision has ideas about increasing the number of cities, so I've been thinking about mechanisms that would encourage new cities.

  • Increase income contributions due to resources
  • Decrease income from banks, stock exchanges, and malls or have them proportional to population.
  • Require Embassies to maintain trading routes.
  • Impose efficiency limitations based upon technology or social development levels, that impair energy production.
  • Adjacency bonuses for buildings (Apartments + Apartments = more people, Factory + Factory = More production).
  • Increase pollution damage (health, crime, etc) to housing buildings.
  • Add cleanup costs crowns & energy to buildings in pollution.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2015, 01:59:42 pm by ptarth »
Note: This post contains content that is meant to be whimsical. Any belittlement or trivialization of complex issues is only intended to lighten the mood and does not reflect upon the merit of those positions.

Offline tbrass

  • Jr. Member Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2015, 11:35:14 pm »
I agree with your sentiment and intentions, but I'm not sure if I grok your solutions. Are you suggesting that these bonuses would be in effect for new cities, but not for your original city?

I think that creating "automatic" internal trade (or a single building that could stand in for internal trade, call it a convention center or something of that sort) could encourage the creation of multiple cities -- 2 cities = 2x crowns/city; 3 cities = 3x crowns per city, etc.  I would hope that the AI would take advantage of this as well.

There should definitely be increased sprawl pain - say added planet rage & pollution as cities expand beyond a certain threshold (or a steady function as they expand)

Offline ptarth

  • Arcen Volunteer
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,166
  • I'm probably joking.
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2015, 01:04:33 am »
Bonuses would be in effect for all cities, the idea would be to penalize a city for being extended without connecting. Those mechanisms weren't proposed. So for example, every tile that is not connected to another X tiles receives some penalty Y. So you would be encouraged to create mini-cities with some sort of linkage network that is immune. For example, we clone the Air Cargo Bay.  Make it self-sustaining and remove the bombers from it and rename it a Supply Depot. We then chain supply depots across the map to our location for our new city. We also make it so that the supply depots can transfer goods (power, water, food, etc) to other cities.

Perhaps we even give cities a specialization bonus. So a city would get +10 Crop production, but -10 everything else. So you'd then develop a city for food, population, factories, etc. And then have a supply network to cross-feed your empire.

We could also have government control, where the Civic Center projects an area around it that produces a bonus. Outside the region is a penalty. As you level tech or society the radius grows. We'd then see smaller cities then merge into a metropolitan area.
Note: This post contains content that is meant to be whimsical. Any belittlement or trivialization of complex issues is only intended to lighten the mood and does not reflect upon the merit of those positions.

Offline tbrass

  • Jr. Member Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2015, 01:38:00 am »
It sounds like we are thinking along similar lines (again).

I definitely like the idea of city specialization. I'd have specializations for manufacturing, food, power, science/creativity, Commerce, probably leave population neutral (so sufficient pops could be spread throughout the various cities).

As I mentioned, I'd definitely like city rage & pollution to increase as cities increase in size (either by tile count or population count), to represent sprawl.

Offline ptarth

  • Arcen Volunteer
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,166
  • I'm probably joking.
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2015, 02:14:56 am »
I seem to be the expert in large scale SBR cities at this point. I'll soon be replaced by more competent people, but I think I'm it at this juncture. Planetary rage is enormous in a 50k city, several thousand rage per turn due to population, various buildings, and power.

Pollution I have mixed feelings about, because it is weird. The scale is an issue. As a planet, pollution is a big deal, but a city doesn't really deal with its own pollution in the same way. In the U.S., California cities are legendary for their smog problems, which are caused by traffic, other cities, and geographical barriers that force the pollution to congregate in certain areas. However, it isn't cleaned up by hazmat teams, nor does it collect on specific buildings. I'm quite okay with pollution being handled as it is, with it being more of a problem for your neighbors.
Note: This post contains content that is meant to be whimsical. Any belittlement or trivialization of complex issues is only intended to lighten the mood and does not reflect upon the merit of those positions.

Offline tbrass

  • Jr. Member Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2015, 01:43:39 am »
You are definitely the population leader :-) I tend to (try) to build out a civ I would like to live in - condos, luxury housing and the (rare) basement apartment complex for the sake of density. So I end up with huge sprawling cities, but no more than 5-10k population. Keeps my rage nice and manageable.

I think sprawl & pop could generate different rage amounts, as they both "damage" the planet, just in different ways.

Offline Captain Jack

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 808
  • Just lucky
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2015, 01:58:16 am »
I seem to be the expert in large scale SBR cities at this point. I'll soon be replaced by more competent people, but I think I'm it at this juncture. Planetary rage is enormous in a 50k city, several thousand rage per turn due to population, various buildings, and power.

Pollution I have mixed feelings about, because it is weird. The scale is an issue. As a planet, pollution is a big deal, but a city doesn't really deal with its own pollution in the same way. In the U.S., California cities are legendary for their smog problems, which are caused by traffic, other cities, and geographical barriers that force the pollution to congregate in certain areas. However, it isn't cleaned up by hazmat teams, nor does it collect on specific buildings. I'm quite okay with pollution being handled as it is, with it being more of a problem for your neighbors.
But the sunsets man, the sunsets!  :D

Spoiler for Hiden:
Still an improvement over twenty years ago.

Offline ptarth

  • Arcen Volunteer
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,166
  • I'm probably joking.
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2015, 10:37:16 am »
In 0.840 Chris made an informal ICS challenge on the mantis. I decided to see how it would work.

It works pretty good and I really dislike how the city mechanics work. A bank produces around 3k crowns and costs 12k. A new city produces 3k crowns and costs 34k. The bank has upkeep, the new cities don't. You can only build 1 bank per X people. You can build an infinite number of new cities. Spamming new cities and never using them for anything is actually quite viable, especially with the hard placed building caps. However, having all those cities is distinctly not fun to deal with. It also has the advantage of being impervious to attack. Each of your cities is its own distinct unit, so no matter what happens to one city, the others are completely unaffected. They do have problems with military defense and the building speed for the new cities is horrible, but those are both weaknesses that can be dealt with.

My current thoughts.
  • Only 1 city.
  • You can only build within X units of a city center. To expand your building range you must build an additional civic center to expand your reach.
  • Remove the building count crime penalty.
  • Allow building anywhere within your transport range, without requiring adjacency.
Note: This post contains content that is meant to be whimsical. Any belittlement or trivialization of complex issues is only intended to lighten the mood and does not reflect upon the merit of those positions.

Offline jerith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2015, 11:15:05 am »
Or just remove the crown production from the Civic Centre. Crowns are a global resource and there's no reason to give new cities the same kind of bootstrapping you need for the lander.

Offline crazyroosterman

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,558
  • Cluck.
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2015, 11:22:02 am »
speaking of current building crime penalty is anyone experiencing a bug were the game is regarding your current amounts of buildings as higher than it actually is? (I have a lander a farm and a dome in progress and the game thinks I have 17 buildings)
c.r

Offline ptarth

  • Arcen Volunteer
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,166
  • I'm probably joking.
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #10 on: May 23, 2015, 02:39:25 pm »
Or just remove the crown production from the Civic Centre. Crowns are a global resource and there's no reason to give new cities the same kind of bootstrapping you need for the lander.

That's true, but that doesn't address the underlying problem of multiple cities not being enjoyable. I keep trying to find a way to make multiple cities work, and it just doesn't.
Note: This post contains content that is meant to be whimsical. Any belittlement or trivialization of complex issues is only intended to lighten the mood and does not reflect upon the merit of those positions.

Offline Cyborg

  • Master Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,957
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #11 on: May 23, 2015, 02:41:10 pm »
Or just remove the crown production from the Civic Centre. Crowns are a global resource and there's no reason to give new cities the same kind of bootstrapping you need for the lander.

That's true, but that doesn't address the underlying problem of multiple cities not being enjoyable. I keep trying to find a way to make multiple cities work, and it just doesn't.


If the city building could add a multiplier and have a percent chance at spawning events, that would be nice. It would add the risk/ reward of city sprawl versus spawning events.
Kahuna strategy guide:
http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,13369.0.html

Suggestions, bugs? Don't be lazy, give back:
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/

Planetcracker. Believe it.

The stigma of hunger. http://wayw.re/Vi12BK

Offline jerith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #12 on: May 23, 2015, 03:38:11 pm »
Extra cities add extra complications and state management. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the complications aren't easily apparent and the state management feels like a lot of work.

The rest of this post ended up being less organised and more braindump than I intended, although I tried to give "information" and "navigation" each their own paragraph. I hope there's at least one useful idea buried in all the words. :-)

In AI War, individual planets don't generally have very much going on that you need to worry about except for construction (which you set up and then leave to do its thing) and enemy action (which you can follow on the galaxy map). While I haven't played much with multiple cities in SBR (and that was pre-II), my difficulties were mostly around visibility and having to manually track potential problems in each city by switching between them and inspecting a bunch of information from different places. I kept trying to hit "tab" to get to the galaxy map equivalent (and that's how I discovered that there was an underground).

I think what we need is a good overview of all the important information everywhere with an easy way to bounce between that and the places we need to go to get more detailed information or make changes. The city management screen isn't very good at this, and I haven't really had much incentive to look at the list-of-all-cities whose name I can't remember offhand. Now that I've spent some time solidifying my thinking, I find myself wanting a "war room map" view of the world that eliminates irrelevant information (like terrain, most building types, etc.) and gives me overlays and icons appropriate for the mode I'm looking at -- pollution/cleanup in one mode, crime in another, friend/foe-tagged military in a third, etc. -- that I can use like the galaxy map in AI War.

AI War's planet/galaxy split works well for getting to the right place quickly because each planet is self-contained and it's easy to see which ones you need to pay attention to. SBR's single large map doesn't provide any obvious navigation points, especially with the city sprawl we've seen in the past. Maybe we need some kind of "points of interest" system that lets us quickly get to particular places we care about. Some points are obvious and already exist (Civic Centres, battle sites), some don't (as far as I know, at least -- crime hotspots, warping saucers), and some can't (that resource I want to keep an eye on while I build my way out to it). For the last, assigning locations the way control groups work in AI War would be ideal.

Offline crazyroosterman

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,558
  • Cluck.
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2015, 06:36:24 am »
ill take the lack of yes or no answers as a sign  that I'm the only person whos come across this bug but any way regarding this second city finicky ness matter how having notifications pop for example when your second city needs more food or when it has a housing shortage and so on?.
c.r

Offline TheVampire100

  • Master Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,382
  • Ordinary Vampire
Re: City Expansion Discussion
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2015, 07:08:13 am »
I think it would be for the better to remove entirely the possibilty of creating a second city. The process is too tedious and not any fun, the benefits from it are minimal to none and the maps aren't even big enough for one of each city and then you want to build a second one?
Also you are the only race that buildsmultiple cities.
If you want to get a specific ressource it's easier to build supply chains in that direction.