C2C - Housing

[Hydromancerx]

So like Housing (Homeless) would be 20% more to grow instead of +4 ?

 

[Koshling]

So like Housing (Homeless) would be 20% more to grow instead of +4 ?

Too much. 10%

 

[Hydromancerx]

I tried to give -10% Food Kept but it would not work. You can put in positive values but apparently not negative values.

Note that Civics have a different value for making cities grow slower that cannot be applied to buildings.

 

[AIAndy]

I tried to give -10% Food Kept but it would not work. You can put in positive values but apparently not negative values.

Note that Civics have a different value for making cities grow slower that cannot be applied to buildings.

Food Kept is a different mechanic (the one that lets you keep some food when you grow). It might be that there is no tag for that on buildings yet.

 

[Hydromancerx]

So since it was not working I am taking away the +1 and +1 from the first tier housing.

Thus they become ...

Lean-Tos = Nothing
Bone Huts = +1
Treehouse = +1 +1 +1

This means that the sole purpose of the Lean-Tos is to cancel out the harmful stats of the Homeless building.

Homeless has be also reduced to just +2 and +2 .

This is about as far as I am willing to compromise. The +2 is WAY less than the +8 I originally had. And now that the other 3 buildings have taken 1 way from each that's an additional 3 more you don't have to deal with.

In short I am going to upload to the SVN and hopefully we can move on to other more important things. Since housing has been redone like 10 times now!

 

[Thunderbrd]

Based on your previous tests on Unhealth, that all sounds about right to me actually. But perhaps part of the 'point' here is you could replace some of the 'unhealth' from homelessness with some causes the city to grow x% slower tags.

 

[Yid]

You can give 5% more to grow instead every unhealthy from early housing.

Agreed with this one. Homeless means you have no place to store any food (or anything else), right? I think we should go this way.

 

[JosEPh_II]

So since it was not working I am taking away the +1 and +1 from the first tier housing.

Thus they become ...

Lean-Tos = Nothing
Bone Huts = +1
Treehouse = +1 +1 +1

This means that the sole purpose of the Lean-Tos is to cancel out the harmful stats of the Homeless building.

Homeless has be also reduced to just +2 and +2 .

This is about as far as I am willing to compromise. The +2 is WAY less than the +8 I originally had. And now that the other 3 buildings have taken 1 way from each that's an additional 3 more you don't have to deal with.

In short I am going to upload to the SVN and hopefully we can move on to other more important things. Since housing has been redone like 10 times now!

Hydro,
This is a good start. But.....(you knew there was a but) the "real problem" Now with Housing is that you took the Option of Choice out of the players hands, by making it all autobuild.

Let me as a player decide which buildings I "Want" to build. If I feel a building is too costly I'll use something else. If I really need it I'll pay the cost. But now I have no say in the process as the game unfolds.

It doesn't matter if they've been redone 10 times. Go back to the version were the player can make choices. Individual bldgs can be tweaked thru consensus. And get rid of the "Homeless" idea until the Industrial Era. It's a bad idea for game start.

As much as I dislike a bldg that gives +x , I dislike even more that my ability to Choose was taken away.

JosEPh

 

[Nimek]

@Hydro

Dont listen the old men words. Autobuild is awesome leave it as it is.

It is normal that people build shelter (houses) themself. They dont wait until their government do it for them

 

[Thunderbrd]

Based on your previous tests on Unhealth, that all sounds about right to me actually. But perhaps part of the 'point' here is you could replace some of the 'unhealth' from homelessness with some causes the city to grow x% slower tags.

I'd like to add that I'm not suggesting to remove the unhealth you have on the homelessness as it is now. I think that fits.

And to comment on Joe's statement, I don't mind the auto build. It makes the effect a game process rather than a choice. Where the building provides a natural negative, or represents a fundamental element of the developing city that a government wouldn't control (they're really just a reflection of the natural growth of human habitation), what you've done by making them autobuild is the way to go imo.

Besides, we get enough complaints we have 'too many buildings' anyhow so it helps to cut back on some of that a little (which is not something we find ways of doing very easily )

 

[JosEPh_II]

<snip>
And to comment on Joe's statement, I don't mind the auto build. It makes the effect a game process rather than a choice. Where the building provides a natural negative, or represents a fundamental element of the developing city that a government wouldn't control (they're really just a reflection of the natural growth of human habitation), what you've done by making them autobuild is the way to go imo.

That's your opinion, I voiced mine. This is becoming more and more like City Limits and Fixed Borders. And isn't one of StrategyOnly's "Golden Rules" (paraphrasing) keep it diverse so you can play many different ways.

Besides, we get enough complaints we have 'too many buildings' anyhow so it helps to cut back on some of that a little (which is not something we find ways of doing very easily )

Remove the whole housing chain then. Or make it an Option.

@Nimek,
I'm "glad" you think so highly of yourself that you would disrespect your elder. I play Civ not Sim City. Thank you.

JosEPh

 

[ls612]

@Hydro

Dont listen the old men words. Autobuild is awesome leave it as it is.

It is normal that people build shelter (houses) themself. They dont wait until their government do it for them

No need to be rude. Personally I'm fine with having one less thing to micromanage, but that is not a reason to denigrate others' opinions on the issue. I agree with JosEPh, Housing autobuild should be an option.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Well I am going to leave it for now. We need some more time testing. Some elements of the game people hated in the beginning, such as removing the UU and UB from civs. But now most love that unique nature of getting to dynamically achieving 1 or more cultures.

If DH was around he would probably say "stop acting so impulsively to every complaint". So I will take his advice and sit on my hands for now.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Actually I agree with you Hydro. Let's get a game or 2 under the belt and then re-evaluate.

You know I "have to" throw up objections or else I believe we would be in the situation Afforess found himself at the ending of AND when he walked away the 1st time.

There were just way way too many yes ppl and all with 10,000 ideas on how to tweak and twist everything. And AND lost it's focus. C2C because it has a bigger team has held course a bit better. But that pull is still here and is still a real and present danger to this Mod's health and vitality. Cause it seems like every newcomer to the mod has the answer to everything that has been worked on for what, almost 2+ years or longer. And yes Nimek this does include you.

JosEPh

 

[Hydromancerx]

@JosEPh_II

In my play testing I can see where the is a bit big. However I think another or 2 buildings could help supplement this. Same goes for crime I think. Rather than cutting back we may just need more options. I have not had any crime yet in my test game but only because its much too early.

Herbalism tech could probably use some love with another building besides Wild Herbs.

 

[TowerWizard]

@JosEPh_II

In my play testing I can see where the is a bit big. However I think another or 2 buildings could help supplement this. Same goes for crime I think. Rather than cutting back we may just need more options. I have not had any crime yet in my test game but only because its much too early.

Herbalism tech could probably use some love with another building besides Wild Herbs.

Herbalism is already a no-brainer in this regard. I I think maybe i is better to spread some health buildings in other techs. Maybe one in Cooperation (to represent the tribe helping a wounded individual back to health, instead of just letting him/her fend for him/herself) or to add +1 Health to the Hunting Instruction building (and maybe increase it in cost slightly) (to represent the fact that people need to be running in order to catch the prey and thus try to get more in shape) or add health to the dance hut (because dancers keep in shape). Just some suggestions, feel free to do it your own way.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I already added 5 new health buildings and tweaked the Wild Herbs building. It should help a bit.

 

[Sgtslick]

How about giving forges and some other building like -4 health. More importantly I think is the excessive happiness, some more negative happiness on important buildings in the mid game is needed. Its so easy to have like 21 happiness 6 unhappiness which is totally out of whack. Far too many + too little + from things. I suggest you give out some extra negatives on key buildings that unlock a bunch of other buildings so players basically have to build them. Then if these negatives could also scale to difficulty level - a lot of the 'too easy' problem would be solved imo.

 

[Nimek]

@Sqtslick

Would be better to add per 1 citizen depending of dificulty level.

Dont give negative effects to buildings - most of us hate it.

giving forges and some other building like -4 health

I don t see logic here. Not every citizen work in forge and it can be placed outside the city (close to city border) so it not do harm to anybody.

 

[Acularius]

So far I'm liking the autobuild houses so far, also off topic, from the brief time I got to play around with them, I like what I saw for slavery as well.

It DOES take away from the micromanagement, or the need to add them to my queue (because as long as it provided hammers I built it) whereas now so long as I provide the requirements (like stone) the people will proceed to build their own damn houses.

Going to play around a bit more to get a better idea...