C2C - Housing

[Dancing Hoskuld]

...

3. Tech Era health benefits were removed however the -health from density was kept. This shoud help make health buildings more important.

Low Density = +0
Medium Density = +1
High Density = +2
Super Density = +3

From a providing of services I would have thought this should have been
Low Density = +1
Medium Density = +0
High Density = +1
Super Density = +2

 

[Hydromancerx]

From a providing of services I would have thought this should have been
Low Density = +1
Medium Density = +0
High Density = +1
Super Density = +2

Why would Low Density houses like Mansons and Suburbs have if they are High and Medium Wealth?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Why would Low Density houses like Mansons and Suburbs have if they are High and Medium Wealth?

aside: Our government is trying to move us all into medium density and get rid of suburbs because of the cost of providing services and the lack of doctors.

I still don't understand why there are any unhealthiness on any but the most densely packed housing.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Medium Density is like an Apartment Building (2 to 5 stories), High Density is like a skyscraper apartment (5+ stories). Super Density is arcology stuff, which is higher than we currently see in even the most densely populated buildings. Basically a city in a building.

In short anything above Low Density mean more than one family lives in the dwelling.

 

[Schwarzbart]

I personal would love it that more Dense Housing have a reducing effect on the Wasted Food. (So bigger Citys are possible when you build High Density Building)
My Curent Game is 21 so a bit back but there I didn't have any problems with unhealthiness or unhappyness in my citys for 100ths of turns thanks to the wasted food.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Medium Density is like an Apartment Building (2 to 5 stories), High Density is like a skyscraper apartment (5+ stories). Super Density is arcology stuff, which is higher than we currently see in even the most densely populated buildings. Basically a city in a building.

In short anything above Low Density mean more than one family lives in the dwelling.

So? I understand the and adjustments but not the healthiness ones.

 

[Hydromancerx]

So? I understand the and adjustments but not the healthiness ones.

More people crowded in a smaller space means more unhealiness. Spreads disease, produce more waste, etc.

Why would you want Medium to have +0 but Low +1 ?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

More people crowded in a smaller space means more unhealiness. Spreads disease, produce more waste, etc.

Why would you want Medium to have +0 but Low +1 ?

because it costs more to get the infrastructure out there, doctors or sewage. Where as in high density, which requires a sewage system btw, the providing of services is easier and you don't get doctors sitting around not doing anything for lack of patcens.

 

[Hydromancerx]

because it costs more to get the infrastructure out there, doctors or sewage. Where as in high density, which requires a sewage system btw, the providing of services is easier and you don't get doctors sitting around not doing anything for lack of patcens.

Out where? These are in the city. Not the surrounding countryside, that's what cottages are for.

Plus do we really want the first available houses to give you +1? Who would ever build them? Especially when they give low and compared to a more dense building.

With your idea ...

Low Density | Low Wealth = +1 +1 +1
Medium Density | Low Wealth = +1 +2
High Density | Low Wealth = +1 +3 +1

Why even build low density housing?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Out where? These are in the city. Not the surrounding countryside, that's what cottages are for.

Plus do we really want the first available houses to give you +1? Who would ever build them? Especially when they give low and compared to a more dense building.

With your idea ...

Low Density | Low Wealth = +1 +1 +1
Medium Density | Low Wealth = +1 +2
High Density | Low Wealth = +1 +3 +1

Why even build low density housing?

Suburbs are out there.

Indeed. If I had my way I would remove housing from the game after the ancient era perhaps even earlier! After that it does not add to the fun and just gets in the way.

Also the crime rate per person in high status neighbourhoods is just the same as in low status neighbourhoods. The crimes might be different and since they are done by the rich they can "buy their way out" or just afford to divert everyone's attention away from them.

 

[BlueGenie]

I'm very much of the mind that Housings should increase the rate a city increases. It doesn't matter if they have their own Storage Pit or not, it's the availability of more housing for more people to move in to.
If nothing else they might be able to influence the growth wastage factor for that city? Higher density giving more bonus to growth rate, lower density not so much, lowest maybe not at all.

As for I see housing as enabling higher population numbers which in itself gives rise to more . Thus lower density and higher wealth at least could be lower in the factor, maybe even with low density and high wealth getting + even, while high/super density and low wealth would have a lot more (but faster growth).

There'll probably be an outcry (waits for it) if I suggest limiting city sizes and increasing those sizes by the housings built but it's for me the perfect way to place some limit on city sizes, one that actually makes sense. If you don't have enough housing for the people then how can the population increase? And there should be enough housings to build to easily get to and past any limits, just have to take that bad with the good and build those housings.

As for crime rate, DH, I don't agree. Wealthier might not have anything to do with it but happy does. The more people are content and can get what they need, and a bunch of what they want, the less crime there is. Might be that crimes in high wealth concern more money but there's still less of them. Only the ones not content, and some morons thinking they can get away with anything, would be the criminals.
In a lower wealth housing area there's more people malcontent and that breeds crime. Might be more crimes worth less money and more violence crimes but a bunch more of them, not all which get reported either.

Cheers

 

[Schwarzbart]

BlueGenie I also suggested that the Housing should affect the wastage factor a vew postings above you but it got ignored.

 

[BlueGenie]

Good, that makes two of us. Better than 0. *wink*
Yes, I saw that. Would have quoted it if I hadn't had more stuff to write planned.
I'm also not certain it can be done without adding new tags and modifications so it's some work to get that done. Only the Team can decide if the effort is worth it.

Cheers

EDIT: Oh, and I'm sure it wasn't ignored, just not responded to.

Cheers again.

 

[Koshling]

Good, that makes two of us. Better than 0. *wink*
Yes, I saw that. Would have quoted it if I hadn't had more stuff to write planned.
I'm also not certain it can be done without adding new tags and modifications so it's some work to get that done. Only the Team can decide if the effort is worth it.

Cheers

EDIT: Oh, and I'm sure it wasn't ignored, just not responded to.

Cheers again.

Correct. It cannot currently be done. If it could we'd need new tags to allow other things (like buildings) to interact with the food wastage system, and also AI to evaluate those things.

 

[robomani]

If Housing help growth the cottage line could help too.

 

[Hydromancerx]

In general I am using Sim City 4 as a model. Lower density creates less heath demand. Higher wealth gives more gold. And higher density means more workers (aka more hammers). The only thing different this time is rather than factoring in health as the buildings get more advanced I added culture. Thus newer types of buildings have a higher culture value. If you want health then you will need to build the various medical related buildings.

I want to keep the housing system easy to understand on why they have the stats they do.

Density = and
Wealth =
Era =

The only exceptionsare that some crime was added from before for lower wealth buildings and some special housing have unique benefits such as Treehouse doubles as a watch tower.

 

[Faustmouse]

I dont get the idea why houses should increase unhealthiness? The people living in the new built houses has been there BEFORE the house was biult, too. In fact, i thni all houses should give more health, cause its healthier to life in a house than living on the street...

But i liked the idea of city limitation! It shouldn't be a limitation that says "city can only grow to size 13 if you have house XY" but more like "without house XY every pop more than 13 creates 3 and 3"

 

[ls612]

I dont get the idea why houses should increase unhealthiness? The people living in the new built houses has been there BEFORE the house was biult, too. In fact, i thni all houses should give more health, cause its healthier to life in a house than living on the street...

But i liked the idea of city limitation! It shouldn't be a limitation that says "city can only grow to size 13 if you have house XY" but more like "without house XY every pop more than 13 creates 3 and 3"

Currently the City Limits are based off of what Civic you are running.

I would actually like it if the City Limits were based off of Tech progression, as opposed to Civics. Then, you could reasonalbly run Despotism in the late game (there are plenty of modern-day despots), the limits would just exist around time you first discover Despotism.

 

[BlueGenie]

@ls: Faust means population limits, not number of cities limit. "grow to size 13". I like your thoughts Faust, having a soft limit rather than a hard limit would be even better.

Though your idea of having limits on number of cities increasing with tech progression does sound like a good idea, I like it.

Cheers

 

[ls612]

@ls: Faust means population limits, not number of cities limit. "grow to size 13". I like your thoughts Faust, having a soft limit rather than a hard limit would be even better.

Though your idea of having limits on number of cities increasing with tech progression does sound like a good idea, I like it.

Cheers

Whoops, misunderstood his point. In that case I totally agree with him, Population and Housing should be linked somehow.