Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
This, I believe, is untrue. If two buildings have a resource they make, and the city builds them both, does not the city create 2 of that resource then? Just as if you have one building produce 3 of the resource, just as is done for Hit Musicals etc...?
While that's good, it makes the sense of building the more advanced versions seem lacking in critical need. Additionally, in RL, if a furniture factory is built, it certainly did not require that there were any local level or smaller level manufacturers in the country, and in fact the reality is that the larger factory level manufacturer is making the smaller ones unable to compete and thus putting them out of business or at least making them operate on hairswidth profits if at all. As a boardgame designer, I could never have manufactured the games from my garage and made a profit. I could've manufactured them there with a little overhead but people don't want to spend $60 on a boardgame they've never heard of when they can get a Hasbro boardgame with massive name recognition for $5. The reason for this is larger operations can spit out a lot more product with a much lower price per unit. So what happens is eventually all the little businesses get shut down by the larger ones and before you know it there are no more mom and pop operations successfully going anywhere except as hobbies. Thus, while this system does work to address a game problem, it runs a little counter to reality, where modern industry jumps right over any need to build up to larger operations and dives into the most cost per unit effective solution they can regardless of the massive overhead it requires - they have it to invest or they don't do it at all. All that said, I like the elegance as a game solution so I'm not really fighting that implementation or arguing against it, just discussing a problem it seems to present with realworld modeling.
In what cultures? Ones that could be said to not have modern tech? If you're trying to say this is the level of the independent entrepreneur, I get it, but a format to adjust the name as it goes would still be a helpful addition if we're going to go this route. Yes, "hut" implies prehistoric - at least Ancient.
You must understand that a Black Ops operative does all they can to be indistinguishable from a normal criminal. That's how they do what they do. So if you name them different, it just becomes a tell that it wasn't a random local 'barbarian' criminal but was instead a state operative that just did something to you or that you are now looking to arrest.
Urban Black Ops units perform crimes in other nations on behalf of their nation and whether they work for another nation or not doesn't change the fact that they are still professional criminals. Trying to make a divide there only complicates things for law enforcement effects and so on.
I get that it would be nice to have your criminals be unable to spread crime in your own cities - if AIAndy's system was more agile I could do something about that and maybe eventually I may yet figure out a way to implement that, but the whole category should also represent the hidden operatives in your own communities that are spying on crime operations and must perform crimes of their own in the process to do so - would be good if those crime sources were lessened, and I do eventually have a promotion in mind for those types that would reduce their crime.
I knew a guy that was hanging around in drug circles and informing the cops about everything he witnessed. To do it effectively, he had to be as much a criminal as the people he was spying on. I knew another that was doing the same for the FBI, spying on scam operations. He had to be the biggest scammer among them and indeed he was a scammer before he was enlisted for this role as an alternative to prison once he was arrested (same story for the previous example with the drug informant).
This is where most 'black ops' agents are generated - they are found doing the same thing as they are sent to do for the government, being a criminal.
The only difference is that they work for the state and not just for themselves, and they aren't always sent to other nations to do it. Not to say that doesn't happen a lot too.
In C2C, under Hide and Seek rules, one of the best ways to get visibility on very skilled criminals at being hidden is to send in a criminal of your own. Some levels of invisibility can only be countered by an observant criminal. Of course, it's not totally necessary to do that because effective investigations will bring any criminal to be revealed eventually, but if you really want to know what's going on, the most effective criminal spotters are criminals themselves.
Those operatives that work for the CIA, however, are spies. Not the independant criminal contractors that the CIA often employs, the ones that are on the actual official payroll. Highly professionally trained and not at all inclined to a life of crime, but purely a life of advanced and specialized espionage. Due to this advanced training, they aren't there for simple roles like spreading crime somewhere or supporting a drug ring or learning about the seedy underbelly of an opponent nation and all its weaknesses that creates, no... they are specifically infiltrating state offices. And in a lot of ways they are better at it because they cannot be seen at all - but they can be caught and they aren't combat capable when they are. They are civilians, after all.
and new unit costs 100
