[Suggestion] Ways to limit city spamming (neutral could be more aggressive toward outposts etc...)

By on September 25, 2010 12:24:53 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Black-Knight

Join Date 09/2009
+15

As the the game is now, roaming bandits and monsters are not very aggressive toward cities. Sure they are a threat and players feel the need to leave a garrison in them, which is a BRILLIANT concept that I have really never seen in any other empire building game, where players don't really need garrisons thus ending up being perfectly fine even without defending their empire.

By being forced to create an infrastructure to defend their newly created outposts players would have to dedicate time, armies and resources every time they build a new outpost. That could be a deterrent to spam cities without having to create unrealistic rules.

--

Another way could could be that in order to create each new outpost the player would have to research it's "new city planning" as a new tech, thus having to spend time researching each time a new outpost is going to be created.

--

Again, in order to be realistic, as I suggested in another post, towns should contribute more with their taxes to the economy of the empire with TAXES, but they would also have an upkeep. By having coaches that carry taxes to the capital (in a way similar to that created for merchants).

Player would have to defend those coaches, by defending the routes and/or adding an escort to each coach. The loss of a coach would thus become an economic loss for the empire and outposts that are too far to be defended would soon become a weight for the empire. (a transport by boat should be created for those town that are not reachable by land). Maybe by researching a new building the "tax collector" in level 4 settlements, players would be able to choose which town the taxes go to, other than the default starting city.

--

Any other idea?

Locked Post 4 Replies
Search this post
Subscription Options


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
September 25, 2010 6:04:59 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Personally, I went in an increased the time it takes to build Pioneer units by 10 turns and slightly increased their cost. This makes it more expensive to build them and makes them longer to build which results in less overall Pioneers and slower city placement.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
September 26, 2010 7:51:12 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Partially true, but the pioneers at the beginning of the game are useful to have in a relatively decent time. Only later on they become too many. By doing what you say we would still have an exponential growth of pioneers. when you have 10 cities you can have 10 pioneers, thus 10 more cities, then 20 more...Your idea would definitely slow that down, but having to research them as a technology FOR EACH NEW CITY would force to make them only if we really need them otherwise we would be behind in terms or other developments.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
September 26, 2010 8:35:38 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Quoting Black-Knight,
having to research them as a technology FOR EACH NEW CITY would force to make them only if we really need them otherwise we would be behind in terms or other developments.

While the basic idea is silly, I think this could work beautifully in game. =P

There would be a tangible drawback to expansion to be weighed against the benefit of grabbing additional resources.

So far the best suggestion I saw.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
September 26, 2010 10:17:14 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Quoting Robert Hentschke,

Quoting Black-Knight, reply 2having to research them as a technology FOR EACH NEW CITY would force to make them only if we really need them otherwise we would be behind in terms or other developments.
While the basic idea is silly, I think this could work beautifully in game. =P

There would be a tangible drawback to expansion to be weighed against the benefit of grabbing additional resources.

So far the best suggestion I saw.

I think it could be justified in a sense. In the real world cities don't just come out of nowhere, in reality they grow spontaneously from ancient settlements that usually tended to grow around rivers or places where drinkable water could be found.

The premise of this game though is that the world has been destroyed therefore there has to be a rational effort to rebuild it. One can argue that plans for the construction of each city have to be studied before a group of pioneer are sent.

Also In Masters of Orion II, the Sci-Fi classic game, in order to have pioneers (colony ships) a city (planet) would have to lose part of its population. That would simulate the fact that a large number of people were removed from one place to be sent the other.

The fact of greatly reduce the population of a city would mean to renounce to its improvements if a village ends up becoming an outpost again.

PROBABLY THE BEST IDEA WOULD BE THAT THE PLACE WHERE THE PIONEER IS CREATED SHOULD BE READY IN TERMS OF POPULATION and maybe could only create a new pioneer once a certain number of turns have passed since the creation of the latest.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Stardock Forums v1.0.0.0    #101114  walnut1   Server Load Time: 00:00:00.0000421   Page Render Time: