Are we supposed to be hitting the city tile limit? (and other citizen thoughts)

from Elemental Forums

so you may or may not know that level 5 cities will eventually reach a limit beyond which it can construct no more due to a hardcoded tile limit. most games have limits of this kind, but the question that needs to be asked is whether this limit is there for performance/visual reasons, or as a gameplay mechanic. neither answer is particularly satisfying.

if it's genuinely a gameplay feature, it seems like a pretty lame one. it's one thing to say that a city can only support a certain number of buildings, but we have much better, less obtuse mechanics for that. for example the citizen limit. however, i've never found citizens a limit, whilst i often run into the tile limit. the city tile limit at the moment would seem to be running counter to the principle that we're supposed to be developing a small number of cities to a high level, because you can get more total buildings in three cities than you can in two.

so i really don't suspect that it's the former.

but if it's actually just intended to be a worst case scenario safety valve, then why are we be given so many buildings that eat up tiles so quickly? it's like stardock wants us to reach the limit. why exactly do walls need their own footprint? i can fully see that there is a wall in the city without the benefit of a special building. similarly, why do we need 2x2 slums etc?

more importantly, it seems ridiculous that the tile limit is currently doing a better job of limiting buildings than citizens are. i would recommend that citizen requirements need to be pumped up, but that doesn't really work when you're dealing with lower level settlements.

this goes back to one of the problems that we first noticed with the specialist/citizen system. when you're dealing with settlements that can range from 10 people to 1000, how on earth do you make the number of buildings proportional to population without either A making buildings prohibitively citizen expensive at lower levels, or B allowing building numbers to explode to map-eating extents in the later game?

i really can't see a solution with the current numbers. over the course of the 1.1 beta, master archivists and the like were introduced to curb the need to spam archivists and hit the tile limit. however, since these buildings have identical citizen costs, they have made a complete mockery of the citizen requirements. you can pose a hybrid system where you go from an archivist with 1 research for 10 people to a master with 2 for 15 (efficiency improvement), but then you'd have to scrap the auto-upgrading (since you'd be risking giing players a citizen deficit). it really wouldn't be pretty. and but for avoiding building spam, you might as well be replacing your entire research tech tree with "refined research" that incrementally increased your research by 10% for the same citizens and gold maintenance. and that idea would have some merit if it wasn't for that tile limit issue and the resulting redundancy of citizens.

so i really can't see a solution with the existing numbers. if you want both population and level to influence production, the only ways to deal with it would seem to be

- remove an order of magnitude from settlement sizes. eg, give a basic outpost 50 people and boost citizen requirements so that limits are both relevant for level 5 cities and achievable for low levels. this requires a massive re-assessment of population growth and opens up a whole new can of worms

- move to a system such as the one i kept suggesting during my skepticism of the citizen system, where instead of determining the number of buildings by population (citizens) and their production by level (upgrading to master archivists etc), you swap the two around and limit the number of buildings by settlement level, and have their production determined by settlement population. so a level 3 city might have 5 of the following: archivist/lore shop/merchant, and those buildings themselves produce 1 research (or gold or materials)/25 citizens in the settlement. this solution has the advantage of production increasing at an increasing rate, so a city with 500 people produces more research than 2 cities with 250. 10 guys in a city are worth more than 10 in an outpost because you have better infrastructure there. it also allows you to tightly control the number of tiles being used by a city of any given size. while it might lead to huge production as production scales up to to that magic 1000 citizens, this would in all honesty being happening now anyway if people were actually building up to their populations in the end game

- just do everything by level. level has the advantage that you can set the goal posts wherever you like. this way you can say "up to 5 buildings at level 3," each of which does a set amount of production. you can set the production of those buildings, the requirements for levels, and even the number of levels possible to whatever is required for balance & fun, from the start of the game to the end. also, you can effectively prevent the player ever hitting the tile limit. however population would become simply a means to an end however, instead of having innate value.

 

so what's it going to be? as it stands, the citizen/tile limit mechanics are clearly flawed.

elemental
9,573 views 20 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

if there's no tile limit... doesn't that mean you can cover a whole map with just 1 city?

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

Solution: Building upgrades representing increasing levels of industrialization. Each successive upgrade employs a larger number of citizens multiplied by some factor (let's say 5) and providing an increasing benefit over the base structure (let's say 10% better). Combine this with a pop cap.

WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting alaknebs, reply 1
if there's no tile limit... doesn't that mean you can cover a whole map with just 1 city?
End of alaknebs's quote

no as pointed out in the OP population would then become your limit to how big your cities can grow and this caps at 750. I feel that the building limit could be removed and population requirements on buildings should stay the same except for the miltary based buildings, Then perhaps we would start reaching the pop cap plus people would have to make more of a choice between a military based city and one that focuses in some kind of production.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting alaknebs, reply 1
if there's no tile limit... doesn't that mean you can cover a whole map with just 1 city?
End of alaknebs's quote

i'm not saying we shouldn't be hitting an ultimate tile limit or that we should be able to cover the map with endlessly sprawling cities; i'm saying that if the game was designed properly, neither of these things would be a risk anyway.

Reply #5 from Elemental Forums Top

no as pointed out in the OP population would then become your limit to how big your cities can grow and this caps at 750.
End of quote

No it doesn't.  I had two cities with population of way over 1000, and growing..  With the ability to constantly upgrade Housing and Farming, it could just keep rising.  But I do agree with the OP in the main.  My best city just became something nice to look at occassionally, after it hit its limit.  Ok, I could have demolished some villas to make room, but the size of the city would not grow.  I think that there need to be some advanced mechanics for advanced cities - eg suburbs and villages that expand out from the metropolis, to eventually become satellite towns in themselves, with their own, more limited tile caps.

Reply #6 from Elemental Forums Top

Or there could be spells that give more tiles to cities. Or quests that give you powerful artifacts that give you just that. Or starting sovereign ability.

Reply #7 from Elemental Forums Top

 

Quoting TorinReborn, reply 6
Or there could be spells that give more tiles to cities. Or quests that give you powerful artifacts that give you just that. Or starting sovereign ability.
End of TorinReborn's quote

I think the cities have enough sprawl to them already, don't you? And this would seriously punish expansion on small maps. Although YMMV on whether that's a bad thing.

Reply #8 from Elemental Forums Top

One of my biggest problems with cities right now it our starting city should be the crown jewel of our empire.  It needs to have something more than any other city in our empire.  The only cities that could rival it would be the capital cities of the other factions.

As for the tiles I agree that we should be able to make larger cities.  I mean I usually only make 1 to 3 level 5 cities on a large map, but my capital I try to make the best at everything which you cant because of the tile limit.  Our capital city should be a shining example of study, magic, philosophy, power and trade that all other cities try to obtain.

Also you would not be able to make one large city because sooner or later you will hit a wall due to the tile spread amongst other cities.  This is of course you never build another city and just raze all of your opponents cities, but what is the point of that it would take forever to fill up a lage map as one city.

Reply #9 from Elemental Forums Top

The obvious answer would be to have buildings available to higher level cities allow you to build on more tiles. The town hall and palace for example, it could be said that these help with the bureacracy needed to run a larger city.

Reply #10 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Aranneas, reply 7
 
Quoting TorinReborn, reply 6Or there could be spells that give more tiles to cities. Or quests that give you powerful artifacts that give you just that. Or starting sovereign ability.

I think the cities have enough sprawl to them already, don't you? And this would seriously punish expansion on small maps. Although YMMV on whether that's a bad thing.
End of Aranneas's quote

 

Agree about wanting something more for the capital. I really want some sort of unique wizard's tower that while you're sovereign is at he can do some cool overland magic (a la AoW2 and it's expansion).

 

-Starcrunch

Reply #11 from Elemental Forums Top

Agree, the Capital should be something special, it should have a higher tile limit than other cities. 

Reply #12 from Elemental Forums Top

The rule about not building a city with 5 moves of another also applies to building additional structures.  I've choked-out several enemy cities by denying them the ability to expand.  I have also had the bad fortune of building a village only to discover that I could not build a single expansion :(

 

Top

Reply #13 from Elemental Forums Top

I played through a very long game yesterday and I do not see a problem with the current system the way it is.  the upgrades work well enough - maybe you modify your capitol over time - but I don't see a need for the complexity your thinking here or how it actually improves overall gameplay.

 

though I admit I can dig the cool factor of having an uber city as your capitol .

Reply #14 from Elemental Forums Top

Insofar as the population scaling, one thought was instead of a direct 1:1 ratio of population, tie in the usable population with housing. So instead of 1 house provides 25 citizens and 25 people to put to work, 1 house provides 25 citizens and 1 person to put to work. If you have 5 houses, 5 people to work with 125 citizens. This might (in tandem with other additions/tweaks) help reduce excessive population and specialists. For one, this produces a slight choice in how you want higher level cities. You can build with big houses to minimize how much housing you need... but this will give you less specialists to work with. You can alternatively build with what amounts to fantasy slums, producing a lot of specialists but requiring much more housing to accommodate. Chances are, it'll end up somewhere in between based on need and desire.

 

We could add to this by also using housing to tweak individual tax rate. A hut might produce less taxes from its residents while a house, more. Or other tweaks based more directly upon how the population is being utilized.

Reply #15 from Elemental Forums Top

Well, I see the point of the OP but I don't totally agree. It's true that some tile limit is not really relevant because , I know it's a game, in real life, the only limiting factor is the "environment". For instance: Montreal. It's build on an Island so it can't grow that much more than it currently do. The only thing that they can do is building in heigth. That cause a higher population density and work well with some system of transportation like the subway. Quebec, however, have only one shore so it can expand as they wish, the only problem is when you hit the arable land. You now must choose if you wish to expand and have "less food" or you keep your farm. So my point is you should be able to expand as long as you have some decent land to expand on, or have a higher maintenance cost on "expensive land". And the idea to have a tech to increase the tile limit that represent the "improve bureaucracy"is also a good idea.

Reply #16 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Goldmos, reply 15
Well, I see the point of the OP but I don't totally agree. It's true that some tile limit is not really relevant because , I know it's a game, in real life, the only limiting factor is the "environment". For instance: Montreal. It's build on an Island so it can't grow that much more than it currently do. The only thing that they can do is building in heigth. That cause a higher population density and work well with some system of transportation like the subway. Quebec, however, have only one shore so it can expand as they wish, the only problem is when you hit the arable land. You now must choose if you wish to expand and have "less food" or you keep your farm. So my point is you should be able to expand as long as you have some decent land to expand on, or have a higher maintenance cost on "expensive land". And the idea to have a tech to increase the tile limit that represent the "improve bureaucracy"is also a good idea.
End of Goldmos's quote

There's a reason for the 'city planning' profession. If allowed to grow organically beyond a certain point, existing relationships between work sectors and residential sectors in a city are likely to become unviable. Once you account for rates of motion and areas of congestion, you will probably end up with some 'commutes from hell' of the sort metropolis livers like to complain about. Infrastructure for sanitation, water, food and shelter will probably become inadequate to the needs of a growing population. And without planning, it can really only get worse over time, especially as building techniques and modes of locomotion improve.

Reply #17 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Aranneas, reply 16

Quoting Goldmos, reply 15Well, I see the point of the OP but I don't totally agree. It's true that some tile limit is not really relevant because , I know it's a game, in real life, the only limiting factor is the "environment". For instance: Montreal. It's build on an Island so it can't grow that much more than it currently do. The only thing that they can do is building in heigth. That cause a higher population density and work well with some system of transportation like the subway. Quebec, however, have only one shore so it can expand as they wish, the only problem is when you hit the arable land. You now must choose if you wish to expand and have "less food" or you keep your farm. So my point is you should be able to expand as long as you have some decent land to expand on, or have a higher maintenance cost on "expensive land". And the idea to have a tech to increase the tile limit that represent the "improve bureaucracy"is also a good idea.
There's a reason for the 'city planning' profession. If allowed to grow organically beyond a certain point, existing relationships between work sectors and residential sectors in a city are likely to become unviable. Once you account for rates of motion and areas of congestion, you will probably end up with some 'commutes from hell' of the sort metropolis livers like to complain about. Infrastructure for sanitation, water, food and shelter will probably become inadequate to the needs of a growing population. And without planning, it can really only get worse over time, especially as building techniques and modes of locomotion improve.
End of Aranneas's quote

 

Yep, the city planning could be the tech for augmenting the tile limit :) Urban planner could also be a new type of champion.

Reply #18 from Elemental Forums Top

i can see why people would want more flexibility with the tile limit, but i think they're thinking small. if nothing else, there are performance issues to consider. I think the idea of urban congestion and squalor is beyond the scope of this game. We already have perfectly good ways of limiting buildings without approaching the tile limit. ie, population and level. those are the mechanics we need to make work. once we start playing around with the tile limit, we have effectively acknowledged that the citizen mechanic has failed.

Reply #19 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting alaknebs, reply 1
if there's no tile limit... doesn't that mean you can cover a whole map with just 1 city?
End of alaknebs's quote

 

No, unless you flatten all mounains, deforest the entire map, connect islands, raise land from the ocean, meet fertile land requirements,...etc ad nausem.

I do think that now that you can build on swamps and other previously useless land tiles is a definite improvement.  I also think that building a garden/skath pit in cities is an improvement.  Providing you have researched it of course.

 

Give a tile limit to the AI, all I see when I conquer them is cities every 5 tiles.  Its ridiculous that I can't raze them or utterly demolish them for asthetics, or better management of resources.

Reply #20 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Aatxe, reply 19



Quoting alaknebs,
reply 1
if there's no tile limit... doesn't that mean you can cover a whole map with just 1 city?



 

No, unless you flatten all mounains, deforest the entire map, connect islands, raise land from the ocean, meet fertile land requirements,...etc ad nausem.

I do think that now that you can build on swamps and other previously useless land tiles is a definite improvement.  I also think that building a garden/skath pit in cities is an improvement.  Providing you have researched it of course.

 

Give a tile limit to the AI, all I see when I conquer them is cities every 5 tiles.  Its ridiculous that I can't raze them or utterly demolish them for asthetics, or better management of resources.
End of Aatxe's quote

I actually did that once on a tiny map.  I flattened all mountains, removed all forests and filled in the ocean.  I filled every spot with settlements until everything was under my influence.  At that point I studied all the techs that give you resources.  Let me tell you that was a huge disappointment and waste of time.  Mind you this was at the beginning of v1.1 beta and the payback was horrible.  With the above stated I had almost the entire map under my influence except for 1 city which I let live to test this out.  I got 2 farms, 1 gold mine, 1 ventri mine and 1 crystal crag.  I am not going to tell you how pissed off I was.

I agree with the statement about the AI having cities every 5 tiles with useless crap abound and poor placement.  When I conquer an AI city I usually demolish 75% of the city due to waste of space and buildings that are not needed which are just soaking up money for no reason.