stein220

Join Date 12/2008

+13

[suggestion] - city density world option

Sometimes I like dense cities. If I want to control a large state, I don't mind the pioneer-spam/land-grab in the beginning, so long as every faction has similar opportunities. However, sometimes I might want to play a more empty world. Perhaps there should be a setting for "settle-able" tile density, apart from resources?

I played a game on a medium map (all settings normal/medium) as Kraxis where I had 5 cities by the time i ran into the first other player, and the 4 of the other 5 players were in comparable positions. When I went to war with three of them, it was long and epic. I was moving troops around everywhere, fortifying some cities, capturing and razing others (thank the devs for razing), ravaging in the fields. By then end, I had 6 full stacks of troops, each battle-hardened and led by a champion. I won before I got to really late game techs. I got my catapults right before the last player surrendered.

However, it's really hit or miss. Sometimes I have no settle-able tiles around for many miles or I start right next to someone else.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting ,

quoting post

I think this is an Excellent Suggestion! Almost any "Selectable Switch" that provides for two or more states of play, is a good idea in a game like this (assuming that it is not too difficult to program for). Players tend to like the variety; and that in turn increases the Replay-ability factor ...

We already have "Selectable Switches" for such things as overall Game Difficulty, Monster Frequency, Pacing, Magic Strength, and Resource Frequency (as well as the more basic ones for Map Type and World Size). Having a Selectable Switch for City Density just seems like such a logical addition to the List !

For my part, I am one of the folks who has previously advocated a Selectable Switch for: Balanced Starting Locations (which have settle-able tiles, have some reasonable resources, are not right next to an over-powered monster, and are not hemmed in by mountains or seas - such that they constitute a virtual cul-de-sac) versus completely Random Starting Locations (which are just that; but which can be chosen for variety, based upon how many times you are willing to use the [ Cntl ] [ N ] feature). See this discussion thread, including my Reply #1 to it:

https://forums.elementalgame.com/429619

Having variety, and Meaningful Choices, are hall-marks of great 4X games and great Strategy games! Adding an option ( Selectable Switch ) for possible City Density would be another excellent way to improve the Replay-ability of E:FE !

Successfully updated karma reason!

Hm my brain is tired, and my back hurts like... But imagine I say something really smart, and agrees with both of you

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Kongdej,

reply 2

Hm my brain is tired, and my back hurts like... But imagine I say something really smart, and agrees with both of you

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

i'll take it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Isn't this an option in world creation as in choosing what type of map. For example a desert type map will not have as many fertle areas as with a temperate map. Similar to the density of resources on the map. The fertile land inevitably is near resources and so if you put this on sparse with desert setting, this should make a map with relatively few cities in it. Unless I'm missing something with the map creation, which I could be.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well, Parrottmath, there is another constrictor on city density, and that is the minimum distance -- between cities -- that is permissable. Until v0.951, the minimum distance was 8 tiles. When v0.951 was released, the minimum distance between cities was reduced to 6 tiles. As a result, it is now possible to build considerably more cities on a given sized map, than was previously the case (assuming the availability of adequate resources).

It seems to me that it should be possible for Stardock to provide a Selectable Switch, at least, for minimum city distances. With a little more analysis and work, Stardock should ( I think ) be able to construct a hybridized city-density switch. That kind of hybrid should be able to factor in (and limit) resource availability too, along with minimum distances, so as to provide more variability in the average (practical) city density.

Of course, you are right that Map Type (Desert vs. Swamp vs. Balanced, etc.) is another way to provide a wider range of choices. But I think it would add even better/wider variety to the choices, if a Minimum-City-Distances switch, or a Hybridized-City-Density switch were added to the game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Ahh, so that is what the OP is refering. It may be nice to see this in the world creation section. I feel they have so MANY good ideas floating around that people want options to tweak that they just need a button called advanced options that include all of these suggestions that people are making.

Oh I didn't disagree with the OP, I didn't quite understand what functionality to the game to which he was refering.

Successfully updated karma reason!

i was basically referring to a combination of number of fertile areas and distance between. I've mostly played "Balanced" maps, but the placement of fertile tiles seems very haphazard and unbalanced; feast or famine.

I did try your suggestion of playing a temperate map and the first time there were more opportunities to plop down cities.

Successfully updated karma reason!