+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 45 of 45

Thread: Mechanics Behind Population Growth

  1. #41
    Sergeant
    Achtung PanzerArsenal of DemocracyHearts of Iron 2: ArmageddonEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIIHOI3: Their Finest HourMagickaMajesty 2Semper Fi
    Sword of the StarsWarlock: Master of the Arcane

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    ,Canada
    Posts
    81
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Dagda View Post
    I can't put into words how much I hate fixed growth. Dumbing down things to make it simple is one thing; dumbing down that things that negatively affect gameplay is another thing entirely and is in no way fun.
    Dumbed down from what? There's no prior game in the series.
    They were designing a new game and picked a simple population growth mechanic to control the rate of improvements. It avoids having to micromanage cities, which would get horribly tedious late game. Being able to focus on the military part of the game is nice.

    I see room for improvements, but I'd rather have the game stay like that than become a micromanagement nightmare.

  2. #42
    Your Friendly Dictator Grubnessul's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultDiplomacyDivine WindHeir to the Throne
    Europa Universalis III: In NomineMagickaMajesty 2EU3 Napoleon's AmbitionEuropa Universalis: Rome
    Sword of the StarsVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedRome: Vae VictisMount & Blade: Warband
    Warlock: Master of the ArcaneMount & Blade: With Fire and SwordEU3 Collectors Edition500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order
    EUIV: Call to arms event

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Banished to the 8th circle of Hell after mentioning rule 34 to Canonized
    Posts
    5,490
    How would you prefer to see it? Based on empire food production or city food production? Undead would have a huge disadvantage here vs monsters with all their + food % buildings. For balance and veriety, a fixed rate seems the best. Yes, this could be countered with the "then why not make just one race"-argument and this way you can make the races more different with hindering one in a very elementary field.
    "History is form of cybersex!"
    EvilSanta
    "Please, call me Grubby"
    - General Schenkhuizen, Timeslines: What if Spain failed to control the world?
    There might be Vikings out there! Or: How I accidentally traded my wife for a halibut (pining for the Fjords since I lost my USB and the save game)

    Patriotism leads to nationalism, nationalism leads to racism, racism leads to suffering...

  3. #43
    I don't see it as "dumbing-down" so much as favoring a design that leads to many faster turns over fewer longer ones. Since (as I see it) a large portion of the game is unit manipulation, having many rapid turns bolsters that aspect.
    Feel free to call me App. It's shorter.

  4. #44
    The simple thing would be create a modifier for the city food production if it is in the positive.

  5. #45
    Except that would a) kill the strategy of having one or two cities specialise in food to supply the others and b) have to balance around the risk of cities that produce a heavy surplus (I once had a city with 80 odd food production) providing runaway growth.

    In any event it begs the question what variable population growth is meant to be adding to the game except something to micro. I tend to the view that the theme of warlock is bringing order to Ardania (pushing back the monsters and those who don't recognise your enlightened rule) rather than building a civilisation. There are other games that fill the latter niche.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts