It's happened to all of us.
Build your first city, only to find that a freaking little spot of grassland, or worse, a special resource is stuck just out of reach.
There is not enough space to build a viable city, so you are stuck with that little square unused forever. Sure, you could build a city, but it would ****** the growth of your capital, and that is supremely bad idea.
I am a petty perfectionist, so I almost always quit the game. That little square will just annoy me for the whole game. I can't stand it. Very occasionally will I forest the area over as a 'national park'.
Every developed civ has a load of cities spead out evenly, with no heavily 'civilized' areas like in real life. Indeed, the worlds biggest cities seem to occur in clusters.
Heavily populated areas don't really seem to exist. The distance between the capital and the surrounding cities will be about the same distance between two Nowheresvilles in the middle of the jungle. I think that this reduces the strategic depth of the game, with city density being pretty uniform.
So I say that the 21 square cross is annoying, boring and unrealistic.
What are the alternatives?
Well, I hear that the CTP series has an expanding city radius. I don't know if it's good or not. Mind you, anything is better that what civ3 has.
One idea would be an base radius which expands in other directions if one direction is cut off. So two cities close to each other will gain squares in other directions, rather than simply overlapping.
Comments/flamings?
Build your first city, only to find that a freaking little spot of grassland, or worse, a special resource is stuck just out of reach.
There is not enough space to build a viable city, so you are stuck with that little square unused forever. Sure, you could build a city, but it would ****** the growth of your capital, and that is supremely bad idea.
I am a petty perfectionist, so I almost always quit the game. That little square will just annoy me for the whole game. I can't stand it. Very occasionally will I forest the area over as a 'national park'.
Every developed civ has a load of cities spead out evenly, with no heavily 'civilized' areas like in real life. Indeed, the worlds biggest cities seem to occur in clusters.
Heavily populated areas don't really seem to exist. The distance between the capital and the surrounding cities will be about the same distance between two Nowheresvilles in the middle of the jungle. I think that this reduces the strategic depth of the game, with city density being pretty uniform.
So I say that the 21 square cross is annoying, boring and unrealistic.
What are the alternatives?
Well, I hear that the CTP series has an expanding city radius. I don't know if it's good or not. Mind you, anything is better that what civ3 has.
One idea would be an base radius which expands in other directions if one direction is cut off. So two cities close to each other will gain squares in other directions, rather than simply overlapping.
Comments/flamings?
Comment