[Gameplay] Prevent Infinite City Spam - limit buildings, make cities cost, increase monsters.

"Infinite City Spam" (ICS for short) is a strategy of rapid expansion, putting down cities\colonies everywhere in the early game, rather than following a more balanced approach.

In some games it's very effective, others not so much. When it is the optimal strategy, it usually doesn't make the game fun to play, as it limits strategic options and introduces too much micromanagement.

Various games tried to address this issue, for example:

Master of Orion - many planets have terrain which requires expensive technologies to settle (e.g. Controlled Toxic Environment)

Civilization 4 - new cities lose money, moreso the further away they are from the capital, and the more cities there are. Only once they grow and get some buildings, do they become a net benefit to the economy.

What happens in Elemental right now?

New cities can build studies and arcane labs for as long as the global population allows. Often, these buildings give the best benefit for the time spent building, so having six cities continually building studies is a lot better than having three cities do the same (as bigger cities don't produce buildings faster than smaller ones, research will increase at the speed corresponding to number of cities, not reflecting their size). Same for units.

Also, new cities means new citizens. Each city's prestige is independent, so having six cities with +1 prestige each, rather than three, means that six people join the kingdom each season, rather than three. Since each new person adds more money to the kingdom, ICS also allows a lot more gold to be generated in the kingdom.

Overall, this means that ICS is probably the best approach to the game right now.

So, what are the options to limit it, and introduce benefits to bigger cities?

1) Limit the number of buildings that a city can build at a given size, limiting the benefits small cities can provide. I've only played 1.1 where the population pool is global, so perhaps having population as a city-local resource is a better approach (or perhaps it had its own problems?). Alternatively, we could limit the number of buildings that can be built in a city - so, instead of building Arcane Labs until the cows come home, we can have (each building can only be built once per city, unless specified otherwise):

Hermit's Hut (4 seasons, 1 arcane research, city level 1 required)
Arcane Lab (8 seasons, 2 arcane research, city level 2 required)
Hedge Magic Shop (8 seasons, 1 arcane research, 1 gold, city level 2 required)
Mage Tower (10 seasons, 3 arcane research, city level 3 required)
Wizards Council (16 seasons, +100% arcane research, city level 4 required, one per kingdom)
Sorcery School (12 seasons, 5 arcane research, city level 4 required)

This places a limit on amount of research a single settlement can produce (also makes lost libraries\ancient temples more valuable!). Also note that higher-end buildings are more effective than lower-end ones.

2) Citizens are not taxed directly. Small settlements cost money. Cities should only start to break even at size 2, after some money-making buildings have been built. Distance from capital may play a part, too.

E.g. a new city is going to cost 5 gold, on average, and no building available at level 1 provides gold. Once it hits size 2, it can build the following (each building is unique per city):

Market (8 seasons, 3 gold, city level 2 required)
Hedge Magic Shop (8 seasons, 1 arcane research, 1 gold, city level 2 required)

With trade routes and specialization in guildar production (say, a +40% to gold), it could be making 3 * 1.4 = 4.2 gold. Once again, in this scenario, citizens do not produce gold at all, only buildings do.

Since various buildings come at different technologies, advancing the tech tree and building up older cities should help with horizontal expansion. Because gold production is limited, Gold Mines become more important.

When city grows to level 3 and as new technologies are researched, additional buildings are opened up:

Jeweller (12 seasons, 3 gold, merchants sell magic rings, city level 3 required)
Tailor (12 seasons, 3 gold, merchants sell magic robes\cloaks, city level 3 required)
Great Fair (16 seasons, +100% gold in city, one per kingdom, city level 4 required)

3) Larger cities are more food-efficient. Food is a hard limit on the cities in Elemental until late game when Gardens are available (and at that stage, the map should probably be filled out), and larger cities provide more people per each point of food. This is already somewhat the case (Villa is better than House, which is better than Hut), but it can be made more gradual, to provide better benefits at every city level.
 
The following housing can be built once per city unless noted otherwise (note that the housing building names here represent not so much the individual dwellings, but rather defensible housing locations that the populace can retreat to in case of monster attack, which suits the atmosphere better, I think):

Hut (4 seasons, houses 15 people, requires 1 food, city level 1 - 15 people\food point)
Town Hall (8 seasons, houses 40 people, requires 2 food, city level 2 - 20 people\food point)
Merchant Quarter (12 seasons, houses 100 people, requires 3 food, city level 3 - 33 people\food point)
Noble Quarter (12 seasons, houses 100 people, requires 3 food, city level 3 - 33 people\food point)
Enclave (16 seasons, houses 200 people, requires 4 food, city level 4, unlimited - 50 people\food point)

Once again, various buildings come at different technologies, and here advancing the tech tree will help vertical expansion. Refugee Camps are also made more important (though probably want to scale them down to 50 people to allow a level 3 city straight away, but keep level 4 cities with bigger bonuses out of easy reach)

4) Monsters attack larger kingdoms. Basically, intelligent monsters don't like civilization spreading throughout their lands, and dumb monsters just want to snack - which forces people to huddle together if they are to defend themselves (or wander around nomadically in small groups, hoping not to be noticed and eaten, until they join your kingdom).

Essentially, have new monster lairs be generated randomly in kingdom's territories, with their level based on the number of cities as well as game turn, with the frequency dependent on kingdom size, and with a preference to be on kingdom's edges where it borders wilderness. The lair level requirements mean that the player needs to research Quests to find and destroy them, and possibly also train\equip heroes (Warfare); if the lairs are left alone, they will periodically generate monsters that can go on rampage, pillaging the lands.

This gives the player's heroes more stuff to do inside the kingdom, makes the countryside more dangerous in response to civilization's attempts to tame it, and gives the early to mid-game a feel of a few scattered pockets of humanity battling against hordes of darkness.

---

Ideally, with these changes, the following can be achieved:

Cities level 1's and underdeveloped level 2's that do not grab a strategic location or resource are expensive endeavours that can be afforded only by rich empires with a solid core, in late game.

Early to mid game is a scattering of kingdoms separated by stretches of wilderness. With less than normal number of civilizations in the game, the situation will last even longer.

Only in the mid-to-late game are the last patches of wilderness eradicated, when new settlements can build gardens to make themselves food-sufficient.

6,612 views 9 replies
Reply #1 Top

Interesting post.

Just one query, how does limiting a building to one per city reduce ICS? Seems to me that it would actually make you want more cities, not less. 

Reply #2 Top

Quoting Lonemessiah, reply 1
Interesting post.

Just one query, how does limiting a building to one per city reduce ICS? Seems to me that it would actually make you want more cities, not less. 

Thanks.

What it does is limit the amount of research\gold a single city can provide, and thus reduce the potential of many small cities.

Let's say you have a food surplus of +3 food. At present, you can either invest it into three small cities, each of which will produce a single study per four turns until the end of time, or one larger city. Three cities is a much better choice, as they will build three times as many studies.

With a limit on buildings, however, the larger city looks more attractive - it can reach a higher level, and create more buildings that increase research, provide gold etc. Short-term, three cities will probably be more efficient still (as they build a study each straight away), but soon they will plateau, whereas the larger city has a better pay-off longer term, as it can continue creating other buildings that provide further research bonuses.

E.g., three level 1 cities can produce 3 research per turn straight away, but a level 2 city will be generating 5 research per turn on its own after 20 turns.

Reply #3 Top

Not a bad idea.  With this concept, there is still the problem of dealing with Kingom vs. Empire buildings and how many of each are actually allowed in a city.

Reply #4 Top

What it does is limit the amount of research\gold a single city can provide

Meaning you need to build more cities rather than larger cities....

Your ignoring a few things..

 

New cities can build studies and arcane labs for as long as the global population allows.

Each building costs an upkeep.. so gildar is a limiting factor as well.

Often, these buildings give the best benefit for the time spent building,

so having six cities continually building studies is a lot better than having three cities do the same

But your giving up some overall research potential due to larger cities getting level up bonuses. When a city levels up it gets to choose a bonus these bonuses are cumulative. Meaning a leveled up city with a selected bonus and a non leveled city with the same amount of buildings are not = in production of  research.

Meaning while you can use a huge population cap of one BIG city to build many studies.. its overall more effective to put those buildings into the large city than the small one.

The upkeep of each building is the major limiter since 1 study costs 1 gildar per turn or = to 10 pop in taxes..unless your using all your mana to cast alchemy in order to upkeep them.

 

1 population = 0.1 gildar per tun in taxes. 1 research building = 1 gildar per turn.

Meaning a city with no housing can only support 1 research building before its putting you into the negative in gildar. (it rounds up i believe allowing you to break even.)

 

Using your example and assuming one food production source shared producing 5 food.

You can have 5 huts/hovels. 30 pop each.

each town supports 5 pop by itself.

So with 3 cities your looking at a total population 175(rounded up). 18 gildar per turn.

18 studies is what you could support before going into the negative.

Or 6 cities 205 pop total. 21 studies.

 

But heres the difference.

Its 50 pop (2 huts) to hit level a 3 city assuming you choose research both times thats a 50% bonus for that cities research.

so with 3 cities you have 2 lvl 3 cities and one lvl 2.

putting 6 studies in each of your  cities  your looking at,

city 1&2 6 research + 50% bonus = 9x2 research a turn

city 3 6 research + 20% onus = 7 research a turn

GRAND TOTAL 25 research a turn.

 

 

Now 6 cities. 3 studies in 3 of them .  4 in 3 of them.

1 hut in each besides the last (only had 5 food)

city 1-2 3 research +20% =  ~7 research

city 3 3 studies 0 house = 3 research

city 4-6 4 research +20% 13 research

GRAND TOTALl 23 research.

 

Or in both cases you can have  1 major research hub (your capital)

3 cities. 1 lvl 4 , 2 lvl 1

captial 18 research +90% = 34.2 research.

cities 1-2 0 research

GRAND TOTAL 34.2 research

 

6 cities 1 lvl 4 5 lvl 1

capital 20 research +90%= 38 research

city 2 1 research

rest no research.

GRAND TOTAL 39 research

4, the point.

Its far more profitable from a research standpoint to stack all the studies  into a few major towns with the bonuses. Build as many satellite cities as you want but without gildar to support the buildings and food  to produce housing they are just production hubs with less overall research potential Your far better off stacking all those studies into one (or more) major research hub.

In the short term spaming cities and studies in each city may have an advantage. However in the long term having a major specialized hub will leave it far behind. Since it not only produces more per turn but opens up resources that would have been spent on pioneers for other assets.

 

Also of note Studies are cheaper on resources than pioneers.. meaning you have to give up more production potential if you spam pioneers. Material wise you can build 3.3 studies for every pioneer you pump out.

 

Easiest way to fix it simply make cities round down rather than up. So you no longer break even with a base town +1 buildilng.

 

Alot of your ideas were previously implemented and discarded due to other issues. The result was (partially due to resources) no reason to build cities that varied and no reason to build cities in any area but directly around resources.

 

 

 

Reply #5 Top

I many of these things would be a step backward toward previous mechanics that were tried and rejected.

Reply #6 Top

What about large map's? Am i supposed to have few cities to keep the game in balance?

 

As mentioned before - limiting building possibilities won't bring anything good to the game. 

 

And, besides, what about conquering two players with four cities each. Won't that be a city spamm too?

 

 

Reply #7 Top


---

Ideally, with these changes, the following can be achieved:

Cities level 1's and underdeveloped level 2's that do not grab a strategic location or resource are expensive endeavours that can be afforded only by rich empires with a solid core, in late game.

Early to mid game is a scattering of kingdoms separated by stretches of wilderness. With less than normal number of civilizations in the game, the situation will last even longer.

Only in the mid-to-late game are the last patches of wilderness eradicated, when new settlements can build gardens to make themselves food-sufficient.

 

I agree with this part of your post. Actually I would love it if by end game there were still patches of wilderness. I don't know if the changes you suggest will lead to that, though.

I only build about 3 cities all game and raze all others, but I still have so much cash I don't know what to do with it all. Even if it's extremely expensive to build your first city, by the time you have a few of them it's peanuts. I think there should be some other reason besides financial to limit expansion. Maybe that would be a good use for diplomatic capital?

Reply #8 Top

Like Fistalis said, a lot of this was in the earlier version of Elemental. In fact, I think it's about 1.08 that the city accepted more than one type of building. This was made to prevent building a lot of city with no real difference because each city that you made were nearly as identical as the old one. Now, you can choose where to put your focus. There is no real way to prevent city spam UNLESS you limit the total tile your Empire/kingdom can have. I reply this to the Idea section: if you want city spam/one big city both viable solution you need to remove the tile limit per city and make it global. In this case, you can build one mega city with a "small" zone of influence or many small city that cover a lot of ground. I think it's the only way to "kill" the city spam problem and add some importance to your capital.If you dont like the tile limit, make a global population limit, it will work well to. My 2 cent :) (By the way, I'm not really in disfavor of city spam but I do think that a few large city should be better than a lot of small city)

Reply #9 Top

Quoting Goldmos, reply 8
if you want city spam/one big city both viable solution you need to remove the tile limit per city and make it global. In this case, you can build one mega city with a "small" zone of influence or many small city that cover a lot of ground. I think it's the only way to "kill" the city spam problem and add some importance to your capital.If you dont like the tile limit, make a global population limit, it will work well to. My 2 cent

 

Best 2 cent I heard all day! Actually either of these could be a lot of fun. It forces you to compromise one for the other while keeping it equal overall. One question, what decides your tile/pop size and what can you do to influence raising its cap quicker?

[edit]

I can't help but think how wonderful it would be to build a Mega-City that exceeds the tile cap on cities currently. We share food and population across cities, so why not tiles??