that also does sound good, it's been already suggested but I'm not sure how easily the AI can be taught to handle it so late into development..

What the hell is the point then in using that feature at all if it doesnt actually effect gameplay?!

useless

I'm sorry but what is the point in this thread.  The game is single player not multiplayer(thank god) so there is nobody playing against you gaining an advantage.  If you don't like snaking then leave auto on or leave off and use some self-control to manually place buildings but not snake. 

I like snaking!  There I said it I'm coming out of the closet!  So quit trying to rain on my snake parade!

(gathers legions of Juggernauts to turn anti-snakers into cannabalistic sushi)

Sorry but it is not flawed design.  This has been the nature of city design since the start of the Elemental series.  The flaw is the AI not being capable of good city design or even placement after all this time.  Currently, the AI is bad in both city and outpost placement as it unleashes hordes of high level monsters.  Fortunately, for the AI, the monsters don't attack their cities very often or as the player you could just sit there and wait for the monsters to win for you.  Though, I still get a giggle out of turn 2 announcements saying so and so civilization was destroyed (because of bad city placement).

You must have an enhanced city building version of the game because I can't snake my cities "ad infinitum".  I have only so many structures that change the cities boundaries the rest are upgrades which have no effect.  I do not see snaking as any sort of exploit when it was designed that way.  As for "gaming the system" I've never understood that being a negative thing.  It is human nature to manipulate the systems that surround us to achieve maximum benefit; it is not breaking the system it is simply making rules work for our benefit.

Sorry again, but it is willpower that stops you from doing something that you can but think is wrong .  If you think snaking is wrong because it gives you an unfair advantage then it is wrong for you to do so just because you can.  Actually, most of us play sub-optimally because were just not very good .  Having said that there are plenty of 4x and wargamers & rpg players who play a game sub-optimally because it may be more fun or challenging to do so.

Having tried to respond to all your points what it really comes down is having fun since it is just a game.  I find the current system fun and you obviously do not.  I have no problem with changes as long as I can mod it back.  I already plan on modding the way piers and lumbers yards work, if it is possible, as the current design makes no sense to me.

Cheers and if you live in the US have a good Thanksgiving

tfmca I've already got a snaking mod that allows you to build piers and logging camps at the appropriate spots already...

https://www.wincustomize.com/explore/elemental_fallen_enchantress/20/

If you don't want to use mods just put these files in the items folder instead. This will allow you to build piers on rivers and logging camps on forests. Brings this back into the game.

Currently the devs do think that snaking is a game design flaw (hence the change they did to those buildings). They are looking for a way to allow reasonable snaking, but not remove it from the game completely. I've always been a proponent of allowing us to build resources on the appropriate spots if the city gets there, but I am not a proponent for the instant highways that they developed with the city stuff. I would prefer it if the cities worked like a road instead of a teleport option. If they can fix a few flaws with the system I would be extra happy with the system.

My two cents:

• Appears biggest gripe is current vanilla snaking won't allow building river or forest improvements if a river or forest is not in one of the tiles immediate to city hub. Parrotmath's mod fixes that, might be a great thing to put back into vanilla.
• I don't reasonably see how the devs could ever program the AI to use proper snaking to take advantage of the map
• I like the current system. You can have it auto, do it manual, w/e floats your boat. I've done both. I like snaking when I want to grab a key resource, make a wall at a chokepoint, or get the rare urge to place my buildings facing a certain way, etc.

So in short, leave it the way it is but consider allowing the building of forest/river improvements via snaking. I find that to be the happy compromise. The player does get an edge over the AI because again, I don't see how the AI could ever be programmed to manage it. But the edge to the player is, in my opinion, immaterial, especially considering the other edges at play...

Here's an edge the player has that is not immaterial - proper usage of strategic spells, especially offensive. I'd rather the devs work on that than this issue. Just my opinion of course.

Good reading the opinions, so opposite but with sense all. I liked more the idea of human skills to use the environment into our benefit. That is a part of us. Willpower may serve to think you can ignore that, and don't use the environment or act in a different way. So ask yourself: If AI could use it, then would it be fair then?

I snake cities mostly at the begining, if I find that can be usefull for resources or dominion. But I don't like the free movement. I use it in a river, because I CANT BUILD ROADS, when the instaroad don't go where I want. But I don't snake long cities to get highways. I tried once, but I don't like. And when I reach a certain number of cities, I don't even care to snake, just autobuild.

Each one, with his willpower and his skills, should be able to express into gameplay. Give more options for that, don't take them out.

cities costing 0 mp really needs to go, that should be an easy and welcome change.

I'd be happy to try a system like parrothmath suggested, where building far from the center is more expensive hammerwise. since you're essentially getting most of the utility of a ZoC building, it seems only fair that you have to pay a comparable cost.

also town hall could use the +zoc and get -15% unrest, then add another upgrade to the monument for +1 ZoC. that you can still get the unrest bonus if you don't want the ZoC effect due to monster lairs.

There's three things I would change:

1. Allow piers and logging camps when the city reaches the appropriate terrain.

2. Allow the bulding of bridges

3. Increase the cost of moving through a city square from 0 to .25 (1/4) without mounted combat and .125 (1/8) with it.  I.e. make it equivalent to the best road.  I'm OK with requiring a building before the city allows 1/8 speeds. 

Tuidjy suggestions are precisely what I like, 1 and 3 are exactly what I would like to see.

Building bridges (do you mean allow cities to build across the river, or do you mean built as a consequence of a road passing through a river)

I was about to tell about the 0 mp, but I don't want the devs remove it. If anyone wants to use, should be fine. I will not, so I don't care. Long cities are ugly, and the free mp don't help to inmersion. So I will just use only what I like.

The pier/loggin camp should be implemented, but with Parrottmath's mod, it is fixed, for those who want. So thank you

I wish someone modded roadbuilding for all pioneers. And with an option to enable/disable the instaroads, that would be just GREAT

You can already snake a city across a river (if it started at a river), it just takes time and money.  I want to make to possible even if you did not start at a river, and to make it look good.

Sometimes a city of mine reaches a river, and that's it.  It cannot grow, and whoever exits it gets stuck.  It's stupid.

For you Tuidjy and all the work you've done. I'll design a building called a bridge that will bridge you across a river. What do you recommend the production cost should be?

A city with a river passing through should be lovely

Alright the river bridge mod is up

https://forums.elementalgame.com/437206

I agree that 0 mp movement is a feature of snaking which really should go.  Unfortunately...

Since the beginning of the WoM journey this has been repeatedly asked for.  I think that there are (unsolvable?) problems with the way the game engine deals with movement.  (Another one is the loss of movement points for units which enter the same location as other units with less movement left.  So moving an army with 1 mp left through a city reduces the mp of all units stationed in the city to 1 mp.  Wtf?)  The developers have been trying to workaround these problems.  My understanding is that they can't figure out a way to get rid of 0 mp multi-tile cities without a rewrite of the engine... and that they don't want to go there. 

Trading all the beauties of multi-tile cities for this is not a good bargain.  Your mileage may differ...

Naughty Kumquat. 

Thanks Parrottmath

Going to give it a try.  See your bridge mod and will try that too.  Thanks for the excellent work!

But zero movement points simplifies the process of mustering units out of a city.  Between the auto-placement of newly created units and the rendering of armies, and the scale of the game, I do not see how this could be made to work.  The active city defense mechanism (where you attack units adjacent to your city) would also radically change.

This could implement the siege mechanism in a round about way. If your armies are on the city tiles, these tiles where the army occupies do not grant you the bonuses of that city. Sit on top of their merchant building and they get no merchant. Also, while sitting on their city no building may take place. There could be added to the mechanic destruction of the improvements. Although, I would prefer instead of descruction, more like damaged (graphically looks torched and needs to be rebuilt but at 1/2 the production cost or something like this. Also, keep the ability to train units, but force these units to automatically be garrisoned in your city.

This keeps the city intact (for the most part), adds sieges (in a sense), actually tactical battles take place at the city center (appropriately), and units can still be trained and rushed to help defend your city for an attacker that likes to just sit on your stuff and take your production away.

I'm fine with these mechanical changes. Although, it's a mute point because the programming might have to be overhauled to implement this mechanically.

Just discovered this thread!

I really don't like crimsongekko's idea of limiting building improvement to your original ZoC, this would leave a ton of resources not exploitable.

This game is still only SP, so basically if it annoys you just let the auto placement do the job for you. This is hardly what we can call an advantage over the AI.

I totally agree with this opinion, and again thanks to parrottmath we have solutions for these now.

Ofc if devs thinks it's a flaw and they "fix it" I do hope they will allow some snaking to be done for us to be able to connect ZoC, grab resources and such.

for me the issue is about "oh crap.  I could build on the river but no essence. I could build on the forest but no food. I could build on the shard but no production. I have 3 average city spots that could become a good city if..." which is why i like "snaking.  And bridges i saw as unneeded until my recent game where i ignorantly built a city on a river by a mountain and it got cornered and could only build 2 buildings.

A good earth magic specialist could fix that mountain problem for you...