Mr Restius

June 2084, Off the Aredan Coast Head Conch Restius: "During the night, Ground Zero from the Enterprise decided to shell the Aredan beach near Philippi, and our [hermit] crabs are now thankful about their new homes. However, the shelling also destroyed one of our sand castles, which was just dirty. Therefore, HERMIT submits a Recognition of War to The Enterprise due to the actions of Ground Zero. (Who knew Ground Zero could be a cause and not just an effect!?) HERMIT's Admiral Dorsal fin-ished shuffling the deck of cards and has split it evenly at the table. The cards are ready to be flipped and we're ready to play a game of War!" In Summary: Who wants Cheesecake?

Ah, thank you very much for that insight! Naturally, my question to these statements is why is infra considered such a bad thing to build beyond x amount. I wouldn't consider it a reward, but rather a different way to play the game, aka another "spec". In my opinion, I would think there should be some reasons and benefits to growing your cities to house more population and expand, as that is what cities typically do in the real-world. I guess I'll just need to learn more about infra levels, especially at higher nation scores. But that is a discussion/lesson for another time. Great points, thank you very much for the feedback. It seems like so far, most are against this idea for a variety of reasons. So I guess this can be shelved

In growing my cities, I've begun to wonder, what is the point of going past 2K infra? I remember this has been a suggested limit since I've played the game for several years (on and off a lot). As it stands, I can increase 1 city by 1K infra and 1k land, increasing it by 1/2 its size, and turn it into an economic powerhouse. Or, I can buy a new city with the standard infra/land. Now, naturally, I would prefer the first option. Increasing improvements to my existing city vs buying a new city is cheaper, and that doesn't even include getting the new city to 2k infra, buying land, and improvements. The Concern Unfortunately, there's one crucial flaw in this plan that is pertinent to PnW. I don't get more military. My score increases and I become "in range" for players who have less infra with more cities. Now, if I did this for one or two cities, the range probably wouldn't increase that much. But if I did it for all my cities, it could be worse. For example, let's say we have Player A with 14 cities with 3,000 infra each for 42,000 infra altogether. Then, if we have Player B who builds their cities with 2k infra each up to 42,000 infra, they would have 21 cities. That's a huge difference when it comes to max military. Player A: Max Military for 42,000 infra with 14 Cities at 3k infra: Soldiers: 210,000 Tanks: 17,500 Aircraft: 1,050 Ships: 210 Player B: Max Military for 42,000 infra with 21 cities at 2k infra: Soldiers: 315,000 Tanks: 26,250 Aircraft: 1,575 Ships: 315 So my question/suggestion is wouldn't it make sense to allow the option to increase the number of military improvements based on infrastructure, land, population, or a combination of all three. The Base Idea: Increase Max Amount of Buildings Based on Infrastructure While I don't have a "This is the way" thought, here is the base idea that comes to mind: This would be one of the more simpler solutions, but, simply allowing the number of military improvements to go beyond 5/5/5/3 based on the amount of infrastructure. You could start out with a set number of pre-defined military improvements, as mentioned in this suggestion, and then increase the numbers as they go. So, for example, if every city started out with 2 Barracks, 2 Factories, 2 Airfields, 1 Drydock, you could increase them via the following infrastructure levels: Barracks: 3rd Barracks is available at 1,000 infra and a new Barracks is available every 250 infra thereafter. Factories: 3rd Factory is available at 1,000 infra and a new Factory is available every 500 infra thereafter. Airfields: 3rd Airfield is available at 1,000 infra and a new Airfield is available every 500 infra thereafter (you could also make this every 750 infra to decrease the amount of airpower if that's an issue). Drydock: 2nd Drydock is available at 1,000 infra and a new Drydock is available every 1000 infra thereafter. This would then change the previous statistics to: Player A: Max Military for 42,000 infra with 14 Cities at 3k infra: Soldiers: 378,000 Tanks: 24,500 Aircraft: 1,470 Ships: 350 Player B: Max Military for 42,000 infra with 21 cities at 2k infra: Soldiers: 315,000 Tanks: 26,250 Aircraft: 1,575 Ships: 315 This would give Player A an advantage at 3k infra with soldiers and ships, but less of an advantage in tanks and aircraft. The Reason My reason for this suggestion, is that it could help to open up new ways to "build your nation". As it stands, there seems to only a few ways to build your nation to maximize usefulness, but restricts the feeling of being able to build your nation as you wish. By allowing nations to increase the amount of infra and military available in their cities, I'm hoping it could help introduce new builds. Using the example above, you could have some nations that are solider/ship heavy while others are tank/aircraft heavy. The Final Thought There are some other thoughts were previously mentioned that could be beneficial as well, such as the mention of the Military Fort in this discussion. This would essentially amount to new military improvements unlocking as your city gets bigger. Additionally, aside from using just infrastructure as a base, you could also implement improvements based on land or population. but that would require a lot more complex changes and thoughts than necessary at this time.