Prefontaine Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 (edited) First city 0% Modifier on cost of Infra. Second city 10% Modifier on cost of Infra. Third city 20% Modifier on cost of Infra. Fourth city 30% Modifier on cost of Infra. ... Eleventh City 100% Modifier on cost of Infra. So each city is a little more expensive to build infra in, thus your capital should always have the most infra as it's cheapest to make. And by the time you've 11 cities it's still not that big a hindrance at double price. 10-1000 infra currently costs 2,291,093.18 Doubling that only makes it about 4.6M which is reasonable at the economy you should have at that stage. The modifier only effects the cost of infra in that city. Edited December 13, 2014 by Prefontaine 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 A horrible idea given we have started the final release of the game already, and doesn't seem to add any value. 4 Quote Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pax Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 (edited) Not sure how much I agree with it, simply because costs are already rising exponentially the further to late-game you get. Seems like all this will do is lower the ceiling even further for how far you can grow before it's almost pointless to continue building. Also, it just doesn't really make a lot of sense. Why would my one city, if it was #11, cost more for a highly developed nation to establish than it would cost for some new nation with next to no actual production capacity? It would seem to me that as your cities get more productive and capable, and you're more experienced at construction and expansion, it would be easier to build up a city - not harder. Edited December 13, 2014 by Pax 2 Quote <+JohnHarms> We need more feminists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 Not sure how much I agree with it, simply because costs are already rising exponentially the further to late-game you get. Seems like all this will do is lower the ceiling even further for how far you can grow before it's almost pointless to continue building. Also, it just doesn't really make a lot of sense. Why would my one city, if it was #11, cost more for a highly developed nation to establish than it would cost for some new nation with next to no actual production capacity? It would seem to me that as your cities get more productive and capable, and you're more experienced at construction and expansion, it would be easier to build up a city - not harder. Also let's not ignore the fact that it gives the current people holding cities at high infra a *massive* advantage. Quote Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted December 13, 2014 Author Share Posted December 13, 2014 (edited) Not sure how much I agree with it, simply because costs are already rising exponentially the further to late-game you get. Seems like all this will do is lower the ceiling even further for how far you can grow before it's almost pointless to continue building. Also, it just doesn't really make a lot of sense. Why would my one city, if it was #11, cost more for a highly developed nation to establish than it would cost for some new nation with next to no actual production capacity? It would seem to me that as your cities get more productive and capable, and you're more experienced at construction and expansion, it would be easier to build up a city - not harder. If you want an IC style reason, well it's further from your capital and you've got to pay more to move resources/equipment to build. A 1-2 city nations takes a long time to get to 1000 infra, with 6 cities, I could get a city to 1000 infra in 1-2 days. Later on, probably half a day. So bigger nations can easily continually distance themselves from smaller nations. To adjust for the cities who've already benefitted from this, put the price jump starting at 9 cities which no one currently has, then start slowly back-implimenting it over time. month from now cities 2-4 are effected, 2 months 5-6, 3 months 7-8. Edited December 13, 2014 by Prefontaine 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELPINCHAZO Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 Well to be fair, IC the thing makes sense. A massive nation will have higher administrative costs that should be reflected beyond just he purchase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefferson Davis III Posted December 29, 2014 Share Posted December 29, 2014 No, this would make no sense considering that in real life, it cost less to build small things in a new town than it does to build a new things in big cities. Quote "Head-shots for days" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollysho Posted December 29, 2014 Share Posted December 29, 2014 Really don't like the idea. At some point it will eventually be more practical to hoard infra on one city than to build more cities 1 Quote [22:36:30] <&CMDR_Adama> I want to be spanked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 There's always going to be an advantage to a new city. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted December 30, 2014 Administrators Share Posted December 30, 2014 I like the fact that it would encourage more vertical growth, but I think it's far too late to be changing such a vital mechanic. Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 The encouragement for vertical growth is there. The drastic increases in city cost and seeking the best return on your money will ensure vertical growth. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Yea where we are now, even at 1500 infra per city and 8 cities it would still take nearly 9 days to save up for a new city. Think that's encouragement enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.