|
Author
|
|
Topic: Slow City Growth? |  |
|
Zardos
Chieftain
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Nov 2000
|
 |
posted April 27, 2001 08:39
   | 
 |
 |  |
Looking at the new screen shots I noticed that the size of the city was relatively small for how much irrigation there was (I'm assuming that the "swamp-like" terrain overlaying the plains and grasslands is irrigation). Given that much irrigation, those cities should be at least size five or six, and probably more like size eight, by Civ2 standards. Does this mean that city size will be reduced dramatically?Now, now--I know that these are pre-(pre-pre-, you get the point) release graphics and concepts, but it seems to me that city growth would be one of the first features they would tackle in code... |
The diplomat
Prince
muncie,IN USA
Sep 1999
|
|
posted April 27, 2001 10:54
|
|
| |
remember that a settler cost 2 pop now. So those cities had to create settlers to create the other ones you see, so they lost some pop. |
airdrik
Prince
Boise, ID, USA
Oct 2000
|
|
posted April 27, 2001 11:36
|
|
| |
If you ever play on any of the harder levels on civ 2 (esp. Diety) you would not think that to be the case. In a game I am playing right now (on diety level) I am in the process of building hoover dam, and my largest city is size 9. Also their gov is despotism which almost means slow growth. That combined with the 2 pop settler means that they are just where they should be in terms of growth. | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
