Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«27 »
  • Locked thread
Communist Zombie
Nov 1, 2011


DrSunshine posted:

I'd really love being able to micro-manage stuff, or at least have the option to. I just know I'd spend hours and hours fiddling with fare prices on the bus line, the hourly cost of parking meters, and various city ordinances. Having different sorts of traffic -- pedestrian, bike, rail, and car, like Baronjutter proposed-- would be really interesting!

I can emphatically say I do not want this at all. The never ending need to fiddle with prices in Cities in Motion 2 has turned me off that line compeletely. Or even like the ability to set individual ice levels in drink stations in Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, why should I care? In fact if you confirm that there will be meaningless fiddly poo poo like this that cause me to instantly lose interest and not look back. Ive had enough of good games with bad design to tolerate playing another one.

Whats that design principle called where you only add in enough detail as neccessary, as the extra detail will become either busywork, meaningless in the grand scale, and/or can be done better by the computer thus detracting from the game.

Dont let this seem like im against in depth stuff, Im not. Im only against useless/meaningless depth like fare prices, if you have to include them abstract it to high, medium, low, and free. Contrast it against height restrictions and setbacks, being fiddly in those areas is acceptable since it has a direct visual impact on areas.


And this might be good for later modeling, this report did a comprehensive analysis of over 50 'fixed guideway' transit systems from 1974 to 2008 to create an accurate ridership forecasting model. They also released the actual model as a spreadsheet, giving you ridership estimates for a line aswell as the entire system.

Communist Zombie fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 00:10

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Nition
Feb 25, 2006

You really want to know?


anselm_eickhoff posted:

Ok, convinced, but it might take a while since actual undo will complicate the code quite a bit.
(I have to keep stuff that is destroyed, and everything dependent on it, isntead of just forgetting about it, for example)

I also think undo is a fairly vital component. Saves just aren't fast enough when you're fiddling with minor stuff or you accidentally place the wrong road etc - plus you might not have saved for a while when you mess something up.

You seem like an excellent programmer going by stuff like your modular save system, so you probably know this already but in case you don't, you'd normally use something like the Command pattern for undo support. That is, whatever the user does is done via a "command" object, which always has a method for executing the command and another for rolling it back. You keep all recent commands on a stack (or list), so you can just push the stack each time a command is issued and pop it each time you need to undo. A destroy command would remember the thing it destroyed so it could restore it etc.

Obviously that could still take some major rewriting, but it'd be easier now than in six months.

Edit: Re the above post, I'm also against micro-management, especially if it should be unnecessary. Personally I feel that whenever there's a logical best option, the game should try to take it automatically. It's like Godus making players click to collect mana: The game could easily collect mana automatically; it's just there to hide that there isn't much else to do.

There isn't always one best option for something, but sometimes you can still abstract things out as Communist Zombie says. e.g. The player can adjust a bus frequency slider instead of setting the whole bus timetable for the week or whatever.

Nition fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 00:31

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


loving with fares is probably the main reason I never got into CiM2. It's just some numbers and there's fairly objectively a "correct" optimal setting, let a computer or an accountant do that.

Mecca-Benghazi
Mar 31, 2012



Well, it could be a thing where there's a level that the computer sets it at, but you get the option to choose your own levels or tinker with it. Might be a lot of extra work for something admittedly only some people would use. Sounds like it'd be a good mod though.

*PUNCH*
Jul 8, 2007
naked on the internet


anselm_eickhoff posted:

No, they don't overlap... yet. There is mixed use commerical/residential, but that is its own zone type.
Maybe freely overlapping zones like you describe are a nicer solution, but I have to come up with a non-annoying UI for that.

So glad you've already thought of this. Either way would work, and I can see your UI problem. If you can figure out a good way to do it, my sense is that overlaps might be easier to deal with ultimately. Plus the flexibility of "open zones" would leave things ripe for unintended consequences. Especially when developing a city center, it would be really cool to have a mixed high-density commercial/residential area, with apartments/businesses popping up due to specific location (for apartments: waterfront views, less street traffic, easy subway access, proximity to parks and nice restaurants but not offices.)

... Now I'm going to blue-sky a bit as everyone seems to do in this thread, except about high density. It would seem to me the best way to create these sorts of dynamics, sadly, would be due to a "rent" system. Rent would be a fluctuating number, and factors included in the rent would differ between types of zone (much like in real life.) So, like the aforementioned for apartments; for shops, high foot traffic would be a plus; for offices, easy access. Everything within the locale is factored into the rent, but with things weighted depending on the nature of the prospective property owner.

Maybe living in the city has made me cynical, but it would seem to me a lot of what makes our cities change boils down to the rent. Which is, of course, ultimately a manifestation of everything else, compressed into one ugly number. I'd love to see cycles of gentrification and urban blight emulated in this game if at all possible. Sofar the dynamics in the game are a series of excellent supply/demand relationships. A rent system interacting with this could lay the groundwork for the densities which define cities.

As far as micro goes... sliders would work well for most stuff, and it'd be nice for schools and hospitals to have an "auto" mode where funding varies on the number of people using the service. So, optional micro with the potential for soul-crushing austerity.

DrSunshine
Mar 23, 2009



*PUNCH* posted:

As far as micro goes... sliders would work well for most stuff, and it'd be nice for schools and hospitals to have an "auto" mode where funding varies on the number of people using the service. So, optional micro with the potential for soul-crushing austerity.

Yeah this is what I meant when I said the "option" for fiddly micro stuff. Just uncheck the "auto adjust" box if you want to tweak the micromanagement things.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


Yeah that's exactly the sort of thing I was alluding to when I said I really hope for a "believable" economic system. Land value/rent is what drives construction and what TYPE of construction. I don't know how detailed shops and commerce will get, simcity 4 had 3 wealth levels of retail which was nice. But if rent is too high, certain types of uses just won't appear. That industrial building that was at the edge of downtown 20 years ago is now enveloped in a new trendy high-wealth area, it's taxes are going to shoot up, and thus its rents. "Market forces" are going to drive it out and have it replaced with condos. That is of course if the zoning allows it. If the zoning doesn't allow it, well then its land isn't going to get too over-valued.

That's another big key in land value. It can be very lot by lot specific. For instance, a lot zoned only to allow 4 stories and 3:1 density is going to remain low no matter how high value the area is, because no one will pay more for the lot than they can get out of it. Up-zone that lot to allow high density and suddenly its value has gone wayyy up. Often land-owners make far more profit getting the city to up-zone land than the developer does building the building. Of course even low-zoned land does go up in value, simply on the speculation that the new owner could successfully get the land up-zoned, but that can be dangerous speculation and I've seen lots sit empty for 10+ years after failed attempts. Often when you see an empty lot in a dense city and think "why the hell isn't this lot developed?? There's sky scrapers down the street and everywhere else is wall to wall 4-6 story buildings!" it's often a case where a developer or investor has screwed them selves and are waiting for better conditions or a new city government. For instance a developer buys a piece of land at a price they know they can't make a profit building anything on in the current zoning with the intention of getting the city to grant them a re-zoning. Previous lots nearby managed to do it so it seems safe, but there is a slightly different city council now so who knows. The developer buys the land, spends a huge sum getting a design package together, talks to neighbours, and finally does a presentation at city hall asking for the re-zoning. Ah well you see because of the recent re-zonings, some nearby residents are mad that their nice neighbourhood of 4 story historic buildings are being over-shadowed by sky-scrapers and the new council wants their votes and support. The council votes against the re-zoning and tells the developer to build something "more in keeping with the scale of the neighbourhood" but the developer bought the land at a price where a 4 story building can't make a profit. Oooops!! So, the developer sits on the land. Sometimes in spite (enjoy your vacant hole!) and sometimes to wait it out. Maybe a few years later he'll submit a slightly smaller project and he'll know to work harder on winning over the locals. Maybe it will sit empty for 10 years.

I don't expect or even want that much detail in the game, but it shows how important zoning and land values are to an area and what buildings can develop.

But really these sort of musings are useless until we know the core of how both your economic/construction system will work (we have hints so far based on your citizens going to work, shopping, needing products) and how your land value system will work.

nielsm
Jun 1, 2009




Fallen Rib

Speaking of desirability factors, is noise pollution something worth putting in? While it tends to follow air pollution levels, it also tends to fall based on different factors. The first row of houses next to a railway is going to receive large amounts of noise pollution, but even the next row over will be getting much less. If I was to model this, I would probably use three "maps", one of noise generation, one of noise shadowing (tall, solid structures) and a calculated one of actual noise pollution per area.

Taeke
Feb 2, 2010



All this talk about mixed zones made me think about something else I've thought about some time ago, namely not so much mixed zones but mixed buildings. In real life you often see the first floor of a building being commercial (shops, restaurants, etc) with the higher floors being residential. I don't know how feasible and/or desirable that would be in a game, but it would add some more realism and allow me to recreate my hometown where the city center is as much residential as it is commercial, the first being on top of the latter instead of alternating buildings for each.

Whatever, just a thought.

nielsm
Jun 1, 2009




Fallen Rib

Taeke posted:

All this talk about mixed zones made me think about something else I've thought about some time ago, namely not so much mixed zones but mixed buildings.

I think that's exactly the point of mixed zones, to allow that type of buildings.
Of course in real life they occur more often than not.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


nielsm posted:

Speaking of desirability factors, is noise pollution something worth putting in? While it tends to follow air pollution levels, it also tends to fall based on different factors. The first row of houses next to a railway is going to receive large amounts of noise pollution, but even the next row over will be getting much less. If I was to model this, I would probably use three "maps", one of noise generation, one of noise shadowing (tall, solid structures) and a calculated one of actual noise pollution per area.

I think this is something important to take into account. Maybe combine "noise" with other undesirable factors. People don't like living right next to a busy highway because it's noisy and smelly and unpleasant to look at. People don't like living next to a busy railway because it's noisy and can shake your house. People don't like living next to a popular club or pub because every night it's noisy drunks. This can be the downside to dense mixed zoning, some people can't stand the noise, the hustle and bustle. This is why I think it's important to have randomized "types" of people move to the city with slightly different tastes and needs. Your dense walkable core will attract a certain type of person, your quiet residential areas another type, and your suburbs yet another sort of person. You can absolutely focus on certain types of forms of housing, but people forced into a sort of housing they don't like won't be a happy person. But of course the type of housing available in your city will greatly skew the type of person moving to your city. No one moves to Manhatten wanting a quiet suburban house. No one moves to Milton Keynes wanting a walkable cosmopolitan city, yet in both cases I'm sure there's unhappy people trapped there wishing they could move out or wishing the city had a place for them. Eventually those people DO move away, when they can.

This is a big change happening in cities right now. Younger professionals don't want to live in an isolated car-centric suburb, they want to live in proper neighbourhoods and proper cities. So many big companies are abandoning their massive suburban "campuses" and moving into more expensive digs in the city because they need to compete for talent and talent doesn't want to live and work in nowhere places. So imagine you're playing a game of citybound, you want to develop a tech industry but your industries are having a hard time attracting and retaining workers. You click on the business or get an alert that "high tech industry is having problems attracting workers". Maybe you can then go into some deeper demand info and see that your city is rated very poorly in some key areas a lot of these workers are looking for. Your working-class paradise of cheap single family homes and easy driving has kept your factory workers happy for a long time, but there's a growing number of people who want something a little more urban. They want to be able to walk to an over-priced cafe, they want a transit system, some of them even prefer apartment living to home-owning!

The reverse can also be true. If you try to create some perfect suburb-free city, the type of people who strongly value home-ownership, yards, and quiet are going to be unhappy in your city and either not move there or move out when they can. If these people are important to your economy, it can be bad news.

And to keep track of all this can be something as simple as some graphs or feedback system. You could click on some sort of detailed satisfaction information and find out what about your city is making people happy and what isn't based on their top issues, sometimes that can be contradictory. You could find 820 people are upset that their housing is too noisy, 550 people complain traffic is a problem, 260 people say cycling feels too dangerous, 32 business owners say they have a staff shortage, 145 people can't find a job, 360 people feel crowded in their homes, 120 people want more urban housing, and so on and so on, this list could be very big but sorted by number of complaints.

So you can look at this big list of what and how many people are complaining about things and get an idea on what to address. People are feeling crowded? Maybe build a quiet suburb with lots of green space. At the same time people want more urban housing? Ok, let's up-zone some areas downtown to allow for higher density residential construction, and also hope that some of the people that want more open-space move out of the urban housing into the new suburbs to free up space in the core. A lot of people feel cycling is too dangerous? I guess we've got the budget to make some bike lanes, but the big cost is going to be reducing car-lanes which might screw up our traffic.

So you do your plan and check the feedback again. Almost no one is complaining about their housing, that is good! Cyclists are more happy and my traffic charts show the mode-chare of cycling and walking has gone up. But now a top issue is traffic! Everyone's complaining about traffic because those bike lanes caused some problems an everyone in your new suburb drives. Maybe we need to keep investing in more cycling infrastructure to try to solve the traffic problem by converting cars to bikes, but this is a big change and if not done right can just make traffic worse. Maybe we need to expand some alternate roads, but that means some quiet 2-lane roads with parking become busy 4 lane roads without parking, people who live and work along those routes may get upset. Perhaps its time to expand our transit system? Build a tram with its own right-of-way and take away even more car lanes? Buses that mix with traffic but can also get stuck in it? An expensive elevated or underground metro?? Can my city support those? Choices! Information! Feedback!

Sorry about the walls of text, but I'm passionate about cities!

Baronjutter fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 17:35

Subyng
May 4, 2013


I love reading your walls of text Baronjutter, don't stop!

anselm_eickhoff
Mar 1, 2014


Taeke posted:

All this talk about mixed zones made me think about something else I've thought about some time ago, namely not so much mixed zones but mixed buildings.

Mixed buildings are already in the game. So far there is only a gound floor commercial / upper floors residential building that appears in the commercial/residential mixed zone naturally, but all kinds of combinations are possible.

Also, Baronjutter, I also love your walls of text! I might not have time to always reply in depth, but I read and appreciate all of it! Not only do you know a lot about cities, but you have a good understanding of how their systems could be represented in a fun way in a game!

anselm_eickhoff fucked around with this message at Aug 9, 2014 around 16:41

Rotten Cookies
Nov 11, 2008

gosh! i like both the islanders and the rangers!!! :^)


Subyng posted:

I love reading your walls of text Baronjutter, don't stop!

Thirding this. poo poo has been makin me think of my city in a different way

Communist Zombie
Nov 1, 2011


anselm_eickhoff posted:

Mixed buildings are already in the game. So far there is only a gound floor commercial / upper floors residential building that appears in the commercial/residential mixed zone naturally, but all kinds of combinations are possible.

Just want to chime in that mixed use industrial is a real thing, was kind of a surprise to me when i found out. Its basically small scale manufacturing firms that are too loud to use office space and cant afford retail.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


It's also a thing to mix industrial with residential. I've seen small live-work units with a residence above or in the back/front and some sort of industry below. Obviously no one's going to build an apartment above an oil refinery or some heavy industry, but light industry and crafting absolutely. Historically too a lot of people would "live above the shop" but the "shop" wasn't always retail, sometimes it was some crafting or light manufacturing. I've also seen new versions of this where you'll have some ocean-front condo towers that have some marine related industries in the water side of the podium. Maybe a marine parts distributor, or a small boat builder, stuff like that. It's absolutely possible to mix residential with industrial, it's just a bit rare and realllly depends on the "industry".

Which really leads to the question of how the game will handle actual businesses. Will it be super generic like the simcity series or will it try to actually model different types of companies like Cities XL did. For instance, a marine parts company might be an industry, but a night club is a commercial zone, which would you rather live next to?

In real life there are far more than R C and I zones. So far we've seen Citybound clearly has more than that, but I'd love to see something a little more detailed, or at least the OPTION to get more detailed. SC4 almost had it by having dirty, manufacturing, and high tech, but what it didn't quite do was add zones for them, forcing the player to get rather creative to control. In reality cities have far more control. They can zone commercial areas for only certain types of businesses, for example shops and services, but not nightclubs or theaters (basically nothing too noisy at night). Also, the line between "commercial" and "industrial" is very unclear. An office building is clearly "C", a factory is clearly "I", but what about a cabinetry shop? It has a retail front for people to come in and order cabinets and see a showroom, but they also have a large workshop and CNC milling machines. Is that C or I? What about a car repair shop? What about a building materials business? The line can be very unclear! Also what does a grocery store and an office building have in common? Why are they lumped together? In some ways we've been brainwashed since the first Simcity into this RCI thinking, but it's far too simplistic.

What I'd love to see is the buildings (or tenants of buildings) divided into many classes of uses. Obviously not as many as an actual zoning guide would have, but a fair number. Then allow the player to toggle them on or off for their zones. The game would come with enough basic pre-set zones that anyone familiar with city building games can get a city up and running, but have the ability to create and name new zones as well. So say you want to create a downtown district where nearly anything goes. You allow office, you allow retail, office, entertainment, services, hotels, residential, and for the hell of it even warehouses. You of course also are able to set things like maximum density, maximum height, and setbacks because how can one really shape a city without such controls? You set unlimited density, unlimited height, and 0 setback, lets get dense!! You name this zone "downtown 1", pick a colour, pick a pattern (or the game randomly generates) and start plopping the zone down. If conditions are right, you'll get any of the listed uses and in any combination the "ai developer" decides to build. You at first actually do get some small warehouses but they quickly get priced out as density and land value go up. Of course no one is forced to set up custom zones, new players are not overwhelmed, but as they learn the game they will yearn to have more control, and that's where custom zones come in.

!!Custom Zone Idea Alert!!
I've seen actual zoning maps where there just aren't enough colours or patterns to clearly show every zone type. So what they do is actually make a little hatch made up of the zone's name. So in the above example you'd get a little diagonal hatch made up of the word "downtown-1" over and over. This allows for nearly unlimited numbers of zones and very clear identification, specially for those of us who are a bit colour blind. It could easily be an option to toggle on and off.

anselm_eickhoff
Mar 1, 2014


Just a heads up:

No update tomorrow, but I will try a development/Q&A livestream! Starting 4PM GMT

(I'm linking there so I have only one place to update when I need to change infos regarding the stream).

If you won't be able to make it, but have a question that you really really want to have answered personally, post it here and I will answer it on stream when I have time.

Shibawanko
Feb 13, 2013



anselm_eickhoff posted:

Just a heads up:

No update tomorrow, but I will try a development/Q&A livestream! Starting 4PM GMT

(I'm linking there so I have only one place to update when I need to change infos regarding the stream).

If you won't be able to make it, but have a question that you really really want to have answered personally, post it here and I will answer it on stream when I have time.

Do you plan to have countryside elements along with the city stuff? Like it would be cool to be able to build farms, rivers and forests and small villages. I can already see myself plotting some dirt roads and watching tractors block car traffic on purpose (they always do).

nielsm
Jun 1, 2009




Fallen Rib

anselm_eickhoff posted:

Just a heads up:

No update tomorrow, but I will try a development/Q&A livestream! Starting 4PM GMT

(I'm linking there so I have only one place to update when I need to change infos regarding the stream).

If you won't be able to make it, but have a question that you really really want to have answered personally, post it here and I will answer it on stream when I have time.

I'll be at work/on my way home at that time, but if you could talk about landscape, in particular hilly terrain, water, and flowing water, that'd be cool. Only SimCity 2000 really had something akin to flowing water, which was somewhat faked, and it's one of the elements I've missed in SimCity 4. I realize it's hard to do right, and you may very well have to go full Dwarf Fortress/Toady One on it to do it "right".
More importantly, the influence of terrain, levels, perhaps even ground/soil types, on construction, costs and desirability.
If it's something you are not doing, just a few words on why would be appreciated

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


Shibawanko posted:

Do you plan to have countryside elements along with the city stuff? Like it would be cool to be able to build farms, rivers and forests and small villages. I can already see myself plotting some dirt roads and watching tractors block car traffic on purpose (they always do).

We've got farming already shown in most of the demos. My only worry is that so far farming is just something a city needs to feed its people. Not all cities have farming near them (let alone self sufficient) and tons of small towns export food. But I'm sure we'll get an import/export system so we can make true farming towns. I'd love to just have a map dotted with a few villages (if maps are 20x20 that's loving huge, enough for like 16 or so villages and all the fields).

Stuff like that does make me yearn for some sort of single-player region/trading system. Where my farming village map can help feed my big city map for example.

Baronjutter fucked around with this message at Jul 14, 2014 around 19:35

Shibawanko
Feb 13, 2013



Well, I saw that there were farms, but I meant more like something like SC4's region system, with entire huge areas being countryside and getting to decorate them with small villages here and there, and ploppable details.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


I'm wondering if the maps them selves will just be huge enough that regions won't matter so much. The demo map he's been showing off is 20x20. What was the biggest map in sc4, like 4x4 ?

nielsm
Jun 1, 2009




Fallen Rib

Baronjutter posted:

I'm wondering if the maps them selves will just be huge enough that regions won't matter so much. The demo map he's been showing off is 20x20. What was the biggest map in sc4, like 4x4 ?

Yeah, the small maps in SC4 are supposed to be 1x1 km, so the largest would be 4x4.

DrSunshine
Mar 23, 2009



Baronjutter posted:

I'm wondering if the maps them selves will just be huge enough that regions won't matter so much. The demo map he's been showing off is 20x20. What was the biggest map in sc4, like 4x4 ?

Did he ever mention the scaling? What's the size of that 20x20 map in real world terms? 20 km x 20 km?

nielsm
Jun 1, 2009




Fallen Rib

Actually, I didn't even bother checking...

But he's still streaming. Is that 5 hours by now?


(Why is it a lesson in GLSL pixel shaders?)

nielsm fucked around with this message at Jul 15, 2014 around 17:05

queeb
Jun 10, 2004

m

He totally just chose my color suggestion in the livestream. I'm famous now.

KillHour
Oct 28, 2007

Wake up and
smell the murder.


I made a quick mockup for a possible way to do mixed zoning.



I'm not sure how colorblind friendly it is, but I have an easy time telling them apart. As for how it would work, clicking with the zone selected would add that zone to the area. Ctrl-clicking would remove only that zoning type. Alt-clicking would replace the existing zoning type. The remove zone tool would remove all zoning.

Density could be shown with line thickness or spacing.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


Any good info in the live stream for those rare people that have to work on tuesdays?

nimper
Jun 19, 2003

livin' in a hopium den

Baronjutter posted:

Any good info in the live stream for those rare people that have to work on tuesdays?

He's working on developing a pollution system right now, so that's kind of cool.

Infected Mushroom
Nov 4, 2009


It's archiving on Twitch (http://www.twitch.tv/ae_play/profile/pastBroadcasts) so you can watch it later and skip around to the QA stuff, but I imagine someone will post a summary on Reddit when the stream's over.

nielsm
Jun 1, 2009




Fallen Rib

KillHour posted:

I made a quick mockup for a possible way to do mixed zoning.



I'm not sure how colorblind friendly it is, but I have an easy time telling them apart. As for how it would work, clicking with the zone selected would add that zone to the area. Ctrl-clicking would remove only that zoning type. Alt-clicking would replace the existing zoning type. The remove zone tool would remove all zoning.

Density could be shown with line thickness or spacing.

I think lines like that becomes too busy on screen.
My own suggestion is raster dots, something like this:



The size of the dots would signify the density. This would be a zone with rather high residential density, and lower commercial density.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


I thought my text idea was a good one and colour-blind friendly

These dots and hatches all look like those colour-blind test patterns. This is very triggering.

nielsm
Jun 1, 2009




Fallen Rib

Baronjutter posted:

I thought my text idea was a good one and colour-blind friendly

These dots and hatches all look like those colour-blind test patterns. This is very triggering.

Yeah, text hatching is probably just plain better.

Loren1350
Mar 30, 2007



And you won't have to listen to chat.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


That live-stream was awesome, I was bummed out I missed it but I managed to catch the end of it. Did not expect it to go 7 hours!! I'll have to go back and watch what I missed. Well maybe not 7 hours worth.

Polikarpov
Jun 1, 2013

STICK TO BUILDING TRACTORS, KHARKOVITE SCUM

I'd like to have a feature where you can paint neighborhood zones on the map for administrative purposes... Like assigning city services like police patrols by neighborhood or comparing resident satisfaction with how things are going in the city. Glitzy Woodholly may be a good neighborhood but Neo-Compton needs some help with x, y and z for instance.

ExtraNoise
Apr 11, 2007



nielsm posted:

I think lines like that becomes too busy on screen.
My own suggestion is raster dots, something like this:



The size of the dots would signify the density. This would be a zone with rather high residential density, and lower commercial density.

I love this idea. What if the dots were simple geometric shapes to help make it colorblind friendly? Circles, diamonds, triangles, and pentagons +'s?

ExtraNoise fucked around with this message at Jul 16, 2014 around 06:32

Shibawanko
Feb 13, 2013



Baronjutter posted:

I'm wondering if the maps them selves will just be huge enough that regions won't matter so much. The demo map he's been showing off is 20x20. What was the biggest map in sc4, like 4x4 ?

I love the idea of regions and wish they'd be included, honestly. 20x20 km is nice and big for a city, but I'd still like to be able to link multiple cities of that size together.

fspades
Jun 2, 2013



Baronjutter posted:

I'm wondering if the maps them selves will just be huge enough that regions won't matter so much. The demo map he's been showing off is 20x20. What was the biggest map in sc4, like 4x4 ?

20x20 is pretty huge. Big enough to accurately model a medium to large-ish city, including some of its suburbs. Not enough to model whole regions and the largest of largest cities, though. Personally, I'd be very happy with it as long as agricultural land is not required for the city to develop.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

anselm_eickhoff
Mar 1, 2014


fspades posted:

20x20 is pretty huge. Big enough to accurately model a medium to large-ish city, including some of its suburbs. Not enough to model whole regions and the largest of largest cities, though. Personally, I'd be very happy with it as long as agricultural land is not required for the city to develop.

The map size right now is actually 50km x 50km

  • Locked thread
«27 »