28-02-2000 06:17									#1
	EC3 New Idea #36 - Different Levels of Cities Got spare money?

by Napoleon I

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>How about having different levels of cities, say a village, a town, a city, and a megapolis. These levels would have progressively greater radii so that they could gather more resources, and the improvements that one can build would also be dependent on the type of city. For example, cathedrals would only be built in a town or above, while superhighways could only exist in a megapolis.

Furthermore, the cities would change status as they grow in population, so that any city below size three is a village, city under size seven is a town and so forth.

I realize that this would cause a problem in the modern times, but I think that a solution can exist. For example a city founded by an engineer instead of a settler could begin at size three or four and immediately achieve the status of a city. Meanwhile, the engineer would also be more expensive to build than a settler.

<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

	28-02-2000 07:33									#2
	Inflate your Upload Space

I dunno.... A huge city like New York probably gets food from around the world, mainly from within the US I suppose, I guess there is some connection between size and support radii, a small village wont go 100 miles out of the way to chop trees, how bout this, 4 levels of city

starting with: (S=square within support radii, C=City)
S
SCS
S

the the S's expand one out for every 8 in city size? Maybe Sanitation improvements should drive this more than population expansion...

after some thought, I SECOND THIS!

	29-02-2000 12:51									#3
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

On one hand, political control doesn't strictly depend on city size. In medieval Europe a noble family might control lands separated by scores or even hundreds of miles without a big "capital city." Other political or cultural systems probably offer similar examples.

On the other hand, if Civ3 allows fractional values for resources then some modification to resource values could be applied depending on distance, transportation, and perhaps city size. Medieval Europe had very little in the way of all-weather roads, so the widely separated lands would be penalized to some degree.

So I agree with making a model which results in practical limits for smaller cities but not to arbitrary limits.

	09-03-2000 06:40									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

<strong> Final Draft </strong>

How about having different levels of cities, say a village, a town, a city, and a megapolis. These levels would have progressively greater radii so that they could gather more resources, and the improvements that one can build would also be dependent on the type of city. For example, cathedrals would only be built in a town or above, while superhighways could only exist in a megapolis.

The cities would change status based on two main factors: population growth, and certain city improvements. For example, any town size eleven or above with an aqueduct will become a city, or any city of size seventeen or above with a sewer system will become a megapolis.

The city radius of the settlement will increase as the settlement increases in status, however it will only grow to a certain limit. The highest level, megapolis, for example will be able to gather resources from squares that are four or five squares away, but not more.

To remedy potential problems in the modern times and make cities built late in the game equally viable I propose the following solution. A city founded by an engineer instead of a settler could begin at size three or four and immediately achieve the status of a city. Meanwhile, the engineer would also be more expensive to build than a settler.


------------------
Napoleon I