Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

Recommended Posts

Posted

Your cities grow over time with a food surplus.

However, your cities will die very quickly if you don't have enough food.

Posted
Your cities grow over time with a food surplus.

However, your cities will die very quickly if you don't have enough food.

The cities don't actually grow. There might be some confusion on this because of the fact that factories and other improvements increase the production value of cities. The little number below the city looks like the population number, but is actually the population + the city improvements.

Posted

Ok, so there is no way to grow your cities, but you can kill their population from missiles, bombing, and food stravation...there is no way to regain that lost population or production?

Posted
Ok, so there is no way to grow your cities, but you can kill their population from missiles, bombing, and food stravation...there is no way to regain that lost population or production?

This is the way things (used) to work:

There was a predefined amount of food on each map, and a predefined population among all the cities. On any map, there needs to be a balance of food and population with an excess amount of food for feeding armies. If populations were allowed to grow, then all players could find themselves in the position where most/all of their food was being spent on the civilian population with no excess for a military. (An odd way to get out of this situation would be to actually starve some of your population, so that you could free-up food for your military.) If populations are allowed to grow indefinitely, then this situation would inevitably happen after a certain number of turns - if no one wins the game first.

Fortunately, the new update (in a few days) will contain a number of food-multiplying technologies. With the new stuff in place, it might be reasonable to allow populations to grow.

Just a side note: Growing populations only make sense in games that take place over long periods of time (like a century), but don't make much sense if the game is supposed to represent a specific war - like the World War 2 - because not much population growth happens in 6 years.

Posted

Well, we have a ruleset supposedly spanning 130 years ;)

Anyway, population should not grow indefinately, but at least should be able to recover slowly. I think.

Posted
Fortunately, the new update (in a few days)

Good news! Is it again the weekend update?

Are you going to implement the desert of a army, if there is not enough food?

Posted
This is the way things (used) to work:

There was a predefined amount of food on each map, and a predefined population among all the cities. On any map, there needs to be a balance of food and population with an excess amount of food for feeding armies. If populations were allowed to grow, then all players could find themselves in the position where most/all of their food was being spent on the civilian population with no excess for a military. (An odd way to get out of this situation would be to actually starve some of your population, so that you could free-up food for your military.) If populations are allowed to grow indefinitely, then this situation would inevitably happen after a certain number of turns - if no one wins the game first.

Fortunately, the new update (in a few days) will contain a number of food-multiplying technologies. With the new stuff in place, it might be reasonable to allow populations to grow.

Just a side note: Growing populations only make sense in games that take place over long periods of time (like a century), but don't make much sense if the game is supposed to represent a specific war - like the World War 2 - because not much population growth happens in 6 years.

New update:D

Possible a new map if possible:rolleyes:

×
×
  • Create New...