Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2809286849
That said I'm not sure the guide explains in detail the point you quoted.
The more pop the more food is used by pop. So when both towns are merged the merged pop request more food than sum of food requested by each town.
The guide should provide some comment on that.
Example:
- In Civ6 each pop i believe consumes 2 food. If you have 18pops the city must produce at least 36 food else you start losing pops. Any excess, as you know, is being used to create a new pop.
- In HK this is not the case. For 10 pop you will need 85 food but for 20 pop you will need 220 food. The exact formula for food consumption is 0.25 * P^2 + 6 * P where P = pops. This is one pain point for the game, at least for me. And i dont think it makes sense.
So, it is not due to the lack of infrastructure that you got -300 food but due to the way food consumption is calculated.
There's a max number of towns, it makes sense marge isn't just the addition of two towns.
It's since long it's clear 4X need a marge mechanic to avoid boredom late game empires with excessive micro/small management.
For me HK is finally the first to target the problem really, no perfect design, but at least one making sense on that aspect.
Then for pop as far I know any civ don't have a linear scaling of pop otherwise it would be faster and faster.
Im' not saying HK choice is the perfect choice, just that it's just different and it's a game managing max number of towns and towns merging, a constraint that hasn't any civ alas.
For example in civ6 a welcome town merging would be a lot too trivial by making the new town the sum of the two towns, this would destroy the max number of town design.
Moreover your math doesn't show that even in civ6 pop increase isn't linear, civ6 pop food rule is just symbolic, a detail that changes nothing which isn't a great design.
This is not an issue but just a different way to do pop growth.
In CIV you need more excess food after every pop to get the next pop in the same time. +2 excess food will take 12 turns to go from 1 -> 2 pops, but 50 turns to go from 9 -> 10
Each pop uses 2 food. Which means each new pop, without increasing food supply, will considerably longer to get the next pop.
In HK, each pop eats more food, the more pops you have by 0.25. But in HK you always get the next pop with the same excess food. If you have 50 excess food, you need 2.02 turns (on normal) for a new pop, regardless if the city has 1 pop or 200 pops.
The average player does not care about the math of pop creation. Eventually a new pop will appear, let the game figure this out and display a slider. What he/she cares is how much food is needed to feed the pops, in case he/she loses a farm due to an enemy pillage or a meteor or whatever.
In HK its the other way around. You need to know the math about pop food consumption and ignore pop growth since its always the same as per your example.
Which approach is more user friendly?
I guess it is not random that civ is so popular (tens of thousands till today). They have these things figured out ages ago.
Implementing the Civ approach is basically not possible without hard limiting the district amount.
But ok, maybe a questionable system can still work gameplay-wise. What's the main takeaway from this? You're punished hard for merging cities because the merged city will end up with less pop than the sum of the two cities would (so City Cap increases are very high-value). Food also cannot ever be a win-condition in the same way Production or Money are because the other two snowball and Food gets a worse and worse ROI. In a game where cultures are specifically focused on Food. The game's still functional if you play to those constraints, but it feels like a missed opportunity.
It's too late to change a system like this in HK ofc. I'm just beating this drum in the hopes some future game finds a better way to depict population.
If one extra town isn't your plan then obviously don't merge.
If town merged was sum of two towns, then max number of towns would mean nothing.
What is the real benefit from merging 2 cities? Production, science, gold will be around equal to the sum of the 2 original cities. Sometimes a bit more sometimes a bit less. Food as we discuss above will go deep in the negative. Imagine merging a city with 40 pops with one with 30 pops. Food will suffer!
The only short term benefit would be if city A had a building that says "you receive science equal to the number of pops" while city B didnt have it. Then when merging there would be a benefit. But i argue that for any sustainable city you could build the same building at the city B quite easily.