Wretched!!!!

[wolfpost]

Maybe someone can help me understand this. Why is it no matter what I do, I can never get single family houses better than wretched or poor? I build tons of schools. Plenty of jobs. Parks. But still wretched or poor. The Rock Star and actors type houses are the worst. Your a rock star for God Sake. How are you wretched? LOL.

Maybe it a product of me living just outside of NYC and I can't wrap my head around the mechanic that the people in the High Rises are not rich. And building high rises is because it makes the land divided up among many others so it's cheaper individually. I get that but only super rich people live in the high rises anyway. So that sort of is ass backwards. And if you go on the North Shore of Long Island or east by the Hamptons, those our some of the richest people in the country. So I just don't get why single family houses are always poor in the game? is it because I densely populate the houses?

Please help. What am I doing wrong?

LOL.

[dot1q1978]

It's a bug. The rent is calculated on land value and low density residents are expected to pay ridiculous rent vs higher density buildings which are distributed among all the residents. This is crazy how they are not fixing this immediately. It's a fundamental part of the game and makes low residential useless.

[girlaroundthecorner]

I found after a long time playing on one city, the low density started to become more wealthy. It took a while.

[wolfpost]

Thanks guys. It's not game breaking or anything. Just annoying as hell. The game pretty much always demands single family houses that quickly fill up with poor people. Which never made any sense to me. hearing it's a bug and not just me is somewhat reliving.

[Winter's Crescendo]

How big are the lots for the houses? The size of the lot has an impact on it's upkeep/rent, so if you're allowing your cims to have huge lots they'll struggle even more.

The trick with low density is to keep it in areas with low land value (ie, away from your commercial and offices) and keep the lots small, using paths to break up bigger lots if needed and painting the lots in by hand so the cims don't get greedy and combine several 2x2 lots to make a 4x2 or 4x4. You can always add some larger lots later for wealthier residents to move into.

[dulany67]

One thing I do is only zone in 2x2, with occasional 3x2. It's a PITA, but if you think about it, suburban sprawl is categorized by uniform, small lots. That is what makes these properties affordable for the majority of people living in them. With a waterside neighborhood, I go larger to simulate higher dollar properties.

[zaltocleotl[Banned@Paradox]]

Originally posted by dulany67:

One thing I do is only zone in 2x2, with occasional 3x2. It's a PITA, but if you think about it, suburban sprawl is categorized by uniform, small lots. That is what makes these properties affordable for the majority of people living in them. With a waterside neighborhood, I go larger to simulate higher dollar properties.

Experience shows