Blow-by-blow playthrough of the Settlements update

ummmmmmmmmmm............................ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, oh I mean to each his own. lol

You know, if you assume that the commandment quote of Peter is true.
That would mean that everyone who 'stays home' is a female breeder.
And everyone who 'works' is a male.

Having the commandment go where females can work or even where males stay home.
We'd be looking at 137 farmers and 14 breeders in that settlement.
Moreover, there'd be 11 working farmers and 126 unemployed =P
But atleast the productivity is up and the reproductive cycles are down! =P

I think you've been playing too much Godus @qetesh - time to take a break and go back to reality =P
Unless ofcourse you are of the opinion that such commandments should account for the real world aswell...
In which case your deduction is correct.

He he, I take that as a virtual hugz. Thanks TM. 

Props from the safest lech you'll ever know.

For starters, the scaling formula is broken.
The population added to a settlement does not proportionately scale to the belief generated and the time it takes to regain breeders/workers.

I've pointed this out many times before - the method used is that of mobile and facebook games. The larger buildings have longer timers but larger storage capacity catering to longer stretches of absence.
For a mechanic like this to work, you HAVE to play the game like a mobile or facebook game.
An active player uses small structures, a less active one uses larger structures to measure the results to their schedule.


Limiting the maximum population would NOT be the solution as the underlying problem of balancing would still be present.
But there's an overarching larger problem at work here.
Which is that there is no logic to WHY the settlement mechanic works like this.

I'll admit that the mechanic has merit within its boundaries. Having local residents "join" with an existing settlement.
Due to the nature of farms and mines, the outward expansion is limited and settlements quickly expand upwards.
Thats mistake #2, both from a realistic perspective aswell as from a gameplay perspective. (Mistake #1 being the poor scaling and balance)

Yes, as society forms, outlying huts will generally be pulled into a settlement or community. Slowly the individual residents will join up and share responsibilities and services among eachother forming villages, towns, cities and more.
As these services become more attractive and the ability to serve people becomes more capable.
The area of influence expands naturally* and you work from there.


And there you have your first hint to a solution, you see, settlements right now form purely on divine intervention.
Its a micromanaging game of min-maxing. Instead, settlements should form where people already congregate.
The existing bundles of people that interact with eachother first form bonds and then start to exchange resources.

Farmers need resources to maintain their housing, storage and tools, while masons/miners, hunters and woodcutters need food to sustain their work.
These exchanges of goods and services combined with the desire for companionship normally result in the forming of settlements.


So what does this mean for the game and the player? How can that be made functional within the confines of Godus?
Well for one, ditch the settlement limit to a single resource. The whole function of a settlement is to SHARE resources and means.
Not to isolate them.

Initiate bonding by having followers form friendships and families. Then strengthen these bonds by having families specialize in a craft or profession.
- Farmers become better at farming, but lose the ability to supply themselves with the materials needed to maintain their houses and tools.
- Woodcutters/Masons (stoneminer) specialize in their fields but will require to be supplied with food.
- Miners (ore) provide the community with better resources but will require both wood/stone and food.
And build up from there. Adding individual resources or professions to the mix.

These specialties are ALL required to form a settlement, since a settlement will be an ORGANIZED version of the already formed bonds and community.
Larger structures will be created to more effectively apply skills and resources. Farmers will band together and distribute tasks according to the needs of the community - so will the others.

Have a centralized "settlement" form the basis of the residential and social needs (initially housing, later on entertainment/companionship/religion).
And have outlying hubs connect to that settlement as spokes of a wheel providing that hub with the resources it needs.
Don't rely on belief alone. Make sure that this settlement CAN support itself. There will be a constant drain on resources aswell as a surplus used for growth. Once the surplus dies out you have reached the maximum potential currently available. (And yes, testing and balancing will be required there, but thats what testing is for!)


These are mechanics that can be made modular. Have the puzzle pieces be added one at a time and expand outwards from there.
First you add in basic resources (wood and stone! they already exist, use them!) - this isn't something the player will control.
This is something that the AI will automatically use in their environment. Its a matter of applying some math, a house gets made from nearby materials.
The profession gets calculated based on availability of resources and requirement of resources.
(While I personally have no objections to some manual control - there is a clear desire to be a god and not a strategist or mayor which I'll respect)


Okay, so when that is done, you have limited the upscaling of settlements. You can't just infinitely add on to them by throwing belief at the problem because they have some inherent requirements.
Subsequently the scaling of belief propotionately to the size of structures and the 'creation' of new followers.
A logical solution here is aging. Have followers be born and naturally age rather than grow exponentially overtime.
Yes, there's a growth in population - no it doesn't scale that drastically. There are inherent limits.

The mistake here is that the system has been oversimplified in fear that a proper resource system is both too RTS-y and too complicated.
Relying on statistical scaling alone without an inherent limiter results in numbers like these.

Have the availability and production of food (a mechanic that is present).
The happiness of people (crowded people or overworked people do not make many babies and are more likely to die)
Disease/famine (as a cause of the 2 above)

Have all of those combined together into a natural status quo. Once you reach the capacity of a limited area. You will need to expand if you want to keep growing.
You will need more base resources to sustain your people.

A fun side-effect. Doing this will automatically create a reason to keep playing and expanding other than purely expanding for the sake of expansion.
It'll give the player something to do aswell as something to watch.
Once this system is in place you'll have a solid foundation to build upwards towards future ages and expand from there.



I've already suggested an expansion/alteration to the cans regarding this aswell.
Including the specific specialization of settlements. A settlement once having reached a certain size will get a surplus in population and resources.
Organized farming and acquisition of other (to be determined) resources can be applied towards various specialties or services.
I'm thinking entertainment, education, religion, industry and more. All offering great points to build upon in future expansion of the game and progression into later ages.

The main problem I see with the current settlement mechanic (other than the overall scaling that is a problem in the entire game) is that going forward.
Imagine needing a seperate settlement for EACH resource.

You'd get a sprawling gridlock of settlements. Instead of huts next to huts like we did before, we'll have settlements surrounded by fields/mines/etc locked into a grid with other settlements and their respective resource plots.

is the current settlement mechanic.

It's not an absolute no, they'll never revisit them, but George has made it sound doubtful that we'll see another revision of the settlements outside of balancing. See below.