Indy Stone Mod development stops - News at 9
LordNecrobot:
Bummer.
I did like ISM interface. But AM has way more meat.
kuronue:
Quote from: Bobbins on 2009 August 10, 23:35:38
Quote from: kuronue on 2009 August 10, 00:46:12
Quote from: Solmyr on 2009 August 09, 20:23:06
A compromise could be allowing non-played families to have one baby without a crib, and then needing a crib to have more. Give us an announcement "so and so just had a baby, they need a crib!" so we can go and edit their house if we want them to continue reproducing.
This will inevitably lead to population decline. Two parents = 1 babby means each generation, without intervention, the population halves. Eventually the only thing left will be playables who are all so intermarried incest is the only option.
I disagree. It's the player's choice if they want the population to decline, and if not, Solmyr's suggestion means they would know which households to provide cribs for and when.
I specifically said, "without intervention". If you play like I've been, ignoring the other people until you need to interact with them, the neighborhood will shrink in population until within a few generations, you have no children to meet at school. I suppose immigration could solve that problem, but why create it in the first place, when 2 parents = 2 babbies results in a stable population?
edalbformat:
I have changed completely my way to play and stablished a standard for houses that pleases me and I got almost all houses in the game to follow my standard. It seems that the game really try to disbalance and the player has the challenge to balance it again. You have to have the correct distribution of deaths and births, what the game cannot do self and cause massiv irregularities on births/deaths. If you do not this self, it clogs your game with townies and moving families that you don't want. I tried to make this balance self and it became a lot easier with the NRAAS inseminator. I can Sims have babies without the long process of sedution imposed by the game. This way I do not marry anyone, just make them best friends and inseminate them.
The city keeps an excess of single sims what avoids creation of new townies and enough babies to replace the previous generation that become elder and elder to finally die. This way I didn't have the game to produce one only Sim except maids that I contract very often. I also keep the maids pool spining correctly because I marry every good looking maid to my elders and create this way the necessary number of married couples and also a guarantee to continue the male family tree.
This is what balances my game and I'm already in the third generation (I play the second long aging, so my sims live about 210 days).
I'm satisfied with the results. Besides I have modified every damn xml mod to give autonomy to the sims in all matters that are boring for me. For example, I autonomized all the gardening process, so my Sims water, weed and harvest automatically. I have only the distributor task of selling the product and finding out the correct seed to plant and care for distributing the perfect or whatever fruits to Sims that have Green thumb. I'm doing the automatization to every task that normally bores me and act like the supermarket chain owner or the Seed Bank Manager of all kinds. It is working and I HAVE fun with it. As said before we are all different.
Wulf:
Quote from: J. M. Pescado on 2009 August 07, 04:54:00
Well, terrible inefficiency is the rule of any top-down bureaucracy. A top-down story progression system, for instance, is like a system where the government decides what you work at, what level you are to be promoted to, and soforth. Guess what? This is called "Communism", and, to no great surprise, it is HORRIBLY INEFFICIENT!
Would like to point out this is not Communism, this is dictatorial government much the same way our military is run.
Chocolate Milk:
Quote from: Wulf on 2009 August 13, 17:51:43
Would like to point out this is not Communism, this is dictatorial government much the same way our military is run.
Well, yes, and then again, no. Perhaps you're right about communism in its purest and most academic form, but practically, it involves a top down central government system that is in fact much the same as that exhibited in fascist systems. Just look at what happened to the Soviet Union; the government tried to coordinate everything, and that was completely inefficient.
Woo for high school history. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page