Timeline for House stability
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 13, 2014 at 0:07 | answer | added | user71441 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 25, 2014 at 14:22 | answer | added | Philipp | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 24, 2014 at 0:12 | comment | added | DeadMG | Developing your food supply requires people to do work, which means they need houses. IME building more food supply is practically the cause of the problem, not the solution. Growing your food supply only works as long as you're still growing your population, so the extra people from building the houses isn't a big deal. It can't sustain your existing population. | |
| Feb 24, 2014 at 0:09 | comment | added | walrus helmet | Then I guess the best solution is to way overdevelop your food supply, so population booms don't lead to starvation. | |
| Feb 24, 2014 at 0:07 | history | edited | DeadMG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 97 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2014 at 0:02 | history | edited | DeadMG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 211 characters in body
|
| Feb 23, 2014 at 23:58 | comment | added | DeadMG | They only do that if there's sufficient housing locally, which is problematic for the reasons outlined in the question. A young couple with children won't displace a single widow. Also, you can't stagger building the houses if their occupants aren't of staggered age, unless you're happy with the buildings flat out not working properly whilst waiting for the latest batch to age. Plus, this would involve micromanaging the ages of the occupants of hundreds of houses manually- not really a fun solution. | |
| Feb 23, 2014 at 23:48 | comment | added | walrus helmet | I think you answered your own question - stagger building the houses. Also, regarding walking across the map to their jobs, I think the villagers re-organize themselves to live as close as possible to their jobs. | |
| Feb 23, 2014 at 23:43 | history | asked | DeadMG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |