SP - General fluctuating number of villages

[Mr-Bandit]

imagine if the number of villages attached to a town (or castle) were not always the same...

right now each town has a fixed number of attached villages, and some towns have more than others (making those towns better than others), but what if the number of villages was tied to the prosperity of the attached town. what you would have is 4 of maybe 5 potential village sites (visible on the map as 'abandoned villages'), and as the connected town grows and prospers the nearby villages spring to life. if a town is ruined through repeated sacking, then the town shrinks and the nearby villages become deserted.

if something like this were implemented:

• nurtured towns would flourish generating more trade and trade goods, and more recruits
• no one town would be universally preferential over another, any town could be the best town if managed right and kept safe from wars
• economy would be more dynamic and less predictable, every town would not always be at peak, not all goods always available

there would be a load of other consequences here, i just thought i would be an interesting idea...

 

[Tryvenyal]

This very interesting!

 

[Vekar]

That actually sounds really cool! It would also make it painfully obvious what areas are war torn hell holes and what areas are peaceful! Twould be a very nice detail to see on the map!

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

I think the villages shouldn't necessarily become abandoned if the town becomes crappy, but should stop sending villagers to the town, or even send villagers to different towns. This could be shown on the map using roads that appear and disappear if trade is increasing or going down. You could then theoretically make a town so prosperous that half the trade caravans go through it, and villagers travel half way across the country to get there. Right now all the towns feel exactly the same, but the most satisfying thing in games of this scale is often to make a really well run town that dwarfs the rest.