Unformatted: Reconstruction inc expansion

[Zec Rich]

I do like the reconstruction feature but I think it needs to include the ability to reposition the purchased expansion squares of land.

I like many like a tidy and space efficient layout and I regret that early on in the game, that I chose some of the squares on the side nearest the harbour.
They do not allow you to expand across the whole width and so just stick out.

It would be a good idea that on reconstruction, when we store all buildings to redesign, that we could also choose to reposition those expansions that we have gained?

Would it be helpful?
I think so!

 

[Knight of ICE]

Ideas need to be posted in a mandatory format. Yours isn't to start with. However, it is also something that has been proposed before and is on the Do Not Suggest List.

In the end, when you get more expansions, your layout will become space efficient again.

 

[Janet Devlin]

Hey there butt, I know what you mean as I've struggled with the same problem. I even went to the trouble of starting another world just to see if design changes would make much difference. Also went with some strategy differences in a world, like you mentioned arriving at a nice tidy and efficient layout seems to be the trend to take. But on one world which I later scrapped I decided to throw all cares to the wind and design it from an fun only design. Kind of fun playing around but alas it makes you not a winner or part of the established method of behaviour? Tut tut life still goes on.

 

[LA - Free UA]

no where you place your expansions are part of the strategy of the game, you know a Strategy game

 

[Janet Devlin]

no where you place your expansions are part of the strategy of the game, you know a Strategy game

What does that even mean?

 

[klods hans]

What does that even mean?

It means that you are stuck with the strategic choices you make when you place expansions.
The most efficient way to place expansions is in a square (with no empty spaces inside, of course).
If you for aesthetic or other reasons choose to place the expansions in an inefficient way in a L or T shape or whatever, you have to live with that until you can get more expansions.
It's a strategy game. The strategic choices we make define how easy or hard the game is.

Some time ago, there was a player here, who didn't want to place expansions on top of the wild life (the deer). Fair enough. Poor animals. Nothing wrong with building around the animals to keep some wild life in the city.. A terribly inefficient choice though..

 

[Paladiac the Pure]

I like the fact that we can rotate our expansions now - just the 4x4 land square of course (the buildings are still set the way they are). Some of my 4x4 squares are turned 90 degrees and some are 180 degrees. I even have a couple that I did a complete 360 degrees, just because the land square looked best in its original position.
And the best thing of all, do not even have to click anything to do it, they reposition (90/180/270/360 degrees) based on my personal whim.

 

[klods hans]

I like the fact that we can rotate our expansions now - just the 4x4 land square of course (the buildings are still set the way they are). Some of my 4x4 squares are turned 90 degrees and some are 180 degrees. I even have a couple that I did a complete 360 degrees, just because the land square looked best in its original position.
And the best thing of all, do not even have to click anything to do it, they reposition (90/180/270/360 degrees) based on my personal whim.

Rotate the expansions?

 

[Janet Devlin]

Yes, I discovered an easy solution to the 90 degrees rotational problem is to just turn your monitor on its side or upside down with 180 degrees if need be.
I'm not a great fan of game efficiency though as it has in the past turned me into a mad clicking machine robot. Not a good look for me.