the government shouldn't build any housing... thats what the private sector is for.

Just pretend that a house is a "Housing District". Then ... as your population slowly fills the "house" ... houses are being built in the Housing District, and slowly reaches maximum capacity.

Basically ... they aren't really houses, but abstractions of houses. No house I know has 50 people living in it. Basically it IS a zoning district, only with the graphical aesthetic of being a house, which, at this level of zoom, works nicely.

you are still building "housing districts" instead of leaving that to the private sector.

I agree with tasunke for the most part.

To Taltamar. In the time period these people are in technologically their is NO private sector except for merchants the lords provided all housing in cities to citizens.

Also i like being able to control my cities somewhat.

Odd it double posted.

Sorry.

Yea ... only the Guilds (if there are any) and the Nobility will have any real power (choice) over their lives ... and the Nobility is really just the entourage of the Champions (with the Champions being the most powerful nobility).

I control the wood and the stone, I say your going to live here, so start building houses here!

Alternatively, you could decide to have your royal agents direct all housing personally, and "independent" or "rebel" housing is destroyed via fireball, douse, and bury (fire, water, earth).

While Im sure most Sovereigns will act more egalitarian, the point is building houses is important, as it should be.

And why not some drawbacks to overpowering ? In late game, with the rise of nobility you start losing grip on some sectors of your kigdom. You're more powerful but you lose step by step control of it. The late game would still be challenging because you can't have what you exactly need. Your empire could get some independance.

Well you could make it possible to have rebellion if a meter/gauge of Oppression/happiness/order falls to low these 3 factors are like to say Oppression is an evil form of order which reduces city maintenance when it reaches a heightened level. Order being the same way but with more just and fair ideals oppression would build a tower and guard and oppress and execute criminals, Order on the other hand would build a social court and give people trials etc. as well as setting up charitys to get rabble and criminals off the streets. Happiness is self explanitory

Well, it would be a good idea, but what I'm talking about is some mechanics that you couldn't really avoid. When you get really powerful, you can't micro everything. you couldn't say "I need a workshop here". You just ask your citizens that you need warfare infrastructures. But if they think that they need a new farm instead of a workshop then be it, and you'll have to deal with that. More power, but less control. Maybe the most powerful spells like raise volcano could get your people angry and you would get some riots in nearby cities, or that kind of things. Late game would be really interesting because you are powerful but don't control everything.

Well, I suppose that would be interesting, however Im not sure if people wish for the RNG to run their empire. I think that most people would prefer simply having to control X cities in an alloted time frame (MP) rather than having cities randomly building things. This would also keep people at size X (the Size 1 city less than the point where you are not in control of building orders) for an inordinantly long period of time, until they have fully maxed said cities.

It also does not allow for a complete re-haul of City usage at a late stage in the game (say destroying all military structures and building more commerce/science structures).

Combined both of those and you got a winner! If I have just taken a City, by force, it may not be the Military structures I replace. I brought my owm Population LOL!

This gets me thinking of Govenors again. Perhaps 1Z might help us find out a more realistic game pace (time per turn) as well. Govenors would be a Mod boon I think.

Well their adding in govenors so perhaps we could have a system of nobility so you can tell gov's to manage their own city? then based on their personality etc. and the style you seem to favor they act a certain way?

Governors are cool. Make it so that Champions have similar City-Related traits (or weaker versions) that the Sovereign has (or possibility to have weaker versions of all traits that Sovereigns have access too), and make it so that only the highest level (or highest Fame/Prestige) Champion's  traits effect the city. Sovereign trumps all, and when Sov is in a city only his traits effect the city.

Perhaps Academies (or royal acadamies), if in a city, can slowly have a positive effect on the Governing traits of a Champion/Sovereign. If Champions have much weaker traits than Sovs, then perhaps Royal Acadamies can only improve Champion's traits ... and the better the Academy, the faster new traits are aquired/improved, and the "Max Limit" of total traits (think a rough estimate point system, akin to Sovereign creation time).

Unless your pair of hand picked Gov's combine to outshine even a resident SOV. Intrigue ensues btw

Just a thought!

 P.S. My twitch has returned btw. Slight. it is. but ... (yoda voice)

OK John Hughes ... I will say that a Sovereigns EGO will require his pompous and illiterate Ass to manage the city, even if he has a better Champion. I suppose the only case that should NOT happen is if your sovereign picked non of the negative mental traits (cruel, blunt, insane, murderous, arrogant) AND your race has egalitarian.

In Rome Total war, a governor's Management skill determined the governor ... even if someone with a lower management skill had more popularity (better citizen morale), more law skills (reduced maintenance) and better tax skills (more gold). Still, the management skill did affect many of those things in base-output, so usually the person with higher management skill was better.

Now, if two people had the same management skill, it was the elder sibling that had dibs, NOT the person with better skills. I think that elemental will probably have Prestige/Fame/Political Power being the determining factor. Usually this will equal the overall combat rating of a unit ... however it could also heavily be effected with the amount of questing (their name has reached legendary renown, gaining much personal prestige). In this case, yes your average Joe Champion could potentially gain greater personal prestige than the Sovereign, however the Sovereign would start out with an inordinately large amount of personal prestige (probably 50 or more).

(personal prestige is a static number, that is increased by level, combat ability, and quests/achievements)

Two things could happen if an underling's personal prestige increases MORE than your Sovereigns. If their loyalty is low, they would create a revolt/civil war. If you are Arrogant and Cruel you will have them assasinated (automatically) and if the assasination fails then their followers will turn against you (civil war). If however, you are a nice sovereign, and their loyalty is high, the probability for Civil War will be very low.

essentially, you DON'T want an Underling to become more popular than you, but if they do, then they can become governor of a settlement.

Yeah i agree with Tasunke. But also make it similar to galciv but more roleplaying so that gov's can be told to automatically manage cities in a certain style or freeform and they will auto construct and build up that outpost.

It takes away micromanagement for those that CHOOSE to not want it.

I believe Tasunke supports this I'm just pointing it out to ensure it gets said.

@Tasunke

Fair enough, but I hope this doesn't turn in another Rome Total War game.

My point was this. Seeing as the SOV is everyone's starting unit, has the ability to Level and get tougher and tougher, it seems a bloody waste of what may be, or obviously will be, your strongest battlefield asset by sticking his pompous and illiterate Ass in a city just to gain his "Best of the Bunch" trump all traits, when a hand picked, by the SOV him/herself even, Govener (or 2) could do the same task, thus freeing up that SOV for what really matters, World Domination, as time marches on.

Hell, we could even ask for a stacking bonus that is applied to any Gov with weaker traits when the SOV is in town during festival season or what have you.

Even Brad makes mention of this thought in the 1Z walk through. His SOV will bring more prestige, but she will also be the only unit able to roam about the land gathering "stuff" and buffing her strengths until the Pioneers become available.

So it adds a choice. 

Oh ... I certainly agree that Sovereigns should usually be used for fighting/adventuring/questing. That is what increases personal prestige after all.

I wasn't suggesting that having high personal prestige would "trump" a really good city trait. Let your Sovereign explore and have the City Trait guy be your governor.

Yeah Tasunke only meant the magical 'Demi god' like SOV was a good gov because of his power and knowledge and the fact that he doesn't die of age.

Oh and he's the emperor/king so of course he should be better at govening then nobility/champions.

what time period is that? medieval england?

we had rome 2000 years actually and who is to say that they weren't a "crystal spires and togas" before the calamity that made the world inhospitable?

For all we know the game is in the future after magic "came back" and was used to destroy the world... just because they don't have computers doesn't mean they will be feudal.

It depends on a persons play style. I mean there are some good traits that you may want to give to your SOV and have them sit in a city for the bonuses even now in the game. If you forgo combat skills in favor of his CHA and talents that give boost to city production then you probably don't want the SOV on the front line. Instead you hire adventures and troops to go out and fight your battles. I've seen mention in the R&D tree and spells about imbuing essence into heroes. So it's likely you can give some essence to other adventures and have them go out and cast spells instead of needing to take the SOV.

I think the issue with the SOV being the only unit to explore and land grab is one of early game before you get other units out. But once you get more settled if you are so enclined your SOV can head into a city to give it the bonuses from being there.