I built a new house on a quarter acre lot a few years ago and I find I spend almost an hour a day in the summertime just looking after the landscaping. I couldn't fathom the amount of work that would be required if I had more land.
My SF (with all the content that is and has been available) works just fine for me with a small bit of extra space for future expansion. I do have some friends though who have some fantastic features that have used up a fair bit of space. It would be an absolute crime to have to pare them down in any way. For them the mantra 'more land' is justifiable.
Bottom line : to each his own (even Priuses- is that the correct plural form?)
I built a new house on a quarter acre lot a few years ago and I find I spend almost an hour a day in the summertime just looking after the landscaping. I couldn't fathom the amount of work that would be required if I had more land.
My SF (with all the content that is and has been available) works just fine for me with a small bit of extra space for future expansion. I do have some friends though who have some fantastic features that have used up a fair bit of space. It would be an absolute crime to have to pare them down in any way. For them the mantra 'more land' is justifiable.
Bottom line : to each his own (even Priuses- is that the correct plural form?)
You are commingling reality -V- pixels ...
I agree, to each his own. But... I'm a Dorothy Decorator Type... Love to use lots of trees and whatnot to give my town a comfy, small town feel. The challenge is trying to use realistic approaches in decorating on a small scale. A good example is the prison. In my town, the prison takes 5.5 plots of land. How close should the nearest business, hospital or school be to this structure? It looks weird to have Stu's Disco shoved up against the prison.
If people want more land, how does that impact those who want to cram everything onto half the amount of property? The fact is, it has zero bearing on those who feel comfortable using half the land. For people like me, we appreciate owning The Ponderosa while the neighbors are happy building their town in Walter White's backyard.
The attacks on people who want expansion for intrinsic purposes is unwarranted.
I agree, to each his own. But... I'm a Dorothy Decorator Type... Love to use lots of trees and whatnot to give my town a comfy, small town feel. The challenge is trying to use realistic approaches in decorating on a small scale. A good example is the prison. In my town, the prison takes 5.5 plots of land. How close should the nearest business, hospital or school be to this structure? It looks weird to have Stu's Disco shoved up against the prison.
If people want more land, how does that impact those who want to cram everything onto half the amount of property? The fact is, it has zero bearing on those who feel comfortable using half the land. For people like me, we appreciate owning The Ponderosa while the neighbors are happy building their town in Walter White's backyard.
The attacks on people who want expansion for intrinsic purposes is unwarranted.
Hey, I'm agreeing with you. I suspect people doing the attacking aren't big on trees or other landscaping features. I think I posted this on one of the showcase threads.
If you buy premium items and actually properly place the items, you need more land. If you cram crap together then you dont its that simple.
Personally I think no more land should be released for cash. any future land purchases should require donuts,and the only reason why I say this, is because those who do not purchase premium items have no need for additional land, and those who do, need more land so they will buy it.
WHAT?!
The devil's hell fire of the forum will rain upon you.
That has to be the worst suggestion ever on this forum.
I think we need a "worst suggestion ever" thread. Though I'm sure it'd get nasty quickly, it'd also be hilarious.
I agree, to each his own. But... I'm a Dorothy Decorator Type... Love to use lots of trees and whatnot to give my town a comfy, small town feel. The challenge is trying to use realistic approaches in decorating on a small scale. A good example is the prison. In my town, the prison takes 5.5 plots of land. How close should the nearest business, hospital or school be to this structure? It looks weird to have Stu's Disco shoved up against the prison.
Couldn't agree more! I spent a-g-e-s agonising over where things should be. Brown houses and low-income areas around the prison; lots of high-income stuff near the sea, but also lots of gambling and bowling around there; public services and greenland near the middle of the map, and residential around the edges. I haven't got it right yet, but I'm trying to work to similar rules.
I've just hit both edges of the map. I think I'll have enough room to get through Christmas at the very least, but having spread things out, I'm starting to see why people want/need more.
That said, in doing so my landing zone moved, and it was a pain to work around it.
Maybe EA could release some more land, but hard-code a certain map point as the landing zone. That'd solve both problems.
If they can't hardcode a landing zone, how about giving us a tiny object of some sort (even a one-tiny-square dot) and, wherever that is placed, the screen would auto-center at that point when the town is entered. (Says Annette, who knows little enough about programming that she can make up ideas that probably can't be done.)
USA/UK Race To Throw Country Into Utter Chaos = TOO CLOSE TO CALL
I've just hit both edges of the map. I think I'll have enough room to get through Christmas at the very least, but having spread things out, I'm starting to see why people want/need more.
That said, in doing so my landing zone moved, and it was a pain to work around it.
Maybe EA could release some more land, but hard-code a certain map point as the landing zone. That'd solve both problems.
If they can't hardcode a landing zone, how about giving us a tiny object of some sort (even a one-tiny-square dot) and, wherever that is placed, the screen would auto-center at that point when the town is entered. (Says Annette, who knows little enough about programming that she can make up ideas that probably can't be done.)
I do stuff like this for a living (not games, but lots of code) and without knowing the details of the system, either suggestion should be easy enough. I suspect they chose the centre of the map because it was easy to do, and because they knew whatever map point it calculated would be valid on that map. If they did hard-code coordinates, it'd have to be the starting ones, because they're the only ones you know every player has.
I like the idea of a user-specified landing zone, though. That'd be nifty, and means we can move or not move it as we see fit. Might be complicated though as the game wouldn't know where to focus if it didn't exist (due to a not-updated game, or a bug), so it'd need a backup option.
I've just hit both edges of the map. I think I'll have enough room to get through Christmas at the very least, but having spread things out, I'm starting to see why people want/need more.
That said, in doing so my landing zone moved, and it was a pain to work around it.
Maybe EA could release some more land, but hard-code a certain map point as the landing zone. That'd solve both problems.
If they can't hardcode a landing zone, how about giving us a tiny object of some sort (even a one-tiny-square dot) and, wherever that is placed, the screen would auto-center at that point when the town is entered. (Says Annette, who knows little enough about programming that she can make up ideas that probably can't be done.)
I do stuff like this for a living (not games, but lots of code) and without knowing the details of the system, either suggestion should be easy enough. I suspect they chose the centre of the map because it was easy to do, and because they knew whatever map point it calculated would be valid on that map. If they did hard-code coordinates, it'd have to be the starting ones, because they're the only ones you know every player has.
I like the idea of a user-specified landing zone, though. That'd be nifty, and means we can move or not move it as we see fit. Might be complicated though as the game wouldn't know where to focus if it didn't exist (due to a not-updated game, or a bug), so it'd need a backup option.
I still need more land.
I truly could use more space.
Please add extra land
How much more land?
I find one strip isn't usually wide enough to do something with, especially for a larger building. Though one strip would let you move everything down / across and pad out some smaller plots.
I still need more land.
I truly could use more space.
Please add extra land
How much more land?
I find one strip isn't usually wide enough to do something with, especially for a larger building. Though one strip would let you move everything down / across and pad out some smaller plots.
Ideally, 2 strip of land perpendicular to the mountains and 3 strips of land parallel to the mountains. But I would be happy with 1 of each. I just need to re-move my town and would like more land before I do it. That's why I'm so adamant about it.
I agree, to each his own. But... I'm a Dorothy Decorator Type... Love to use lots of trees and whatnot to give my town a comfy, small town feel. The challenge is trying to use realistic approaches in decorating on a small scale. A good example is the prison. In my town, the prison takes 5.5 plots of land. How close should the nearest business, hospital or school be to this structure? It looks weird to have Stu's Disco shoved up against the prison.
Couldn't agree more! I spent a-g-e-s agonising over where things should be. Brown houses and low-income areas around the prison; lots of high-income stuff near the sea, but also lots of gambling and bowling around there; public services and greenland near the middle of the map, and residential around the edges. I haven't got it right yet, but I'm trying to work to similar rules.
Ditto... I play what I call "Logical Springfield." I try to make it amusing, but also logical. There's a town square, older buildings are together. Residential areas are somewhat distinct from businesses. I built the town on a grid of blocks that vary in width of 2, 3, 4, or 5 squares. All houses have yards, most buildings have parking lots.
Once I acquired all the land, I built a huge lake on the "right" side. I've gradually filled that in with add'l buildings as necessary. The prison and Frink's lab are on islands in the lake. I've been able to adapt fairly quickly with new buildings, by reconfiguring the grid blocks and reducing parking lot sizes. I have plenty of room for everything (I have all the premium buildings--except Mt. Carlsbad--since I began playing in Feb.) and can still grow a bit. But I'd like more land--at least one strip, to plan for expansion.
I've got all the water too, and actually would like more water. I'd like to build SQ out, and not have it take up so much of the beach views. I think EA could add a strip or two of water without putting much strain on the game. I notice that most of my neighbors only bought the water they need for their SQ. So adding water probably wouldn't get as much use. IMO.
I agree, to each his own. But... I'm a Dorothy Decorator Type... Love to use lots of trees and whatnot to give my town a comfy, small town feel. The challenge is trying to use realistic approaches in decorating on a small scale. A good example is the prison. In my town, the prison takes 5.5 plots of land. How close should the nearest business, hospital or school be to this structure? It looks weird to have Stu's Disco shoved up against the prison.
Couldn't agree more! I spent a-g-e-s agonising over where things should be. Brown houses and low-income areas around the prison; lots of high-income stuff near the sea, but also lots of gambling and bowling around there; public services and greenland near the middle of the map, and residential around the edges. I haven't got it right yet, but I'm trying to work to similar rules.
Ditto... I play what I call "Logical Springfield." I try to make it amusing, but also logical. There's a town square, older buildings are together. Residential areas are somewhat distinct from businesses. I built the town on a grid of blocks that vary in width of 2, 3, 4, or 5 squares. All houses have yards, most buildings have parking lots.
Once I acquired all the land, I built a huge lake on the "right" side. I've gradually filled that in with add'l buildings as necessary. The prison and Frink's lab are on islands in the lake. I've been able to adapt fairly quickly with new buildings, by reconfiguring the grid blocks and reducing parking lot sizes. I have plenty of room for everything (I have all the premium buildings--except Mt. Carlsbad--since I began playing in Feb.) and can still grow a bit. But I'd like more land--at least one strip, to plan for expansion.
I've got all the water too, and actually would like more water. I'd like to build SQ out, and not have it take up so much of the beach views. I think EA could add a strip or two of water without putting much strain on the game. I notice that most of my neighbors only bought the water they need for their SQ. So adding water probably wouldn't get as much use. IMO.
In short, more land AND water please.
I love the sound of your Springfield! Totally agree about Squidport, too. I wanted to build a pier out to sea with something at the end, and was disappointed when I saw I couldn't.
With the "speculated" Gil deal coming I'm gonna need more land. Yes I needed land before, buy now I will need even more. Come on EA, give us more land so I can spend more doughnuts.
Replies
I know, I hated getting down in the mud but that comment deserved some serious retaliation. 8)
My SF (with all the content that is and has been available) works just fine for me with a small bit of extra space for future expansion. I do have some friends though who have some fantastic features that have used up a fair bit of space. It would be an absolute crime to have to pare them down in any way. For them the mantra 'more land' is justifiable.
Bottom line : to each his own (even Priuses- is that the correct plural form?)
You are commingling reality -V- pixels ...
I agree, to each his own. But... I'm a Dorothy Decorator Type... Love to use lots of trees and whatnot to give my town a comfy, small town feel. The challenge is trying to use realistic approaches in decorating on a small scale. A good example is the prison. In my town, the prison takes 5.5 plots of land. How close should the nearest business, hospital or school be to this structure? It looks weird to have Stu's Disco shoved up against the prison.
If people want more land, how does that impact those who want to cram everything onto half the amount of property? The fact is, it has zero bearing on those who feel comfortable using half the land. For people like me, we appreciate owning The Ponderosa while the neighbors are happy building their town in Walter White's backyard.
The attacks on people who want expansion for intrinsic purposes is unwarranted.
Hey, I'm agreeing with you. I suspect people doing the attacking aren't big on trees or other landscaping features. I think I posted this on one of the showcase threads.
+1
I think we need a "worst suggestion ever" thread. Though I'm sure it'd get nasty quickly, it'd also be hilarious.
Couldn't agree more! I spent a-g-e-s agonising over where things should be. Brown houses and low-income areas around the prison; lots of high-income stuff near the sea, but also lots of gambling and bowling around there; public services and greenland near the middle of the map, and residential around the edges. I haven't got it right yet, but I'm trying to work to similar rules.
If they can't hardcode a landing zone, how about giving us a tiny object of some sort (even a one-tiny-square dot) and, wherever that is placed, the screen would auto-center at that point when the town is entered. (Says Annette, who knows little enough about programming that she can make up ideas that probably can't be done.)
I do stuff like this for a living (not games, but lots of code) and without knowing the details of the system, either suggestion should be easy enough. I suspect they chose the centre of the map because it was easy to do, and because they knew whatever map point it calculated would be valid on that map. If they did hard-code coordinates, it'd have to be the starting ones, because they're the only ones you know every player has.
I like the idea of a user-specified landing zone, though. That'd be nifty, and means we can move or not move it as we see fit. Might be complicated though as the game wouldn't know where to focus if it didn't exist (due to a not-updated game, or a bug), so it'd need a backup option.
+1
I truly could use more space.
Please add extra land
How much more land?
I find one strip isn't usually wide enough to do something with, especially for a larger building. Though one strip would let you move everything down / across and pad out some smaller plots.
Ideally, 2 strip of land perpendicular to the mountains and 3 strips of land parallel to the mountains. But I would be happy with 1 of each. I just need to re-move my town and would like more land before I do it. That's why I'm so adamant about it.
Ditto... I play what I call "Logical Springfield." I try to make it amusing, but also logical. There's a town square, older buildings are together. Residential areas are somewhat distinct from businesses. I built the town on a grid of blocks that vary in width of 2, 3, 4, or 5 squares. All houses have yards, most buildings have parking lots.
Once I acquired all the land, I built a huge lake on the "right" side. I've gradually filled that in with add'l buildings as necessary. The prison and Frink's lab are on islands in the lake. I've been able to adapt fairly quickly with new buildings, by reconfiguring the grid blocks and reducing parking lot sizes. I have plenty of room for everything (I have all the premium buildings--except Mt. Carlsbad--since I began playing in Feb.) and can still grow a bit. But I'd like more land--at least one strip, to plan for expansion.
I've got all the water too, and actually would like more water. I'd like to build SQ out, and not have it take up so much of the beach views. I think EA could add a strip or two of water without putting much strain on the game. I notice that most of my neighbors only bought the water they need for their SQ. So adding water probably wouldn't get as much use. IMO.
In short, more land AND water please.
I love the sound of your Springfield! Totally agree about Squidport, too. I wanted to build a pier out to sea with something at the end, and was disappointed when I saw I couldn't.