SC4 Devotion Forum Archives

SC4Evermore Welcome Portal => LEX File Exchange Discussion => Topic started by: SC4BOY on October 14, 2009, 07:09:52 AM

Title: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: SC4BOY on October 14, 2009, 07:09:52 AM
Hope this is a reasonable place to put this.. not sure

I've used the MASSIVE WORLD TRADE CENTER lot off and on, and I think this is a GREAT lot. Its been around for over a year. I know it doesn't use a lot of flashy colors and things, but it's mass, its reward status, plus its "station qualities", and it's cool integration of the network elements make it really unique.

I was just thinking given:
1. This is such a GREAT concept of the "bridge functional" placeholder lot
2. This is is such a HUGE lot with 52000+ CO$$$ jobs
3. This is made up of several nice "sub elements" ie the base plaza, each of the low height buildings (3 I think?) and the 2 towers
4. There has been much interest in "expansion" lots like the airports and seaports

Since these are true, I wonder if this can be a "staged growth" reward? It might start with the placeholder, as it currently does. Then it might add a base building and give some jobs.. 8k say, then 12k more and another base, 15k more and one of the towers, the last 17k and the last tower... all the time keeping some "construction type areas" for the unfilled parts until done. Of course these are just thoughts.. the specifics would be up to the designers.

This is all just thinking and I don't even know if it is possible or if it would be difficult. But I thought it might be a real conversation piece and another unique extension to the SC4 concepts. In the meantime it would make good use of the elements that have already been developed.

It could well be that all the people that are a part of this are just tired of fooling with it.. if so then.. sorry.. :)

Just thought I'd throw that out to see if folks thought that had merit.
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: Diggis on October 14, 2009, 07:56:14 AM
Think about this for a moment... other than special lots like airports and seaports can you think of a single other upgrading lot...?
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: RippleJet on October 15, 2009, 12:03:41 AM
The only way to achieve that would indeed be to make it a functional airport (or seaport)... ::)
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: SC4BOY on October 15, 2009, 07:31:06 AM
Perhaps I wasn't really clear (though what I am thinking might also be not possible ;) ) what I meant is an "overlay" kind of thing..  not something that was automatic... Just a way of making it "progressive" rather than a huge chunk at once.. Just like when you go from the "placeholder" to the reward.. it would just be several lots based on the same set of "stuff" :)
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: Diggis on October 15, 2009, 07:58:00 AM
Ahh  I see, sounds like a good idea.  You'll probably need to do some more models, of the buildings at various stages.  There are plenty of construction props available.  I look forward to seeing where you go with this.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: k808j on October 15, 2009, 09:23:28 AM
Along the lines of RippleJet, designing the WTC lot like a functional A/P or S/P would be better. Just as long the individual have all the dependencies
it should turn out great.
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: Diggis on October 15, 2009, 10:14:49 AM
Quote from: k808j on October 15, 2009, 09:23:28 AM
Along the lines of RippleJet, designing the WTC lot like a functional A/P or S/P would be better. Just as long the individual have all the dependencies
it should turn out great.

In what way?  How do you justify making a Commercial structure an airport?
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: k808j on October 15, 2009, 11:24:01 AM
Just as the functionals can upgrade themselves why can't commercials be designed the same way?
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: Diggis on October 15, 2009, 12:23:59 PM
Quote from: k808j on October 15, 2009, 11:24:01 AM
Just as the functionals can upgrade themselves why can't commercials be designed the same way?

Because we aren't designing the game...  it was designed by Maxis, 5 years ago...
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: RippleJet on October 16, 2009, 04:54:41 AM
Considering that airports in the game are nothing more than CO CAP relievers,
I wouldn't completely trash the idea of having other structures than airports modded like "airports"...

Those structures would have to be similar to other in-game rewards providing CO CAP relieves;
the Convention Center, the Stock Exchange and the University.

A World Trade Center could thus quite well provide CO CAP relief...
I think we need to be careful not to call it an "airport" though...

And maybe Jon would be interested in creating an upgradeable university... ::)
I would have to test to see if an "airport" can be modded as a functional school first though!
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: delta9 on December 11, 2009, 04:55:49 PM
I hate to be vulgar, and this is probably in bad taste, but one might want to make sure the capacity icons can be changed if you make it a functional airport... I don't think many people would be keen on that.
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: RippleJet on December 11, 2009, 05:33:52 PM
Yes, a custom query with custom icons would of course have to be created.
For an upgradeable university the capacity icon would of course have to be the apple.
Title: Re: World Trade Center thoughts
Post by: jplumbley on December 12, 2009, 12:33:09 AM
Quote from: delta9 on December 11, 2009, 04:55:49 PM
I hate to be vulgar, and this is probably in bad taste, but one might want to make sure the capacity icons can be changed if you make it a functional airport... I don't think many people would be keen on that.

Having planes in the query... I see what you are saying.  And I am sure there are a few people who might be sensitive to a memory that the building may stir certain memories for some people.  I don't think you are vulgar or in bad taste making that point.