It's trying to strike an incredibly delicate balance between growing the economy, and providing for the people. But achieving this simple goal seems fiendishly difficult. Viva Tropico! is one of the main campaign missions, the goal sounds so simple - have over 65% happiness by 1975. Well, I suppose it is at a certain level, but the political intrigue comes in and makes it interesting. It isn't the normal 'gather resources, build, rinse and repeat'. It's a really fun game, the way they've moulded the controls to work with a pad is quite astoundingly good. If you have plenty of unfilled houses and plenty of homeless people it means the same sort of thing as if you had a massive unemployment problem alongside tons of jobs being unfilled: that the society you built is completely broken at a fundamental level and you need to fix it.I've been falling back on Tropico 3 for my late night XBOX 360 sessions. Either pay your workers more wages so they afford the homes, or decrease the rent on the homes. What would've fixed half the problems with this game is just reliable public transit and control over rents with more ability to adjust wages. Where it definitely is unrealistic is no oligarch is ever going to live in a shack because he's refusing to live in a normal middleclass home or apartment, and this was part of a big problem with Tropico 5 because also you have people living in shacks if the commute is too long. ![]() In fact the other home actually might be better because it has a much better view you'd say this can't be simulated and is too subjective, but really since Tropico 3 at least there's been a humidity index and beauty index as well as pollution, so it isn't like a pristine unpolluted house with a cliff overlook view of the ocean can't be factored in to homeowner prices and values. Why is my charging absolutely extortionate rates out of my renters supposed to increase housing quality? If anything it decreases housing quality and home happiness index, because there's no affordable housing and some slumlord is rubbing hands together "gief me moar coins, Tropican." But the house looks exactly the same. Which come to think there's an even funnier implication that makes me realize why people get scammed so hard into getting nVidia and Apple hardware that's overpriced af and not even within moonshot of its actual low quality hardware for the price, is "you pay more so it must be better!" Like, it's the same damn house. Somehow not just healthcare but also food is "always free in Tropico" which is most blatantly socialistic af, yet at the same time acts like I should have a massive housing crisis as "normal" just because rents are too high and have a sea of shacks near a bunch of empty houses and act like this is all "normal." That again, because the government of Tropico is building these housing and afaik the income is generated directly into the treasury anyway because mechanically there is no private ownership of homes in this game afaik. I guess, that even though as a German game company that likes to say "healthcare in Tropico is always free" that there's some unfortunate implications to these wealthy Germans for bringing up things like affordable housing in Berlin))) I'm still just really irritated by the way this game treats that. I would check your almanac to ensure that you truly do not have any homeless Tropicans. I will say though, it's strange that your housing happiness is in the 20s if you have electrified all bunkhouses and there are no shacks at all. Both buildings can be used by the Poor wealth class. A bunkhouse only has 40 housing quality for 6 families, though it is a little cheaper in terms of money and electricity. You should generally try to replace Bunkhouses in the Cold War, when the Tenement is unlocked WITH electrification, Tenements stand at a 63 housing quality (a whopping 90 at maximum budget, if you can afford it) while the "Armed Caretaker" setting is on, providing for 16 families. ![]() ![]() Originally posted by Baron von Tansley:Ah okay.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |