• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Economy 2.0 Dev Diary #2

Welcome back to the second dev diary detailing the changes coming in the next patch. If you missed it, check out the first part here. Today we are covering a few important changes not directly related to the economy and we’ll go over what you can expect when loading up your existing cities.

Let’s start with Rent. Most likely you have run into complaints of “High Rent” in the game, so let’s talk about it. To complement the Land Value changes in patch 1.1.0f1 in March, we have tweaked how Rent works. First of all, we removed the virtual landlord so a building’s upkeep is now paid equally by all renters. Second, we changed the way rent is calculated. For those interested, the calculation looks like this:

Rent = (LandValue + (ZoneType * Building Level)) * LotSize * SpaceMultiplier

This of course affects the “High Rent” notifications you may have encountered, but we’ve tweaked those directly as well, so they are now based on the household’s income. That means that even if they currently don’t have enough money in their balance to pay rent, they won’t complain and will instead spend less money on resource consumption. Only when their income is too low to be able to pay rent will they complain about “High Rent” and look for cheaper housing or move out of the city.

Besides rent, households and companies need to pay for the building’s upkeep, which in turn affects the level of the building. When they pay the full upkeep fee, the building condition increases by a constant amount until the building levels up and the tenants start paying towards the next level. Similarly, if they cannot pay it, the building condition decreases by the same amount until it’s in such poor condition it collapses.

BUILDING UPGRADES UNLEASHED
From zoned buildings automatically leveling up to the City Service building upgrades you choose and place manually. While this update doesn’t directly relate to the Economy 2.0, it shares the same patch and deserves a little spotlight. Gone are the days when you had to bulldoze the entire building to remove, or just move, an upgrade. Now, all upgrades can be removed by selecting the building, finding the upgrade in the Selected Info Panel, and clicking the bin icon.

Sub-buildings.png

Deactivate or delete Extensions or relocate Sub-buildings through the Selected Info Panel

For sub-buildings, there’s even more control. They can also be removed using the bulldozer, you can pick them up and move them, or turn them on and off as needed. Moving them is particularly handy now as they don’t have to be placed in connection to the main building. As long as they are within the predefined radius and have pedestrian and/or road access, they will work like before. Sub-buildings like the Elementary School Playground just need a pedestrian path connecting them to the rest of the city, while sub-buildings like the Bus Depot Extra Garage will need road access to function. We’re excited to see how you take advantage of this new freedom in your cities, so don’t hesitate to tag us on social media if you’re showing off screenshots.


EXISTING CITIES
Now you might wonder how all of this affects your existing cities, so let’s get the most obvious question out of the way first. Saves from before the economy rework still work, though we expect they will have a transition period as the simulation adapts to the changes. When it comes to modded saves, we can’t make any guarantees, but keep an eye out for updates or instructions from the modders. Mods that affect the simulation are likely to be affected by the update.

When you load up your city (and unpause) there are a few things you should keep in mind. With Government Subsidies removed and City Service upkeep increased, the cost of running your city just increased. If your city relies on ambulances, hearses, fire engines, police cars, and garbage trucks coming from Outside Connection, make sure to enable the Import City Services policy in the City Information panel, but don’t forget that your neighbors charge a fee to help you out. All this is expected to create a negative money trend, but depending on your city’s finances, your tax income might be enough to offset the new costs once the calculations catch up. If you’re struggling for money, don’t forget that you can increase taxes, reduce service budgets, or temporarily turn buildings off to save on their upkeep cost.

Demand adjusts quite quickly, so don’t be alarmed if some of your demand bars empty or fill up when you start playing. With the increase in industrial manufacturing space, your industry will be on a hiring spree that’s likely to drive up your residential demand - unless your city has workers already looking for a job. We recommend giving it some time though as companies (commercial, industrial, and office) readjust their production and employee numbers to be profitable, which we expect will overall lead to an increase in unemployment in your city.

With the new calculations for residential density demand, your citizens may also start looking for different types of housing or move around the city. Thankfully, the new calculations for rent and resource consumption should help them afford the type of housing they prefer, and we expect most (if not all) of your “High Rent” notifications will disappear after letting the simulation run for a while. If you keep seeing these or they start to come back, then make sure to check your unemployment and provide citizens with jobs so that they can pay their rent.

With time and some tweaks, your existing cities should adjust to the changes, so you can get back to realizing their full potential. And as always, don’t hesitate to ask for help if you encounter any situations you’re unsure of how to handle and report any bugs you might run into here.


WHAT’S NEXT?
Before we finish for today, we’d like to share our plans going forward. We will of course follow discussions and read feedback you share as you play with these changes. We’ve done extensive testing to get the changes as balanced as possible, but we know that some tweaking will likely still be necessary once you all start sharing your experiences.

We’ve already started work on the next major patch which we hope to have ready for you in Q3, and we want to give you a little sneak peek at what you can expect. As previously mentioned, we want to expand the service import to bring you more control. We’re also looking at what we can improve in the UI and how the game relays information to you, so you have everything you need to solve issues in the game. We’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic. Are there any issues you’ve struggled to solve in your city? Any information you have been looking for but weren’t able to find?

Last, but definitely not least, the art team has been cooking up some new free buildings for you all. We appreciate each and every one of you for sticking with us and giving us a chance to make Cities: Skylines II what it can and should be. Your patience and support mean the world to us and we hope the new service buildings and vehicles can serve as a token of our appreciation. Thank you for being a part of our community!

NewStuff.png

A sneak peek at some of the new service buildings and vehicles you can look forward to
 
  • 109Like
  • 54Love
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
The solution to this is simply the player not zoning the largest lot possible. If you want buildings to only be 3x3, then zone 3x3 lots. It's not that hard.

My question would be why is something like controlling the lot size not just a variable I could set in the UI?? Why am I having to manually lay down 2x2 size low density lots by manually drawing every 2x2, skip a 2x2, draw a 2x2 etc etc.

If we had UI assistance that could help with flood fill and marquee fill that would be the dream to create low density neighborhoods quickly. In this dream situation , I'd imagine the UI has a drop-down selection near the marquee tool area that has "Zone As" options like "2x2", "2x3", "3x3", "3x4" etc, maybe with an additional button to rotate or previsualize the zone layout and housing org before committing to the plots. Perhaps all of this is handled when the player flood fills zoning or marquee fills zone and then a popup dialogue appears with the aforementioned.

One other cool thing that a more extreme tool like this could provide would be an automated way to make "cul-de-sac neighborhoods" using the pre-existing content. I think cul-de-sac are a very Americanized way of handling neighborhoods, which might explain why they are absent. In my mind, all you'd need is to be able to zone around the roundabout model, even if the roundabout is very small the illusion it could convey on a tool would be like auto cul-de-sac, and another option inside of the zoning tool.

As it stands, low density residential has this mini game of keeping the zone size very small and even with the upcoming changes to rent I have a feeling there will still be advantages to having small zones. Make the tools work more efficiently for the players ideas should be the goal.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I hope this is not a simplification ("streamlining...") process where mechanics are being removed because of players not understanding what's going on in their cities and because of hard to fix bugs. Things like removing virtual landlord sound like simplifying the underlying economy model. I would rather give more info to players, fix bugs and keep the complexity of the game instead of removing parameters and dimensions of simulation originally meant to be features.
Just speculation, of course.

This is bound to happen, unfortunately. Some features can be removed because it's too much complexity for a team to straighten it out within a limited time and budget, even though they are representatives of real-world economics within the simulation. Players wanted immediate gratification when they simulate and manage their cities, and this is the end result of that reduction of complexity.

Unless one of the devs can chime in and explain why it is better to remove virtual landlords in favor of the alternative, this is what I'm observing right now.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Thank you so much for your hard work to make this right. It's later than I had hoped, but at least it seems like things are headed in a very positive direction with the renewed focus on quality over speed. Please keep it up. I'm excited to play when the patch drops!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
My question would be why is something like controlling the lot size not just a variable I could set in the UI?? Why am I having to manually lay down 2x2 size low density lots by manually drawing every 2x2, skip a 2x2, draw a 2x2 etc etc.

If we had UI assistance that could help with flood fill and marquee fill that would be the dream to create low density neighborhoods quickly. In this dream situation , I'd imagine the UI has a drop-down selection near the marquee tool area that has "Zone As" options like "2x2", "2x3", "3x3", "3x4" etc, maybe with an additional button to rotate or previsualize the zone layout and housing org before committing to the plots. Perhaps all of this is handled when the player flood fills zoning or marquee fills zone and then a popup dialogue appears with the aforementioned.
Totally agree. To add to this, lot size could also be a district area setting. When you select a district, there could be a section within the district policies that allow you to restrict lot size by zone type.

They could make it check box matrix, zone type by row, lot size by column. The player can then toggle on/off the lot sizes they want or don’t want to construct in the district.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This of course affects the “High Rent” notifications you may have encountered, but we’ve tweaked those directly as well, so they are now based on the household’s income. That means that even if they currently don’t have enough money in their balance to pay rent, they won’t complain and will instead spend less money on resource consumption. Only when their income is too low to be able to pay rent will they complain about “High Rent” and look for cheaper housing or move out of the city.

Please, can you help me to better understand this? So does it mean that if household has barely to pay a rent, it won't buy any resources? So - for example - I could have a poor city where people can just pay rent without any more money to spend on resources so there wouldn't be any commercial demand... Or does a household have some minimum demand for resources which it requires? So it actually has to have money at least for the rent and this bare minimum of resources...?

Anyway, I appreciate your work on these updates - seems like a step to the right direction to me :)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Thank you for the latest Dev Diaries. If the patch lives up to the promise, then I might consider rechecking CS2, after I stopped playing 5 months ago.

You asked about what we would like to see in the next (Q3) patch:

1. Fix all the public transport issues that break the whole simulation (e.g. trams getting stuck or disappearing, etc.)

2. Fix the energy simulation when disabling the day/night cycle. Solar panels and batteries should produce / charge / feed energy according to the day-time and weather even when the visuals show sunshine 24hrs a day. The current bug just renders the whole energy simulation useless when relying on solar energy

3. Additional service buildings, especially for schools, i.e. smaller schools with much smaller footprint for villages, and schools that fit into the landscape of a high-density skyline (nothing looks more silly than having a skyline and 5 of those completely mis-fitting elementary schools in the middle to meet the demand)

Once you fixed the economy and those issues above have been fixed as well, the game might actually have a chance to be fun again. If you really want to, you can get all of us there before the end of the year.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Just speculation, of course.

This is bound to happen, unfortunately. Some features can be removed because it's too much complexity for a team to straighten it out within a limited time and budget, even though they are representatives of real-world economics within the simulation. Players wanted immediate gratification when they simulate and manage their cities, and this is the end result of that reduction of complexity.

Unless one of the devs can chime in and explain why it is better to remove virtual landlords in favor of the alternative, this is what I'm observing right now.
Doesn't sound good. I just don't know whether this economy fix is acheived mostly via removing simulation features to then drop out parameters which cause too much complexity and are bug-prone or "virtual landlord" case is an exception. And yeah, would be nice to know what was that landlord. To be sincere I didn't have these high rent issues at all, guess cause I play the game differently. I had rather issues with the ugly trees and hedges and tons of other bugs mostly unrelated to whatever is discussed here. Would be nice if someone from CEO could confirm that this is not a systematic removal of simulation (eg.: for realism) features. But I guess it is not in their interest to do so, in case it is.
 
Damn why so mean? You know it takes a lot of time to develop things? And now they coming up with a very big update and change and you still not satisfied? They are so transparent now, and they show very good will. Just have some more patience and the game will only get better at this point.
You and I have very different ideas of what "mean" is. I'm just stating facts and my opinion. The "very big update" wouldn't be needed if they knew what they were doing in the first place. And transparent? LOL.

The only good will they've shown comes off as their hand is being forced by their corporate overlords.

And sure, the game might get *better* but can it ever actually reach being "good"? After so many months, I'm guessing "probably not".
 
  • 6Like
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
this right here is what I think of when someone looks for an example of “toxicity.”

If you can’t say anything nice…

CS1 still works… Civilization… Manor Lords…

But your best of use of time was this janky comment.
<holds up a mirror>

The difference being, I've publicly stated that if CO can't get their act together and provide a solid game as was advertised and sold to us, then I'll derive my value from other forms of entertainment. One of which is making sure that for all you rose-tinted glasses types, there's at least one voice pointing out the crap shoveled out to the community.

As for "<game> still works" ... what's your point?
 
  • 6Like
  • 5
Reactions:
the tone is absolutely toxic. nothing nice whatsoever to say is toxic. Thumper’s Mom offers sage guidance here.

So not saying the nicest thing possible is toxic?

Would you say false advertising and ripping off your customers is toxic?

It's cool to have your opinion, but don't state it as if it's a fact.
 
Last edited:
  • 12
  • 5Like
Reactions:
You and I have very different ideas of what "mean" is. I'm just stating facts and my opinion. The "very big update" wouldn't be needed if they knew what they were doing in the first place. And transparent? LOL.

The only good will they've shown comes off as their hand is being forced by their corporate overlords.

And sure, the game might get *better* but can it ever actually reach being "good"? After so many months, I'm guessing "probably not".
You are again not stating facts. Your timeframe is again not correct. It is not 10 month after release but 8 (or will be in two weeks). Why do you feel the urge to always exaggerate? And time is very easy to spot, that you are wrong there. But with that wrong, what else of your statements are wrong?
 
  • 6
  • 4
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
We’re also looking at what we can improve in the UI and how the game relays information to you, so you have everything you need to solve issues in the game. We’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic. Are there any issues you’ve struggled to solve in your city? Any information you have been looking for but weren’t able to find?

Hi,

Please do something to improve underground view readability. I find it really more difficult to work in underground view in CS2 than in CS1, because it's too messy.
1) There is probably one easy fix: disable textures, the same way it was for CS1.
2) In edit mode, add a depth indicator for underground road/tracks that are hovered by the cursor, so that we can know at which depth this section is located.
3) In edit mode, you could add at regular interval, a thin vertical line going from the underground road/track up to the surface. That would help to estimate the location of the road/track in the 3D view.

For public transportation lines, especially trains/subway, connecting lines to the stations is hard unless you zoom in very close, because the two (or more) icons for connecting to a station are too close each other. Maybe drawing those icons at a fixed distance (for humans) independent of zoom level when the camera is far could help (or something like that). Moreover, those icons are often covered by the large blue icon, which I find quite useless by the way (I don't find them easily understandable, and I don't care about them since there's already the icon for connecting lines)

For public transportation view, one thing I liked in CS1 was that cims that where waiting for a train, bus or whatever transport, where colored with the transport line. This was a nice visual indicator of the crowd dedicated to a stop/station.

I don't understand why in public transportation view, my buses are green while the bus lines are blue. Same for trains. Cargo planes are blue while their lines are magenta. Underground vehicles (subway) however are not visible unless highlighted with the mouse cursor. Globally it looks messy and a bit inconsistent. I think I preferred how it was in CS1.

In CS1, this was clear:

cs1-underground-view.png


In CS2, this is messy and hardly readable:

95436980405B19F54D66B3C94FC268447FBE8562


611D10C4726BF134EC0A59F1635F7FE119C1092E


Another UI point: the building level view is disturbing. It shows graphics for the proportion of the 5 levels of each kind of buildings with a dedicated color per zone type (green for residential, yellow industries, etc.). And at the same time, on the 3D view of the city, the buildings are painted with a color gradient indicating their level, but this color gradient reuses some of the colors used in the graphics, such as green and yellow. And that is fooling us at first look, because brain thinks that the graphics colors and the 3D view colors are related, which are not.

In CS1, the color gradient used was of the same tint than the zone type. This had another advantage: on the same view, you could see the different zone types by their colors, whereas in CS2 you only do it separately (one button for seeing residential, one button for seeing industrial, and so on). The separate view is useful, as it has other indicators, but I miss the global building view by zone type of CS1.

Thanks.
 
  • 7
  • 2Love
Reactions:
Check out the most popular mods - that should tell you tons about what people are dearly missing in the game ...
Sometimes it can. Sometimes it just tells you what a very small subset of players want, since most people playing any game are going to be playing without any mods.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
1) Will the families / citizens now actively look for affordable housing instead of just complaining like they do now?
2) There is a lot of information what game omits and doesn't show. My biggest issue is with the unemployment data, which doesn't show the info based on education levels. One tab with Total amount of people in each education class, total amount of jobs for that education class and the difference. Now you can have 15% unemployment and lack of workers at the same time, but you got no idea which groups this involves. You can see the lack of workers from the workplace overlay but you'd have to assume which ones are the ones with high unemployment.

Also import / export data is somewhat abstract showing percentage rather than actual tons. You need to piecemeal a full picture from several places and that's not very fun.

Edit: Oh, and please stop the nonsense with building model changing with building level updates. It doesn't work like that in reality, it's not good looking either. And it reduces the amount of building models we have in our disposal. Initial building should always remain more or less the same, add some props / fine tune some small extension etc. but don't change the whole building. This way for example the beach properties would have added substantially more house models _permanently_ into your city rather than the 6 level 5 models.
That edit right there, with all due respect, is NOT a good idea
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
You are again not stating facts. Your timeframe is again not correct. It is not 10 month after release but 8 (or will be in two weeks). Why do you feel the urge to always exaggerate? And time is very easy to spot, that you are wrong there. But with that wrong, what else of your statements are wrong?
Yeah, that's my bad for spacing out on just how long it's been. When things get dragged on for so long, it's easy to lose track. Still doesn't change anything.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Thank you so much for your hard work to make this right. It's later than I had hoped, but at least it seems like things are headed in a very positive direction with the renewed focus on quality over speed. Please keep it up. I'm excited to play when the patch drops!
I am just taking your posting as an example. Nothing personal.

Guys, really?
At the moment we have just words. They do sound nice, I will give you that.

But we did have a lot of words in the past already, and boy, did they all sound great. What a wonderful, great game that would be! "If you can dream it, you can build it!"
And if you had a 4090 in your system, you could even see it. In 1080, that is. At 27 fps.

Let's wait and see how the patch will actually work.
IF it works, then we can say: "Ok, finally things are changing for the better!"

Until then, maybe we should just be a bit more careful with our enthusiasm.
 
  • 8Like
  • 6
  • 4
Reactions: