How to balance City Rush and later modding in Warlock: Master of the Arcane?

[Maq-Bool-Ji]

Well after playing demo version of Warlock: Master of the Arcane and I concluded that it seems to important to rush town at beginning. I noticed that there is great advantage to town empire. Also I have noticed following advantage for small town.
1 farm, market , mainspring and resource building like temple, special unit, armory or income.

We are going to get higher movement rate for troops due to culture area.
You will be able to perform money, food or mana. However small town would help you to get requirement of yours. there should be negative points of the small town. You should give a look on civilization 5 to get the solution that they had developed. Currently this particular game as city such as Civilization or city spamming.

[Shikamaru Nara]

Spamming is happening a lot in the game. gigantic armies are fighting and sending raiding parties so that it can slow down settler production as well as military production. Well I am hoping that the developer of the game would fix this particular issue. there are lots of citieswhich are far away from Capital same as that of Civilization. Well according to me this particular game is really nice and I would like to give 7.5 stars from 10. I am having really great time with it.

[Badmannah]

I don’t think so the thing which you have mentioned in question would work for you. the system of city is going to frustrate all gamers and it wont limit same as that of Civ $ system. so far I have not found any real working system which would limit players. If gamers are able to build and number does not seems to be limited. It can be done by Rise of Nations or Rise of Legends in which every single city would need new technology.

I really loved to play this particular demo version of the game. I used to think about penalty of maintenance seems to be farther than that of capitol. It can help us to avoid city-spam. For your information I am not so expert and not having much knowledge about previous version of game. but I am wondering that current version is effective enough.
Big and specialized cities seems to be nice for multiplier buildings.
The small cities in the game denying tiles for important cities. It supposed to be suboptimal as it is multipliers

Big cities are supposed to denying tiles for small cities. Small cities will not be able to construct buildings even though they are not having enough population since they are not having tiles.
The Civ method is doing well but Civ is smaller than that of this particular version of the game. especially in terms of expansion department. It does not support for meta management and its great thing. you will be able to expand quickly the expansion supposed to falls really nice.

[DevenderD]

I am not having much idea regarding working of demo version of the game. but I did not got any major issue with the game. however I noticed lots of disadvantages with cities available into the game.
First of all you will require to build many settlers and denies your build queue to other units.
You are going to get less bonus with small cities as compared to multipliers.

I am not aware of the thing that it would affect growth.
You will get higher price for settlers if you are playing full version of the game with having higher difficulty. So it would be really difficult thing to expand new territories as well as harder to defend.
I am not happy with penalty Cities count if they are going to introduce and kind of limit then it should be really bad for this game. why I am saying I am not interested to do major wars in Civilization. There is no mean to have big penalty. This particular game is not having any major issue if any of penalty seems to working fine.

[Halle]

You wanted to make changes just because that you wanted to secure your empires future by simply building lots of cities so that you can get gold and food which you can use them at the time of financing a war. AI of game seems to be good enough. It seems to be fair in terms of unit to unit fighting. However building of own army with demo does not allow you to know at what difficult level you are supposed to play. it supposed to be smallest map so you are supposed to get advantage from the point where you have started from other opponents. Ratking empire supposed to be falling into roving monster attack and it was controlled by monster AI. Ratking was fighting with me than that of other AI.

Well I have been playing PC strategy games when very first Civ got released. Every single game has distil down with core gameplay strategy and it seems to be superior for all other games available in the market. ICS seems to be ultimate solution if you are playing empire building strategy games. I would like to appreciate if any game design that provides road block which would limit the progress of the gamers.
I can understand that all the gamers are not having same desire to win by having full domination. Particularly with harder difficulty setting that makes the game play enough difficult. A smart domination style strategist supposed to mapped all territory and it would allow every single city in boarders which is giving maximum growth. Civ 5 seems to be really nice with respect to winning option provided into the game and it should be focused on empires.

[Daksha90]

I don’t think so this game is for you if you don’t wanted to play small map. For this particular game it is all about how you wanted to play and you are not going to get any freedom to do so. They should make Civilization mod for this particular game. if you are looking to get structured and forced route game then you should go for Civ. It would give you lots of freedom in the game. you will be able to see monitor how you are supposed to play game and make rules according to requirement of yours.

The developer of the game should provide forced play style in which you will need to plan every single move in the game. If you are not able to play Warlock easily then I recommend that you should go for the game which seems to be suitable for you.

[Chakradevroy]

I would like to prefer limited number of cities because of below mentioned reason.

It seems to be awful job to manage large number of cities into the game. it would make you think which should be best city rather than of founding the same in all places.

It sounds great when you are going to get wilderness areas at the later stages where monsters will be able to spawn.

This particular thing making the entire game imbalance enough. Since all the gamers are having same number of cities and they are having same strength at the later stage rather than one should get advantage very early.

[GaganGang]

After playing demo version of the game I have concluded that it is smaller than that that of main world. It is having only single entrance. I have noticed that player who is holding entrance and that player is claiming entire world. If that player is having an army good which will allow you to eliminate all monsters and you will be able to spam cities as well. if you have killed all monsters into area and you should send settlers. If there is limit associated with number of cities then you can send units to wild area that fighting with monsters. It would allow you to get experience as well as loot. However without them you will not be able to claim all land. In such situation you should make a new monster lairs appearing into that areas.

There is very less cost is associated to figure out new city. You will need to spend 50 gold which allow you to build settler as well as small amount of food. Lost production capabilities of does not seems to be important point of this particular game. to increase cost of settlers is not a good idea. Rather it would make players to spend large amount of resources to do expansion. I used to play game which allows me to develop cities normally irrespective of considering speed of expansion. According to me the developer of the game should provide limit on number of cities which supposed to growing over time. It should not permit to introduce limit when number of cities getting increased slowly over time. You might noticed Conquering enemy cities issue. if you are having higher conquer limit then you have to simply raze all cities when you are conquer.

I think all the gamers are not going to like the idea which I have mentioned over here. it should be nice thing if they are going to provide good mod capabilities as compare to Civ4 or Civ5.

[Shae]

This game is offered for 20bucks only. Though number of cities are limited so it does not implies that there would be city rush. Number of cities are limited so I don’t think so it could make major issue in the game until and unless I have selected victory condition is used. I played last game against of managing class and I really loved to manage them. I am hoping that the developer of the game would release a new features in the patch itself. I am hoping that they would release DLC pack.
I am looking to have hero units and it should be considered as a hero units. I wanted to see artifacts and it should increase units powers. I am hoping that this particular game do well. there would be great multiplayer experience for small maps. They should consider following points to built Cities.

Cities should not share radius and they should block tiles from other cities on the map.
Population should be grown in blocked cities and it will not be able to build buildings. If you block larger cities then its should fill tiles slowly since larger cities going to grow bit slowly and it would loss all the resource.
The cities which are having small radius are worse than that of cities with larger radius due to multiplier buildings. If you are having flat bonus Craftsmen Districts, Farms, Mana Farms with multiplier buildings.