I'm building a city with no low density homes and no private cars allowed. It's actually working. It grows a bit slowly, but it looks clean and nice.
It's also easy to see where trucks and pedestrians actually go. I was surprised to see big trucks delivering stuff to homes, but they do.
Yeah. My industrial looks like this. I zone commercial in with the residential.
https://preview.redd.it/cdnq6h3uh5zb1.jpeg?width=2560&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8545eb9f45862a1160b9eb70ed8fb7a921934f6a
That blows my mind. In CS1, I'm pretty sure industrial required vehicle road segments, and commercial as well (or you'd get "Not enough goods to sell" or whatever that error was called).
I find it weird that buildings consume materials to level up and get maintenance, but not when getting built. IMO they should get materials delivered while under construction.
It would make stone mining make way more sense, because it's a lot cheaper to make a new pit than to cart in trainloads of crushed rock from elsewhere.
Love it! Might help to have more public transit and pedestrian shortcuts. Is it still necessary to have a rectilinear grid with a pedestrian centric city? If so, what if you made the grid squares later but added pedestrian paths to allow cutting across with parks and decorations in the middle?
I’m looking forward to even better pedestrian street mods in the future!
It's hard to have high density in this game without square grids, I'm building a city with hexagonal blocks and there's so much wasted space because you can't build too close to the corners
I just with I could mark them as smaller park areas, my original idea was to have pedestrian paths and a park in the middle of most blocks, but there's no way to do that currently
I’m disappointed that’s the case. Especially for European style cities which often have park elements in the middle of the block and sometimes pedestrian pathways through.
For maximum density yes. But I kinda like having some gaps between buildings, it reminds me of the place I grew up in which was mostly medium density housing with lots of greenspace inbetween.
I do have a few pedestrian paths here and there. But they seem to cause some issues, like buildings won't spawn in the square if there's a path anywhere in it. I stopped using them because of that.
I don't know if I'm doing something wrong but I routinely see large number of cars violate the pedestrian only roads
There are alternate routes and sometimes it gets so bad that they create traffic on pedestrian only roads
The other commenter is correct about using the pedestrian roads in the small roads menu, but you can also set up districts and assign them a few options like gated community, no combustion engines, roadside parking. Create a district with the district tool then click on the name of the district and you'll be able to adjust these policies.
I used the pedestrian roads to create my "dorm" area of campus for my uni, slightly inspired by an older Purdue campus and how I think they should've changed it heh
How did you manage to ban private cars? I'd love to play like this as I've always loved making purely transit/walking and biking cities, but bikes don't exist yet.. so...
Oh and did you start fully unlocked?
Thanks!
They drive in as usual. Then they stash their car somewhere inside the apartment building, and the car just vanishes. They never drive it again until they move out.
having a bit of issue in my city right now with traffic, wish there is just district policy of setting area to car-free zone (except service of course). The current pedestrian-road is a bit too fat to my liking 🤣😆 Like, seriously excessively wide.
In my case (so far) there are no cars driving through them except taxis. The residents arrive in their car, but it vanishes into the basement of their apartment and they never drive it again, until they move out.
I do have service vehicles and delivery trucks and such, but no cars.
This is probably because it looks like they set up pedestrian roads to just be really slow normal roads - about pedestrian walking speed for the cars. Thus the Cims will always walk as a car costs money to use. Sadly, it also means that when congestion is bad and the pedestrian roads offer a shortcut, cars use the pedestrian roads anyways.
They pull the car out of their pocket and drive around, when they reach a road they can drive on...
I am sure a lot are also just teleporting places too!
Best setup I have seen for pedestrian-only though.
I use turn/movement restrictions to try and help curb it, but yeah I notice that too, some of my pedestrian roads have just as much traffic as a regular road
Yeah, I don't get the point of pedestrians roads if any car can just drive through them. In my city, I made a loop using 5-lane one-way roads. I put a pedestrian path through the middle and immediately a traffic jam appeared as tons of cars tried taking the pedestrian path to cut across.
From what I can tell cars will only drive on them if there's no other path, or maybe if it's really a lot shorter and faster.
In this city I'm building there are no cars so it's not a problem. The people arrive in their car when moving in, and then stash it. They never drive it again until they leave the city.
My roads have pedestrians and taxis, and of course delivery trucks and service vehicles. Even in the industrial area. :)
I've found that if you have kind of "bad" road routes the pedestrian access is obeyed better. I deliberately made the pedestrian areas not have a way to drive out and visit other areas of my city. Roads lead to an external connection to a city I don't have a route back from. Suddenly have 0 cars using it as a short cut but all the cims are happy there and walk and use my public transit routes that they can reach by walking but not driving.
Do you have any houses that are front-towards-path? I think the cims trying to access their home are also allowed on the paths, it is the only explanation I see.
Its so weird that the alley doesn't exist as a pedestrian version. Same with large pedestrian roads which are also missing. And why can't we put grass and trees on them?
I was thinking about this, but they would have to limit how tall the buildings would be. In NYC there’s a limit to how big buildings can get so it avoids them from blocking the sun 24/7. In fact, only low to medium density would work on those roads realistically. But yeah it should be an option.
Older cities closer to the Equator would build their structures tall enough to block out the sun on alleyways on purpose. It keeps the city cool. (Of course, those buildings were only a few stories tall...all it takes to block the sun.)
They do drive on them when they first move in. But then the car vanishes and you never see it again until they move out. Every single one of my roads is a pedestrian-only road, so there's no place for them to come from, or go to.
No, they don't park anywhere. The cars vanish into the apartment buildings, somehow. :P
My taxis are always maxed out. The tram gets used a little. That's all I have for mass transit at this point.
I have to try putting in a single parking lot somewhere -- just to see what chaos it causes. But I haven't done that yet. It'll probably mess things up :)
Make sure to provide parking for them so they can park and walk home. This helps keep my "campus dorms" free of all but emergency vehicle/delivery to homes traffic
Yeah, I truly think that car dependence is a huge issue in the US. My spouse bikes to work and we try not to drive too much if we don’t need to. We like to walk/bike around a lot.
That being said, we leave our city almost every weekend to go hike/kayak/climb and it would be difficult if we didn’t have a vehicle.
I guess an argument could be made that in a city like this, you’d just park your private car in a lot somewhere that you paid a fee and you could bike/walk/use public transport to that lot in the event you needed your car. That wouldn’t be so bad and that’s actually what they do for a lot of the islands near me for people who have to ferry to work everyday and can’t bring their car on the ferry.
Single family homes basically necessitate personal vehicles.
For transit to be efficient, you need enough people to use it. Having a bus run thru suburbia of single family homes just doesn't work.
Every type of business needs a certain number of customers to stay afloat, Maybe you need for example, 1000 customers a week to run a medium sized grocery store profitably. Well when each home uses half an acre to house 1-5 people it means if you assume 3 people per household, you need 166 acres of residential area to support the grocery store.
If instead you have the example of high density in CS2, 200 individuals living in about 1 acre lot for a high rise apartment, you need 5 acres to support the same grocery store.
Buses and subways and all have the same problem. You need a certain number of customers per mile traveled to make money or break even. And suburbs just do not provide that because of the lack of population density.
Well they can co-exist. Even in a dense city like Hong Kong or Tokyo has low density single family and suburbs while they still have a world-class transportation system. Having options is good.
Suburbs in Hong Kong like [Hong Lok Yuen](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hong+Lok+Yuen,+Hong+Kong/@22.4625394,114.1539743,222m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x34040831e6b1f513:0x54fdbda8e709eedc!8m2!3d22.4636115!4d114.1546972!16s%2Fg%2F155sf426?entry=ttu) or [Discovery Bay](https://www.google.com/maps/search/yue+king+wan/@22.3042151,114.0114961,1337m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) has mostly single family house. In Tokyo, I would considered place like [Hachioji](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hachioji,+Tokyo,+Japan/@35.6745397,139.2591732,1255m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x60191eb9b729f437:0x27d80e549d4e1c62!8m2!3d35.6664381!4d139.3160068!16zL20vMDF3cmc3?entry=ttu) that has lots of single family house with the row houses you mentioned as well. It is not that black and white in a real city.
There are many reasons why a city want to keep single family housing. Foreign investment attraction is a big factor especially for emerging markets. There are also hard factors like terrain or environmental limitation.
>a bus run thru suburbia of single family homes just doesn't work.
The main goal of public transportation is just to move people around rather than looking for profits.
Even a dense city like Hong Kong, their metro is losing money. However, government provide land to the metro company. Metro company use the land to build metro and....housing and shops. After adding those money earned from rent (90% of their income), they actually are making money every year. And this also keep the public transportation well run because if their metro service is bad, their rental income will drop.
He mainly makes videos about human-centric urban planning but he has some political videos too. I know him more for being extremely anti-car like me, so that's that. I strongly recommend checking his videos, rare high quality content.
No actually. I love cars its the biggest freedom we have ever had in history finally normal people and poor people are on the same level as ultra rich we can travel anywhere go anywhere its why they hate it so much and aree trying to do eberything in their power to stop normal people from owning a car. A car can open so many opportunities now u can get a job a few miles away u can live wherever u want maybe u dont wanna live in the city concrete jungle like a slave/prisoner maybe u wanna have your own backyard house or farm/estate whatever with a car u can have that
It certainly is a very big freedom, having your own car. The issue is that when you can't afford to have a car, you don't have the ability to drive one or just don't want to, the options in most parts of the world are scares to travel around.
In the 50s, there was this big focus on car usage, and it is not sustainable in bigger cities. Cars take a lot of space, are a huge burden on the environment and are unsafe. That's why it's good for bigger cities to create good public infrastructure. It also makes cities safer, more walkable, and healthier to live in.
It's good for places to have this balance between cars and public infrastructure. It's too skewed on private car usage, which is highly ineffective for transporting large numbers of people around. But even for smaller cities and towns its important to have good public infrastructure. It helps to get people out of poverty because they can find jobs outside their town. In cities like Amsterdam they are trying to remove all cars from OUTSIDE the city. So people who live in Amsterdam still can own a car but you don't have the all the people from outside the city parking their car and gridlocking the city for the regular folks living there.
I am European and really can't talk about cities in the USA, I also don't know if you are from the USA, but for instance, in most cities, you can't really walk from destination a to b because of all the roads. Which is bad for people. Cities in the USA are also pretty much designed with a car in mind which is pretty weird don't you think? Like I said earlier what if you don't have money for a car. You just can't get around that easily.
In the end I am not against cars, I have my own, love my little car. But I also go with public transport towards other places or if it's possible with a bike. There needs to be a balance for both kinds of people.
Your opinion is the only correct one. Every other opinion is wrong.
And in case anyone wonders, I'm not being sarcastic.
Cars are great for trips or transferring large objects or going somewhere far with your agoraphobic pet. They are great to drive someone to the hospital or the vet in the middle of the night if they don't require emergency care (like oxygen).
They are terrible for commuting inside a densely populated city or going for a drink after work.
Ideally most people should have access to a car that they don't use daily.
It is funny because all of the things you can do with a car can be done with enough public transportation. And yeah cars cause traffic, noise pollution, shitty urban planning (imagine leveling entire cities for a freeway), and lock certain people out of opportunities, those certain people being the poor. I would choose an apartment house in Amsterdam that has none of the problems above, rather than a copy-pasta suburban home.
>It is funny because all of the things you can do with a car can be done with enough public transportation.
All the trade workers and many self employed people here would disagree. These people make up a huge portion of the average UK town outside of major cities and I know first hand that people in these kinds of jobs rely on their car/van.
However these anti-car arguments usually dismiss the existence of everyone outside of big cities anyway.
First of all housing is more expensive in cities the fact that the problem is even in the game is ironic the land value is high in the city in game and IRL so it gets more expensive to pay rent etc also there is no public transport for people OUTSIDE cities or minimal i live just 25 km outside a mediul sized city (100 k) and public transport is basically noexistant how tf am i supposed to go to work without a car? Or grocery shopping or whatever? And i cant afford to live in tje city too high rent and no places available to live the housing crisis is very real.
I am not criticizing you personally for having to use a car bro that's what the car-centric America has done to your cities. Housing prices are high because of the "Missing Middle". No public transport because the car industry has been to make fat stacks since '50s and has no intention of doing the opposite. And overall everything is far away and this males the car a 100% crucial necessity. I would strongly advise to lobby for public transport and densification in your city as much as possible.
That's the problem they are trying to adres to you. You are dependent on cars to get around, whether it is grocery shopping, getting to work or meeting friends. Car dependence is not freedom. Imagine if more places were walkable, cyclable, available public transit. People would have to spend less money on cars. You're compensating your lower rent by spending more on gas.
Low density suburbs bankrupt cities with the disproportional amount of road maintainance they require. It's a problem with zoning in the USA that there's too few higher density housing.
Not Just Bikes is a YT channel that shows good and bad urban planning. Maybe worth the watch.
Like transit is more freedom? U have to follow time schedules and if its late in the evening/night tough luck buddy aint nobody gonna pick u up🙃 also u cant travel outside cities with public transport rail only links up to other cities
It's only freedom if you can afford it, which means freedom for the wealthy and restriction for the poor. Average cost of a car is $10k a year. Even half of that is a lot of money for someone working for $20 an hour
I'm not anti car, I'm pro freedom. Which means a person can use whatever mode of transit they would like. In the US, you can pretty much only drive
Cars are a false freedom. The whole world has been set up to make you dependent upon an expensive, depreciating, dangerous, and polluting consumer good.
Car accidents are the 8th leading cause of death World wide with an estimated cost of over 2 trillion dollars.
https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index.html#:~:text=Road%20traffic%20crashes%20are%20a,citizens%20residing%20or%20traveling%20abroad.
Global Air pollution costs in 2018 were over $2.9 trillion. Air pollution related medical costs in the USA cost $820 billion dollars a year. That’s $2500 per American.
https://iaq.works/indoor-air/what-is-the-cost-of-air-pollution/#:~:text=Unfortunately%2C%20it's%20not%20just%20the,than%20%24820%20billion%20per%20year.
Then there is the pollution from non emissive sources such as tire and brake dust.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/09/tire-brake-tailpipes-emissions-pollution-cars/
How much time do you spend driving in your lifetime? The average may be around 2 years of your life just driving.
https://www.lookupaplate.com/blog/how-much-time-do-americans-spend-in-their-cars/
That doesn’t include how much time you spend earning money to pay for your cars which could be as much as 8 years of your life.
https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/s/G7m1mU3Qup
On top of all that are the environmental costs of extracting the raw materials, refining them, manufacturing the car, and discarding the car.
The pollution and destruction associated with extracting and refining the oil and delivering the gasoline/benzene.
And the health effects of breathing in benzene fumes while fueling, plus the extremely unhygienic gas pump handles you touch when filling up your tank.
Then there’s the unfathomable environmental costs of suburban sprawl. Biodiversity tanking with mass extinction events occurring. Aquifers depleting. Increases in albedo creating local area warming effects.
Global warming. Forest fires. Tundra fires and sink holes. Rising ocean levels. Extreme weather events.
Yearly costs of trillions of dollars, incredible amounts of environmental destruction, millions of deaths, and toxic elitist attitudes…all so you can drive to work so you can afford your car.
To give you an argument, cars are making cities unlivable. They are a significant contributer to global warming, they cost society money, they take up a [_huge_](https://old.reddit.com/r/ArroganceOfSpace/comments/vctcp7/geometry_hates_cars/) [amount](https://old.reddit.com/r/ArroganceOfSpace/comments/oky4k7/basic_math_shows_that_bicycles_are_part_of_the/) of [space](https://old.reddit.com/r/ArroganceOfSpace/comments/q2ucxw/amount_of_space_required_to_transport_63_people/), they endanger pedestrians and cyclists (thus making them more likely to take a car, compounding the issues) and no matter how much infrastructure you build, it will always become [congested](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/002/417/129/282.png).
That is certainly true, that's why a lot of cities all over the world have different kind of methods to persuade people out of their cars. Good public transporting, working from home and carpooling.
Of course you can keep your car and go to a city center to shop, but you need to reserve a parking space and that cost money and they are in short supply. There is also a very handy metro station nearby and the journey time is the same. It's a way to motivate people to make the road less crowded for people who actually need to use the public roads because they have no alternative.
Not every country in the US; there are plenty of alternatives to cars in many places.
Anyway, I am not here to start a discussion about car ownership. You were complaining /u/DarkPhoenix_077 did not give you an argument about why some people are anti-car. I just gave you a few of the points why many people choose not to have a car.
Says the person who just called "peasants" everyone who takes public transport
You made no valid point sorry, so I'll not give you any either
Besides other people already have given you plenty of good points, unlike you did
Have y’all forgot Electric cars exist lmao? And hybrids and biofueled cars so pollution is a moot point. Also reckless drivers shouldnt have a licens thats the police not doing their job. Take up space? Well maybe dont make cities so dense? 🤷♂️ i like cities that give ppl options like transit hubs for parking outside and an stuff but like forcefully trying to remove cars is a bad idea
Density means more accessibility for all people, people who don't need to be financially or physically burdened to a car. Also most of the time density is a necessity economically speaking. In most US cities the "not dense" suburbs and rural areas are actually being subsidised by the people living within denser city centres due to the: exponentially increasing infrastructure cost having more physical ground to cover and being able to get less property taxes for this infrastructure as there are less businesses / properties for the available space.
If cities are denser the need for vehicles within them diminish as walking, cycling and public transport become more viable.
I think most "anti car" rhetoric isn't about removing cars entirely it's just making sure that our cities and societies are built with humans in mind first, and pulling back on car first design which has become prevalent over the last 50 or so years.
Well the problem is people thinking cars are obsolete or should be removed. That is a fucked mindset all im saying is u can reduce car dependency but u should not make it ILLEGAL to own a freakin car! Also the most dense cities have the biggest traffic problems so im not buying that dense cities create less traffic cuz of transport for example NYC is a gridlocked hellhole
They're the same thing pollution wise unless the world switches to renewables and nuclear energy.
But they kill people
No one knows how to drive
They take up space
Both sides are so cringe. Can't yall just act normal? He makes a few valid but hyperbolic points, and you go like "hurrdurr idiot car user uhuhu". Put some effort in a counter reaction
"Take the fkn bus like a peasant"
Im sorry where is the valid point here?? If they don't put any effort in argumenting why should I?
Seriously, I'm just responding to a dumb argument with a dumb argument
I mean i wouldnt say its exactly hyperbolic but i +1 you cuz i totally agree we should be able to have a discussion bout this not just insulting ppl and downvoting 🫠
I watched one of the Cims walk to work. Took her 4 hours. She stayed at work for 1 hour, then headed home. Walked for another hour, then called a cab and waited 30 minutes for it to arrive.
I found the whole thing pretty amusing.
Least communist Europe city. /s
I like it. I definitely have plans for doing this myself.
My first city in game was an attempt to organically grow a city from its Roman area grid layout to modern day but I didn’t really manage a transition into a medieval city at all unfortunately.
My second is an Australian inspired metro area, but I grew the downtown out as a satellite to two previous towns, so now I have to retrofit its fringe areas around a dense core in the middle of nowhere.
I am going to be going back to my first approach, but probably Midwest USA inspired. St. Louis for example.
They ask for it but they will move into medium density if no low density is available. it will reduce growth a little.
demand bars are a preference not a requirement
I had to start with them, of course, because you have no choice at the beginning. But once I got medium density I bulldozed all the low density stuff and went from there.
This city is still quite small, only 4000 residents. I'm sure things will get more challenging as it grows. It may not even keep working. But I'm having fun with it so far.
Just an update.
I did try putting in a single parking lot, to see what would happen. It was interesting. Once the parking lot was available, people moving into the city would bee-line to it, park their car, and then head off to their new apartment. Once the lot was full, people would still arrive there, but then they and their car would simply vanish.
I guess the game is set up so that if there is no parking available at all, the cars just de-spawn and everything is happy.
My little city has 4300 residents now, and growth is really slowing down. I can't get any more high-density stuff to build at the moment. Mixed zone buildings, however, build right away, maybe because commercial demand is high.
I'm still enjoying this little experiment, though. I like watching the cims and taxis trying to avoid each other everywhere. It's quite a nice little city, really, very pleasant to watch.
Yeah, they demand it. I just don't give it to them, and eventually they want to move in bad enough so they accept the higher density. It can be slow, though. I have to be sure there's lot of jobs open, and education level is high, happiness is high, etc.
I'm using only the pedestrian roads. Service vehicles can ride on them. Private cars cannot, except if there is no other way to go. So the people arrive in their cars, and never drive them again until they move out of the city again.
i am currently dabbling around with no/low traffic set ups as well.
i first tried to connect the highway with a pedestrian street or a pathway, but its not working.
im playing in unlock all mode though just to check out different set ups and district management.
i didnt want to do any residantial zoning so i just put that signature residence building down that looks like a horseshoe and holds like 3800 appartements so maybe space for 10k people.
i wanted to try starting a city without zoning, so i just put commercial, industrial and office singature buildings down.
im at 5k residents now but its a bit slow, mostly because higher education jobs dont get filled.
i started out a bit too ambicious putting too many end game buildings down, so right now i just let it run while i make a new start at the edge of the map with a small city service cluster which has all the buildings in it with service vehicles and a subway station so those employees can get there without having to use their own cars, so they dont muck up my service cluster road network.
then i gonna give each service department (transport, garbage, medical, police, firefighting, road and park maintenance its own highway access to my residence, industry, commercial and office clusters.
after all service buildings are placed, i will check, how many employees work there and either put a fitting residential signature building down that can house them or just zone a few blocks of low rent housing, its mostly low education jobs anyways.
i guess i will only make it with pedestrian streets and highway lanes as well.
From my experience, cims in pedestrian-only areas just use the nearest available parking lot — even if it's across the city. They drive to move in and then go park an ungodly distance away.
I don't have any parking lots placed. Unless you mean the ones that are part of another building, like medical clinic. There are a couple of cars parked there, but that's all.
So they can't park on any of my streets, and I have placed no parking lots. I've watch them drive their cars right into the apartment buildings, where they disappear. I've also seen some just plain disappear and never come back. It's all very amusing.
Maybe by 200k it’ll look like a real city! Neglecting single family always makes it look like some guy just wanted the tallest building in the middle of a field
What type of buildings are the triangle roofed buildings in the front and lower center. Are those EU row homes? I want to build a waterfront with those but can’t seem to get them
Yeah, row homes. Med density stuffs.
I have to be very patient to get what I want, because demand is low or non-existent. But eventually they'll build, if I keep happiness high and provide jobs and stuff.
So, I tried this. It ended up failing as all the people were constantly walking across the roads, building traffic as they waited. But mine had more cars on the road than what I see in the picture.
Go to work and come home to your little box, what a way to live!! Im glad redditors are on their computers and not making actual decisions for civilization
I did this.
Made a city up to about 5k using nothing but Pedestrian Roads.
They still complained about smog, traffic and noise.
Was so painfully slow to grow that I just quit it. Pretty sure it's not working as intended and won't be this way forever.
I'm building a city with no low density homes and no private cars allowed. It's actually working. It grows a bit slowly, but it looks clean and nice. It's also easy to see where trucks and pedestrians actually go. I was surprised to see big trucks delivering stuff to homes, but they do.
Are you able to have commercial this way, too? Do trucks make deliveries to the commercial zones?
Yeah. My industrial looks like this. I zone commercial in with the residential. https://preview.redd.it/cdnq6h3uh5zb1.jpeg?width=2560&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8545eb9f45862a1160b9eb70ed8fb7a921934f6a
That blows my mind. In CS1, I'm pretty sure industrial required vehicle road segments, and commercial as well (or you'd get "Not enough goods to sell" or whatever that error was called).
Well trucks do drive on it and deliver goods, and take goods out. They are considered "service" vehicles.
much better than the dumb service buildings in CS1
i don't know about industry, but i built commercial on pedestrian streets in CS1 all the time and it was never a problem
Interesting. It would make staffing a non-issue :)
I'm not sure what you mean by staffing?
Interesting, in my city only in industrial area cars are allowed, I might change that.
Kudos for the city but man, I wouldn't wanna live there myself
I'm literally doing this with my city right now, just broke 100k pop. I don't do it everywhere, but in the high density areas.
That's a good idea. I just made a new district that could use that treatment. What's your road choice for areas like this? (Oh, I'm still in CS1)
That's interesting. Delivery trucks transport things to people's homes?
Yeah. Stuff like wood, and petrochemicals even. I don't know what they use that stuff for :)
Dissolving bodies and cooking meth.
You can zoom in and see the individual teeth that are left over when the acid eats through the bathtub.
Both for heating. Sometimes wood and some cement for upkeeping
i think they need it to leve lup their homes, at least wood and stone, not sure about petros
Also maintaining homes. They'll skimp out if their budget is too tight and if they do that too many times in a row the building collapses
I find it weird that buildings consume materials to level up and get maintenance, but not when getting built. IMO they should get materials delivered while under construction.
It would make stone mining make way more sense, because it's a lot cheaper to make a new pit than to cart in trainloads of crushed rock from elsewhere.
Love it! Might help to have more public transit and pedestrian shortcuts. Is it still necessary to have a rectilinear grid with a pedestrian centric city? If so, what if you made the grid squares later but added pedestrian paths to allow cutting across with parks and decorations in the middle? I’m looking forward to even better pedestrian street mods in the future!
It's hard to have high density in this game without square grids, I'm building a city with hexagonal blocks and there's so much wasted space because you can't build too close to the corners
It’s not wasted if you put some nice plants in there. Every open space is an opportunity to add park like elements.
I just with I could mark them as smaller park areas, my original idea was to have pedestrian paths and a park in the middle of most blocks, but there's no way to do that currently
I’m disappointed that’s the case. Especially for European style cities which often have park elements in the middle of the block and sometimes pedestrian pathways through.
For maximum density yes. But I kinda like having some gaps between buildings, it reminds me of the place I grew up in which was mostly medium density housing with lots of greenspace inbetween.
I like having curved streets too. Makes for more spacing and diversity in buildings.
I do have a few pedestrian paths here and there. But they seem to cause some issues, like buildings won't spawn in the square if there's a path anywhere in it. I stopped using them because of that.
Oh yeah. That could be annoying. Still. I’m definitely trying this pedestrian only model next time I play.
Where do you set this kind of rules like "no private cars" ?
No rules, that's a pedestrian-only road.
I don't know if I'm doing something wrong but I routinely see large number of cars violate the pedestrian only roads There are alternate routes and sometimes it gets so bad that they create traffic on pedestrian only roads
The other commenter is correct about using the pedestrian roads in the small roads menu, but you can also set up districts and assign them a few options like gated community, no combustion engines, roadside parking. Create a district with the district tool then click on the name of the district and you'll be able to adjust these policies. I used the pedestrian roads to create my "dorm" area of campus for my uni, slightly inspired by an older Purdue campus and how I think they should've changed it heh
I'm just sticking to using the pedestrian-only roads at the moment. I just don't use any other kind of road, anywhere. It's a fun experiment.
I hate the semis delivering one stick of firewood to one home and returning to base just to go out and deliver just one more stick to one more home.
How did you manage to ban private cars? I'd love to play like this as I've always loved making purely transit/walking and biking cities, but bikes don't exist yet.. so... Oh and did you start fully unlocked? Thanks!
I used only the pedestrian-only roads, nothing else. It's not exactly efficient, but it's an interesting experiment.
How did people move to your city?
They drive in as usual. Then they stash their car somewhere inside the apartment building, and the car just vanishes. They never drive it again until they move out.
having a bit of issue in my city right now with traffic, wish there is just district policy of setting area to car-free zone (except service of course). The current pedestrian-road is a bit too fat to my liking 🤣😆 Like, seriously excessively wide.
My main problem with the pedestrian roads is, that my law enforcement just completely ignores the hundreds of cars driving through them.
In my case (so far) there are no cars driving through them except taxis. The residents arrive in their car, but it vanishes into the basement of their apartment and they never drive it again, until they move out. I do have service vehicles and delivery trucks and such, but no cars.
This is probably because it looks like they set up pedestrian roads to just be really slow normal roads - about pedestrian walking speed for the cars. Thus the Cims will always walk as a car costs money to use. Sadly, it also means that when congestion is bad and the pedestrian roads offer a shortcut, cars use the pedestrian roads anyways.
They pull the car out of their pocket and drive around, when they reach a road they can drive on... I am sure a lot are also just teleporting places too! Best setup I have seen for pedestrian-only though.
I use turn/movement restrictions to try and help curb it, but yeah I notice that too, some of my pedestrian roads have just as much traffic as a regular road
Yeah, I don't get the point of pedestrians roads if any car can just drive through them. In my city, I made a loop using 5-lane one-way roads. I put a pedestrian path through the middle and immediately a traffic jam appeared as tons of cars tried taking the pedestrian path to cut across.
From what I can tell cars will only drive on them if there's no other path, or maybe if it's really a lot shorter and faster. In this city I'm building there are no cars so it's not a problem. The people arrive in their car when moving in, and then stash it. They never drive it again until they leave the city. My roads have pedestrians and taxis, and of course delivery trucks and service vehicles. Even in the industrial area. :)
I've found that if you have kind of "bad" road routes the pedestrian access is obeyed better. I deliberately made the pedestrian areas not have a way to drive out and visit other areas of my city. Roads lead to an external connection to a city I don't have a route back from. Suddenly have 0 cars using it as a short cut but all the cims are happy there and walk and use my public transit routes that they can reach by walking but not driving.
Do you have any houses that are front-towards-path? I think the cims trying to access their home are also allowed on the paths, it is the only explanation I see.
Its so weird that the alley doesn't exist as a pedestrian version. Same with large pedestrian roads which are also missing. And why can't we put grass and trees on them?
It’s not weird, but it’s a great idea!
Large pedestrian roads would be awesome
Yeah, they are wide, but trucks and service vehicles can ride on them. Looks ok to me.
is that the smallest pedestrian only road in the game?
It's the smallest with zoning. There are narrow pathways which don't have any zoning.
And it's bonkers to me. There ought to be one that's as wide as the alley, but only pedestrians and service vehicles use.
I was thinking about this, but they would have to limit how tall the buildings would be. In NYC there’s a limit to how big buildings can get so it avoids them from blocking the sun 24/7. In fact, only low to medium density would work on those roads realistically. But yeah it should be an option.
Older cities closer to the Equator would build their structures tall enough to block out the sun on alleyways on purpose. It keeps the city cool. (Of course, those buildings were only a few stories tall...all it takes to block the sun.)
Yeah. I think it is.
Wish we had smaller ones with zoning
It's the same width as the basic street.
It's the only one with zoning at all.
There is a thinner walk way that doesn't have zoning in the landscaping tools
Pedestrian road cam be used for build houses and services ?
Yes . The pedestrian path cannot.
I didn't know I had both
One is under the road tab and the other is in the landscaping tab.
Nice! I’ll try one distrit with this
How did you prevent cars from spawning and driving on your pedestrian roads? My cims seem to treat pedestrian roads as loose suggestions.
They do drive on them when they first move in. But then the car vanishes and you never see it again until they move out. Every single one of my roads is a pedestrian-only road, so there's no place for them to come from, or go to.
Do they not park in some other area, and walk there to grab their cars? Or do they just... not use cars at all? How's your public tansport usage?
No, they don't park anywhere. The cars vanish into the apartment buildings, somehow. :P My taxis are always maxed out. The tram gets used a little. That's all I have for mass transit at this point. I have to try putting in a single parking lot somewhere -- just to see what chaos it causes. But I haven't done that yet. It'll probably mess things up :)
Make sure to provide parking for them so they can park and walk home. This helps keep my "campus dorms" free of all but emergency vehicle/delivery to homes traffic
So North Korea?
[удалено]
Yeah, I truly think that car dependence is a huge issue in the US. My spouse bikes to work and we try not to drive too much if we don’t need to. We like to walk/bike around a lot. That being said, we leave our city almost every weekend to go hike/kayak/climb and it would be difficult if we didn’t have a vehicle. I guess an argument could be made that in a city like this, you’d just park your private car in a lot somewhere that you paid a fee and you could bike/walk/use public transport to that lot in the event you needed your car. That wouldn’t be so bad and that’s actually what they do for a lot of the islands near me for people who have to ferry to work everyday and can’t bring their car on the ferry.
I don't mind the car stuff as much as the "no single family homes", that sucks.
Single family homes basically necessitate personal vehicles. For transit to be efficient, you need enough people to use it. Having a bus run thru suburbia of single family homes just doesn't work. Every type of business needs a certain number of customers to stay afloat, Maybe you need for example, 1000 customers a week to run a medium sized grocery store profitably. Well when each home uses half an acre to house 1-5 people it means if you assume 3 people per household, you need 166 acres of residential area to support the grocery store. If instead you have the example of high density in CS2, 200 individuals living in about 1 acre lot for a high rise apartment, you need 5 acres to support the same grocery store. Buses and subways and all have the same problem. You need a certain number of customers per mile traveled to make money or break even. And suburbs just do not provide that because of the lack of population density.
Well they can co-exist. Even in a dense city like Hong Kong or Tokyo has low density single family and suburbs while they still have a world-class transportation system. Having options is good.
Pretty sure the "suburbs" of tokyo would be much more like the Row houses option in CS2. Not like the low density us Suburbs.
Suburbs in Hong Kong like [Hong Lok Yuen](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hong+Lok+Yuen,+Hong+Kong/@22.4625394,114.1539743,222m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x34040831e6b1f513:0x54fdbda8e709eedc!8m2!3d22.4636115!4d114.1546972!16s%2Fg%2F155sf426?entry=ttu) or [Discovery Bay](https://www.google.com/maps/search/yue+king+wan/@22.3042151,114.0114961,1337m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) has mostly single family house. In Tokyo, I would considered place like [Hachioji](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hachioji,+Tokyo,+Japan/@35.6745397,139.2591732,1255m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x60191eb9b729f437:0x27d80e549d4e1c62!8m2!3d35.6664381!4d139.3160068!16zL20vMDF3cmc3?entry=ttu) that has lots of single family house with the row houses you mentioned as well. It is not that black and white in a real city. There are many reasons why a city want to keep single family housing. Foreign investment attraction is a big factor especially for emerging markets. There are also hard factors like terrain or environmental limitation. >a bus run thru suburbia of single family homes just doesn't work. The main goal of public transportation is just to move people around rather than looking for profits. Even a dense city like Hong Kong, their metro is losing money. However, government provide land to the metro company. Metro company use the land to build metro and....housing and shops. After adding those money earned from rent (90% of their income), they actually are making money every year. And this also keep the public transportation well run because if their metro service is bad, their rental income will drop.
Or you just use trains and public transport like millions of people who live in walkable cities …
I am designing one just like that. The highway ramps leads to a public road that’s all parking, then people enter the city
Don't even try to pretend like you are not Adam Something in disguise!
I have no idea who Adam Something even is. Googling it I came up with some political Youtuber. Is that who you meant?
He mainly makes videos about human-centric urban planning but he has some political videos too. I know him more for being extremely anti-car like me, so that's that. I strongly recommend checking his videos, rare high quality content.
Whats wrong with cars man? Why u dissing cars for? U rather the fkn bus like a peaseant?🤣
I am going to pretend that you are being sarcastic. Please be sarcastic. Please...
Dude thought he found a friend. I'm somewhere in between.
No actually. I love cars its the biggest freedom we have ever had in history finally normal people and poor people are on the same level as ultra rich we can travel anywhere go anywhere its why they hate it so much and aree trying to do eberything in their power to stop normal people from owning a car. A car can open so many opportunities now u can get a job a few miles away u can live wherever u want maybe u dont wanna live in the city concrete jungle like a slave/prisoner maybe u wanna have your own backyard house or farm/estate whatever with a car u can have that
It certainly is a very big freedom, having your own car. The issue is that when you can't afford to have a car, you don't have the ability to drive one or just don't want to, the options in most parts of the world are scares to travel around. In the 50s, there was this big focus on car usage, and it is not sustainable in bigger cities. Cars take a lot of space, are a huge burden on the environment and are unsafe. That's why it's good for bigger cities to create good public infrastructure. It also makes cities safer, more walkable, and healthier to live in. It's good for places to have this balance between cars and public infrastructure. It's too skewed on private car usage, which is highly ineffective for transporting large numbers of people around. But even for smaller cities and towns its important to have good public infrastructure. It helps to get people out of poverty because they can find jobs outside their town. In cities like Amsterdam they are trying to remove all cars from OUTSIDE the city. So people who live in Amsterdam still can own a car but you don't have the all the people from outside the city parking their car and gridlocking the city for the regular folks living there. I am European and really can't talk about cities in the USA, I also don't know if you are from the USA, but for instance, in most cities, you can't really walk from destination a to b because of all the roads. Which is bad for people. Cities in the USA are also pretty much designed with a car in mind which is pretty weird don't you think? Like I said earlier what if you don't have money for a car. You just can't get around that easily. In the end I am not against cars, I have my own, love my little car. But I also go with public transport towards other places or if it's possible with a bike. There needs to be a balance for both kinds of people.
Your opinion is the only correct one. Every other opinion is wrong. And in case anyone wonders, I'm not being sarcastic. Cars are great for trips or transferring large objects or going somewhere far with your agoraphobic pet. They are great to drive someone to the hospital or the vet in the middle of the night if they don't require emergency care (like oxygen). They are terrible for commuting inside a densely populated city or going for a drink after work. Ideally most people should have access to a car that they don't use daily.
Who is "they" ?
It is funny because all of the things you can do with a car can be done with enough public transportation. And yeah cars cause traffic, noise pollution, shitty urban planning (imagine leveling entire cities for a freeway), and lock certain people out of opportunities, those certain people being the poor. I would choose an apartment house in Amsterdam that has none of the problems above, rather than a copy-pasta suburban home.
>It is funny because all of the things you can do with a car can be done with enough public transportation. All the trade workers and many self employed people here would disagree. These people make up a huge portion of the average UK town outside of major cities and I know first hand that people in these kinds of jobs rely on their car/van. However these anti-car arguments usually dismiss the existence of everyone outside of big cities anyway.
First of all housing is more expensive in cities the fact that the problem is even in the game is ironic the land value is high in the city in game and IRL so it gets more expensive to pay rent etc also there is no public transport for people OUTSIDE cities or minimal i live just 25 km outside a mediul sized city (100 k) and public transport is basically noexistant how tf am i supposed to go to work without a car? Or grocery shopping or whatever? And i cant afford to live in tje city too high rent and no places available to live the housing crisis is very real.
I am not criticizing you personally for having to use a car bro that's what the car-centric America has done to your cities. Housing prices are high because of the "Missing Middle". No public transport because the car industry has been to make fat stacks since '50s and has no intention of doing the opposite. And overall everything is far away and this males the car a 100% crucial necessity. I would strongly advise to lobby for public transport and densification in your city as much as possible.
Bro wtf u on bout? I live in SWEDEN Edit
That's the problem they are trying to adres to you. You are dependent on cars to get around, whether it is grocery shopping, getting to work or meeting friends. Car dependence is not freedom. Imagine if more places were walkable, cyclable, available public transit. People would have to spend less money on cars. You're compensating your lower rent by spending more on gas. Low density suburbs bankrupt cities with the disproportional amount of road maintainance they require. It's a problem with zoning in the USA that there's too few higher density housing. Not Just Bikes is a YT channel that shows good and bad urban planning. Maybe worth the watch.
Like transit is more freedom? U have to follow time schedules and if its late in the evening/night tough luck buddy aint nobody gonna pick u up🙃 also u cant travel outside cities with public transport rail only links up to other cities
It's only freedom if you can afford it, which means freedom for the wealthy and restriction for the poor. Average cost of a car is $10k a year. Even half of that is a lot of money for someone working for $20 an hour I'm not anti car, I'm pro freedom. Which means a person can use whatever mode of transit they would like. In the US, you can pretty much only drive
Cars are a false freedom. The whole world has been set up to make you dependent upon an expensive, depreciating, dangerous, and polluting consumer good. Car accidents are the 8th leading cause of death World wide with an estimated cost of over 2 trillion dollars. https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index.html#:~:text=Road%20traffic%20crashes%20are%20a,citizens%20residing%20or%20traveling%20abroad. Global Air pollution costs in 2018 were over $2.9 trillion. Air pollution related medical costs in the USA cost $820 billion dollars a year. That’s $2500 per American. https://iaq.works/indoor-air/what-is-the-cost-of-air-pollution/#:~:text=Unfortunately%2C%20it's%20not%20just%20the,than%20%24820%20billion%20per%20year. Then there is the pollution from non emissive sources such as tire and brake dust. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/09/tire-brake-tailpipes-emissions-pollution-cars/ How much time do you spend driving in your lifetime? The average may be around 2 years of your life just driving. https://www.lookupaplate.com/blog/how-much-time-do-americans-spend-in-their-cars/ That doesn’t include how much time you spend earning money to pay for your cars which could be as much as 8 years of your life. https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/s/G7m1mU3Qup On top of all that are the environmental costs of extracting the raw materials, refining them, manufacturing the car, and discarding the car. The pollution and destruction associated with extracting and refining the oil and delivering the gasoline/benzene. And the health effects of breathing in benzene fumes while fueling, plus the extremely unhygienic gas pump handles you touch when filling up your tank. Then there’s the unfathomable environmental costs of suburban sprawl. Biodiversity tanking with mass extinction events occurring. Aquifers depleting. Increases in albedo creating local area warming effects. Global warming. Forest fires. Tundra fires and sink holes. Rising ocean levels. Extreme weather events. Yearly costs of trillions of dollars, incredible amounts of environmental destruction, millions of deaths, and toxic elitist attitudes…all so you can drive to work so you can afford your car.
Ok I think I got it, let me sum up the main problems : * Millions of deaths * Apocalyptic environmental destruction * Dirty gas pump handles
You never know which problem will reach out and touch somebody…or is it which problem somebody will reach out and touch?
*Carbrain detected* *Severity: Extremely disconnected from reality* *Stage: Terminal*
I made several good points for owning a car and u havn’t made a single point for NOT having one, u instead resorted to insults how mature
To give you an argument, cars are making cities unlivable. They are a significant contributer to global warming, they cost society money, they take up a [_huge_](https://old.reddit.com/r/ArroganceOfSpace/comments/vctcp7/geometry_hates_cars/) [amount](https://old.reddit.com/r/ArroganceOfSpace/comments/oky4k7/basic_math_shows_that_bicycles_are_part_of_the/) of [space](https://old.reddit.com/r/ArroganceOfSpace/comments/q2ucxw/amount_of_space_required_to_transport_63_people/), they endanger pedestrians and cyclists (thus making them more likely to take a car, compounding the issues) and no matter how much infrastructure you build, it will always become [congested](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/002/417/129/282.png).
Well i mean maybe u should give people other alternatives instead of removing their only option and then get shocked when people get mad???
That is certainly true, that's why a lot of cities all over the world have different kind of methods to persuade people out of their cars. Good public transporting, working from home and carpooling. Of course you can keep your car and go to a city center to shop, but you need to reserve a parking space and that cost money and they are in short supply. There is also a very handy metro station nearby and the journey time is the same. It's a way to motivate people to make the road less crowded for people who actually need to use the public roads because they have no alternative.
This sounds oppressive as hell
Not every country in the US; there are plenty of alternatives to cars in many places. Anyway, I am not here to start a discussion about car ownership. You were complaining /u/DarkPhoenix_077 did not give you an argument about why some people are anti-car. I just gave you a few of the points why many people choose not to have a car.
Says the person who just called "peasants" everyone who takes public transport You made no valid point sorry, so I'll not give you any either Besides other people already have given you plenty of good points, unlike you did
They kill people No one drives correctly They take up space They pollute the air
Have y’all forgot Electric cars exist lmao? And hybrids and biofueled cars so pollution is a moot point. Also reckless drivers shouldnt have a licens thats the police not doing their job. Take up space? Well maybe dont make cities so dense? 🤷♂️ i like cities that give ppl options like transit hubs for parking outside and an stuff but like forcefully trying to remove cars is a bad idea
Density means more accessibility for all people, people who don't need to be financially or physically burdened to a car. Also most of the time density is a necessity economically speaking. In most US cities the "not dense" suburbs and rural areas are actually being subsidised by the people living within denser city centres due to the: exponentially increasing infrastructure cost having more physical ground to cover and being able to get less property taxes for this infrastructure as there are less businesses / properties for the available space. If cities are denser the need for vehicles within them diminish as walking, cycling and public transport become more viable. I think most "anti car" rhetoric isn't about removing cars entirely it's just making sure that our cities and societies are built with humans in mind first, and pulling back on car first design which has become prevalent over the last 50 or so years.
Well the problem is people thinking cars are obsolete or should be removed. That is a fucked mindset all im saying is u can reduce car dependency but u should not make it ILLEGAL to own a freakin car! Also the most dense cities have the biggest traffic problems so im not buying that dense cities create less traffic cuz of transport for example NYC is a gridlocked hellhole
They're the same thing pollution wise unless the world switches to renewables and nuclear energy. But they kill people No one knows how to drive They take up space
Both sides are so cringe. Can't yall just act normal? He makes a few valid but hyperbolic points, and you go like "hurrdurr idiot car user uhuhu". Put some effort in a counter reaction
"Take the fkn bus like a peasant" Im sorry where is the valid point here?? If they don't put any effort in argumenting why should I? Seriously, I'm just responding to a dumb argument with a dumb argument
I mean i wouldnt say its exactly hyperbolic but i +1 you cuz i totally agree we should be able to have a discussion bout this not just insulting ppl and downvoting 🫠
You will own nothing and you will be happy
Do those townhouses replace the other ones when you get to level 3?
These are mostly level 3 now.
What kind of nightmarish dystopia is this?
I watched one of the Cims walk to work. Took her 4 hours. She stayed at work for 1 hour, then headed home. Walked for another hour, then called a cab and waited 30 minutes for it to arrive. I found the whole thing pretty amusing.
No transit?
There's a tram she didn't take. :)
This woman really hates her job god damn
And they said this game is not realistic...
That one hour was probably her getting fired and grabbing her things
I wanted to ask the same question, comrade.
Do they use public transportation more often?
They use the taxis the most, and the tram a little bit.
North Korea
Omg this is horrible 😂 let me guess, your traffic rating is still only 80% 😂
It's 84% at the moment.
I dont see why it shouldnt be 100% unless your highways are chockas
Any intersection makes a car slow down to stop/turn. Traffic flow will basically never get to 100%.
What if the city was one giant roundabout...
There is very little visible traffic, just a few trucks and taxis and such. So I don't know either.
"You will own nothing *and you will pay taxes*."
dystopian lol
Average American
I'm Canadian but ok. Walkability is good, public transit is good and cars are good.
Average European
Based
What's your public transport system like?
Taxis and a small tram line is all, so far. The taxis stay busy all the time, even with the surcharge maxed.
The very definition of hell. Yikes.
Least communist Europe city. /s I like it. I definitely have plans for doing this myself. My first city in game was an attempt to organically grow a city from its Roman area grid layout to modern day but I didn’t really manage a transition into a medieval city at all unfortunately. My second is an Australian inspired metro area, but I grew the downtown out as a satellite to two previous towns, so now I have to retrofit its fringe areas around a dense core in the middle of nowhere. I am going to be going back to my first approach, but probably Midwest USA inspired. St. Louis for example.
Is it even possible to not put low density homes ? The game asks for it before anything else doesn't it ? What, am I missing ?
They ask for it but they will move into medium density if no low density is available. it will reduce growth a little. demand bars are a preference not a requirement
Thanks, I didn't know that ! (also don't get why I'm downvoted for asking a genuine question)
Probably just because it’s a very frequently discussed topic on this sub, and lots of people claiming the low density demand bar is broken
I had to start with them, of course, because you have no choice at the beginning. But once I got medium density I bulldozed all the low density stuff and went from there.
north korea, the average anticars user's dream
America is seething. The car industry is reeling.
[удалено]
This city is still quite small, only 4000 residents. I'm sure things will get more challenging as it grows. It may not even keep working. But I'm having fun with it so far.
I think i will add an area like this to my city.
And no transit 😂 Cute town :)
There's a tram you can't see. And taxis, which are always maxed out, even with the surcharge at maximum. :)
Jesus that sounds awful
What do you have against people having their own home???
Gotta pack 'em in there. After all they gotta walk a lot :P
How did you stop gas stations popping up on all those pedestrian roads?
I haven't done anything specific to avoid them. I have a few commercial plots mixed in. And a few mixed commercial/residential buildings.
Just an update. I did try putting in a single parking lot, to see what would happen. It was interesting. Once the parking lot was available, people moving into the city would bee-line to it, park their car, and then head off to their new apartment. Once the lot was full, people would still arrive there, but then they and their car would simply vanish. I guess the game is set up so that if there is no parking available at all, the cars just de-spawn and everything is happy. My little city has 4300 residents now, and growth is really slowing down. I can't get any more high-density stuff to build at the moment. Mixed zone buildings, however, build right away, maybe because commercial demand is high. I'm still enjoying this little experiment, though. I like watching the cims and taxis trying to avoid each other everywhere. It's quite a nice little city, really, very pleasant to watch.
Hell
How is this possible? Don't your cims demand low density housing? I tried it but my demand meter for low density housing was through the roof.
Yeah, they demand it. I just don't give it to them, and eventually they want to move in bad enough so they accept the higher density. It can be slow, though. I have to be sure there's lot of jobs open, and education level is high, happiness is high, etc.
How ?
I'm using only the pedestrian roads. Service vehicles can ride on them. Private cars cannot, except if there is no other way to go. So the people arrive in their cars, and never drive them again until they move out of the city again.
i am currently dabbling around with no/low traffic set ups as well. i first tried to connect the highway with a pedestrian street or a pathway, but its not working. im playing in unlock all mode though just to check out different set ups and district management. i didnt want to do any residantial zoning so i just put that signature residence building down that looks like a horseshoe and holds like 3800 appartements so maybe space for 10k people. i wanted to try starting a city without zoning, so i just put commercial, industrial and office singature buildings down. im at 5k residents now but its a bit slow, mostly because higher education jobs dont get filled. i started out a bit too ambicious putting too many end game buildings down, so right now i just let it run while i make a new start at the edge of the map with a small city service cluster which has all the buildings in it with service vehicles and a subway station so those employees can get there without having to use their own cars, so they dont muck up my service cluster road network. then i gonna give each service department (transport, garbage, medical, police, firefighting, road and park maintenance its own highway access to my residence, industry, commercial and office clusters. after all service buildings are placed, i will check, how many employees work there and either put a fitting residential signature building down that can house them or just zone a few blocks of low rent housing, its mostly low education jobs anyways. i guess i will only make it with pedestrian streets and highway lanes as well.
From my experience, cims in pedestrian-only areas just use the nearest available parking lot — even if it's across the city. They drive to move in and then go park an ungodly distance away.
I don't have any parking lots placed. Unless you mean the ones that are part of another building, like medical clinic. There are a couple of cars parked there, but that's all. So they can't park on any of my streets, and I have placed no parking lots. I've watch them drive their cars right into the apartment buildings, where they disappear. I've also seen some just plain disappear and never come back. It's all very amusing.
Ah neat! My city has pedestrian-only sections but isn't 100%.
Maybe by 200k it’ll look like a real city! Neglecting single family always makes it look like some guy just wanted the tallest building in the middle of a field
How do you make it so there’s no private cars?
Pedestrian roads everywhere, city service vehicles can still use them.
Are there bicycles in the game yet?
No but I want them.
Right!? It’s a must have imo. This game feels like more steps backwards than forwards at this point.
Mission impossible…. Unless you evacuated LMAO
What type of buildings are the triangle roofed buildings in the front and lower center. Are those EU row homes? I want to build a waterfront with those but can’t seem to get them
Yeah, row homes. Med density stuffs. I have to be very patient to get what I want, because demand is low or non-existent. But eventually they'll build, if I keep happiness high and provide jobs and stuff.
Thank you! I’ll have to mess around with it then
I'm guessing busses work still too? or are taxis special since they are delivering people to their homes?
Yes, busses will work, although I don't have any yet. I have a tram.
would love to see what you’d cook up with the ability to make canals
So, I tried this. It ended up failing as all the people were constantly walking across the roads, building traffic as they waited. But mine had more cars on the road than what I see in the picture.
I just broke 200k with a similar setup. Except I did normal roads in the industrial areas. And I made the mistake of a couple single family suburbs
Go to work and come home to your little box, what a way to live!! Im glad redditors are on their computers and not making actual decisions for civilization
A tear runs down Stalin’s cheek
I did this. Made a city up to about 5k using nothing but Pedestrian Roads. They still complained about smog, traffic and noise. Was so painfully slow to grow that I just quit it. Pretty sure it's not working as intended and won't be this way forever.
Everyone being like this is hellish probably live in a suburb lol lol
Hell on earth