Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Organize cities by area

  1. #1
    Senior Member birq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    294

    Default Organize cities by area

    Currently in the big city list, you can sort by owner, name, size and armies. It would be good to get a regional view as well. Could you add a column for continent? You could then sort by continent and see all the North American cities together, Asian, Australian, etc. They'll just be divided along geographical lines, and not geopolitical, so it won't change over time.

  2. #2
    Administrator Mickey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birq
    Currently in the big city list, you can sort by owner, name, size and armies. It would be good to get a regional view as well. Could you add a column for continent? You could then sort by continent and see all the North American cities together, Asian, Australian, etc. They'll just be divided along geographical lines, and not geopolitical, so it won't change over time.
    Good idea. Not real soon, though. That will require that we tag each existing city with the proper continent, as well as write the code for pulling/sorting based on that.

    It's on the to-do list, though.

  3. #3
    Senior Member birq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mickey
    It's on the to-do list, though.
    That's all I ask

    Thanks!

  4. #4
    Senior Member rasqual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Organizing by continent is entirely arbitrary just now. It's not even a logical grouping, distance aside. Until oceans are a real barrier, and until national boundaries are respected in international law, any such groupings will be arbitrary and potentially misleading; the grouping will lend significance to a distinction that really has none (it would be misleading).

    My two cents.

  5. #5
    Senior Member birq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rasqual
    Organizing by continent is entirely arbitrary just now. It's not even a logical grouping, distance aside. Until oceans are a real barrier, and until national boundaries are respected in international law, any such groupings will be arbitrary and potentially misleading; the grouping will lend significance to a distinction that really has none (it would be misleading).

    My two cents.
    Continental grouping is decidedly not arbitrary, which is why I suggested it. Okay, so the line between what is North America and what is South America was arbitrarily decided at one time, but the lines are now so widely accepted, they're inveterate.

    The purpose for my suggestion was to be able to see a general area at a glance. Long-term, we should be able to group cities however we want, but until we can get to the point where we each have control over the display of our city groupings, by landmass makes sense to me.

    And that's my 0.02 Geos

  6. #6
    Senior Member rasqual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birq
    Continental grouping is decidedly not arbitrary, which is why I suggested it. Okay, so the line between what is North America and what is South America was arbitrarily decided at one time, but the lines are now so widely accepted, they're inveterate.

    The purpose for my suggestion was to be able to see a general area at a glance. Long-term, we should be able to group cities however we want, but until we can get to the point where we each have control over the display of our city groupings, by landmass makes sense to me.

    And that's my 0.02 Geos
    I agree with the logistical purpose, but the value of the grouping is incomplete until oceans act as oceans -- impediments to the movement of forcers which motivate acquisition of navies and air forces.

    BTW, at some pont soon, this world is going to have to accommodate civilian activity, such as refugees from embattled cities, changes in the "value" of cities when they're nuked, and so forth. Mickey's challenge is quickly becoming this: as the game scales and features become more realistic, the extent to which features need to be "fleshed out" (by having commensurate features in related conceptual areas of the game also fleshed out) grows non-linearly. That is, a credibility gap widens as emergent properties of changes cause still more dramatic changes.

    And so on.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •