To me it does not make sense that a big family has the best house in town; then for some reason desirability drops just a bit to 99% and the whole family moves out - searching new shelter made of basic wood and hay in some random slum house with 10% desirability. Something in this mechanics should be changed to make more sense. In real life houses/location in good places cost more - maybe get more taxes from people who live areas like this? Then it would motivate to upgrade these houses manually to have more people there. If desirability drops from 100 to 95, the taxes from this house should be 95% and this is enough. I don’t think there should be restrictions to upgrade house. If i decide to shelter 10 people in big strong nice house - why not?! - it is my town and i decide - go live there and pay 10% tax with happy hard-working faces.
4 Likes
Yeah, I agree. It would be nice if the house gets progressively worse overtime too. You get less money from the homes, because the area is now less valuable, maybe the original family moved out to another area of your city where the value is better and the new family to move in can’t keep the house in the best condition… Overtime it could make the other houses around lose value too, repeating the cycle.
1 Like
I agree. I want the freedom to upgrade my house. It’s hard to provide enough desirability when there’s so little space
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.