01-17-2020, 03:27 AM
So you didn't like my idea of making the different population center definitions flexible, so they could contain pretty much anything? I was proposing to determine the "type" strictly on population and letting all the additional features (including defenses) be defined entirely independently of what they're called. So, for instance, you could define size ranges such as:
1-500 = Hamlet
500-1000 = Village
1000-7500 = Town
7500+ = City
My way wouldn't define a Fort as a separate entity, for instance, but it would instead be a relatively-well-defended Hamlet-size population which could be called a Fort and used primarily for military purposes.
I'm not particularly fond of saying things like "a village must be X, Y, & Z and nothing else." I'd like to at least have a migration path for cities to grow from smaller groups, and limiting the definitions seems like it won't allow such changes.
1-500 = Hamlet
500-1000 = Village
1000-7500 = Town
7500+ = City
My way wouldn't define a Fort as a separate entity, for instance, but it would instead be a relatively-well-defended Hamlet-size population which could be called a Fort and used primarily for military purposes.
I'm not particularly fond of saying things like "a village must be X, Y, & Z and nothing else." I'd like to at least have a migration path for cities to grow from smaller groups, and limiting the definitions seems like it won't allow such changes.