Cool.
I think a maximum life on buildings makes sense - or at least ramping up maintenance costs (e.g. heritage buildings)
Most building materials would last around 50 years before major structural problems become likely, making a rebuild/replace more viable than a repair
As for the natural grow concept - I think it would add a lot of character and reduce micro management. Maybe a building can be given a ‘plot’ that it is allowed to grow on…although the concept of land ownership is quite modern
1 Like
This may apply to wooden houses, but mudbrick should be good for the long haul. It’s easy to replaster or add a few new bricks as your house ages.
1 Like
This is the three little pigs scenario - the straw hut isn’t as good as the wood hut which isn’t as good as the brick hut which can represent technological innovation.
and you don’t want your tribe wiped out by a wolf
2 Likes
I disagree with the idea (posted in this thread) that huts will become unrepairable after a time. A neolithic hut can easily be repaired, indefinitely (I’ve literally made such a hut and repaired it). There are other reasons for abandoning a settlement or turning a hut into a midden, but these are not based on repair issues.
Neolithic houses were quite sophisticated structures for their time. Far from the caves which many, unfortunately, and incorrectly, associate with ancient peoples, Neolithic houses often had wooden walls, thatched roofs, and even stables for livestock in the latter half of the period. Though basic in construction, Neolithic houses could be found on stilts near the waters or even buried partially into the ground or the sides of hills to aid in climate control. Some Neolithic houses were long and rectangular, such as the LBK Longhouse, and some were circular. The layout of Neolithic houses was especially important given the harsh environments some peoples lived in.
The houses of an LBK village were sturdy wooden structures designed for the harsh winters of Europe and the occasional floods from the rivers that people so often lived near, as they still do today. The sides of the houses were caked with mud to keep out rodents and insects, and the dirt floors were covered with dried mud and old worn animal hides. The roofs could be propped open in the warmer summers to let heat out, and covered with extra mud and thatching during the cold winters.
The construction becomes even more sophisticated as we look at Anatolian or Levant dwellings. Walls are made from Mudbrick and plastered while roofs are made from wooden timbers. Rooms contain storage areas, rush mats upon plastered floors. Small ovens for bread and cooking areas are made from sturdy mudbrick and beds are made from platforms elevated via mudbrick. So strong where these dewellings that some even exist, to this day (e.g. Catalhoyuk).
http://www.catalhoyuk.com/database/catal/BuildingSheet.asp?num=49
4 Likes
While the idea of grow vertically is really interesting it kind of make no sense with a hut, but the algorithm of if “there’s some place” then grow" is interesting and the idea of different districts in the town would really bring life to a city
@SkolNifer you’re right, vertical is not going to work with a little hut, but horizontal will. When newer materials are discover and building types, then going vertical makes sense. Though I don’t see them buildings going above one extra floor.
I like the idea… the evolve and expand rule would make it manageable.
Some of the points expressed here, especially of different materials under different times and biomes, have been touched upon in the thread of building variation:
I too played Populous, and remember it fondly. And though it was a magical world, I think we could learn some from it. As I recall, the “upgrades” that were performed by the inhabitants themselves, came with density, occupation. When a need arose to somehow expand, they did just that. You could also connect it with desirability and growing economic power, prosperity. After all, even then, in the neolithic, whether in the Linear Pottery culture that @lotus253 mentions, or later, we know that there were “better” houses and worse ones. Some we’re built quickly for a short stay, others were improved over decades, for a long-term safe and secure home. Not to mention class differences. Some had access to good quality materials, some not.
If resources are plentiful, and life is good, I see no reason why our villagers should not improve their temporary huts to more sturdy buildings, given time and a need. Proper houses were an immense investments in all pre-modern societies, and people often were born and died under the same roof. They took care of their house, just like they took care of their land, their crops, their lives. But I do wonder if it would really be possible to improve capacity and quality that much over time… @lotus253 would remind us that Çatalhöyük really couldn’t be more “upgraded”, more dense. Maybe if they started building another floor…? 
And the same goes for the great long-houses of Europe’s history. Once you have a large, sturdy wooden house with a thick thatched roof and a stone chimney and fresh rushes on the floor… what more could one hope for in ancient times? And though the Egyptians and others might have disliked their mud bricks during times of heavy raining… it was the best possible option.
Earlier games, like Pharaoh, Caesar, Zeus: Master of Olympus and Emperor: Rise of the Middle Kingdom, but also, as my fellow northerner @dennis.aahlin points out, Anno, had a system in which houses went through lots of evolutionary stages, improving in beauty, density and also tax paying ability, when supplied with resources, from basics like water and food, through clothing and entertainment and medicine, to luxuries like fine furniture or jewellery. Such a system always felt a bit… simplistic, to deterministic. Better to have basic houses improve slowly, given time and resources and security, developing organically like @EchelonMirror suggests, maybe within a certain zone, like @Angelis mentions (that did exist in for example Pharaoh: houses couldn’t reach certain levels unless given more room).
Of course, the main power to build and shape the city must rest in the player’s hands, otherwise - why have a game? 
This could be more for flavour, a sort of a complement, a nice touch. It would, like @SkolNifer writes: “really bring life to a city”
Pity that even two story buildings were practically unheard of in the neolithic
3 Likes
Another example is Majesty 2 - you place the ‘important’ buildings, but houses etc. manage and build themselves
I’m down with autouogradable. Should be organic to the need of your village at the time.
Many homes also served as basic workplaces for the soft goods of the time.
1 Like
@Gal2 and Community:
Maybe this topic had been discussed already elsewhere.
I would like to know if there will be the possibility to build adjacent structures. Like, if I would like to build two houses without a gap between them, will it be possible?
Thanks.
Feel free to Link to existing discussions, If they exist
2 Likes
Hi and welcome to the forum,
I cannot answer your question definitely but there is a high degree of freedom to place your buildings.
We all will see
Martin
Judging by some of the screenshots provided so far (e.g. the background image on the home page of ancient-cities.com) I would assume so. If you take a close look you’ll notice the same building designs present multiple times in one scenery, sometimes solitary and sometimes connected to each other.
Of course maybe the demo screenshots do not accurately depict the mechanics of the playable game but I certainly would love to be able to dock or merge buildings to a certain degree. It could make a settlement look a lot more realistic.
1 Like
I merged your topic with another you might find interesting 
Remember, there are no grids in AC, which means great liberty in building placement! I don’t know much more, we will have to wait for the beta 
1 Like
That would be an amazing scenario. IF the game engine could allow it.
I’m not sure if for the devs that’s really worth the pain for Mesolithic/Neolithic era working on such a feature.
However, probably some upcoming DLCs would be a perfect occasion to work on such a feature. For instance, when A.C. will reach Middle East Bronze Age, palaces will be a real important thing, as they were the center of political AND economic power (and temples the same).
In such cases, you should be able to extend progressively your palace, by progressively adding more rooms, workshops, a greater harem, a new throne room, warehouses, etc.
This could be the perfect occasion to have adjoined buildings, so that you could build something “modular” like Çatal Höyük, which was basically a whole town made with adjoining houses.
2 Likes