make the use last a lot longer, give that building type special perks that make it worth having around or make it fit into a rent system where different levels of homes are needed for different social and wealth classes?
I think it'd be better to simply be more of byproduct of life. A shack is fairly easy to make and works to keep you alive better, but has few comforts. Making anything better requires both time and resources. People trying to eke out a life farming on a generally barren mountainside might have to spend so much time working on growing food that they can't take the time to really gather resources and work on a better house. Stonework takes a
lot of effort, and while lumber is easy to work with it's not always available in large quantities and much of that may be needed for tools, fences, and firewood.
Getting better homes is more a consequence of being wealthier in some way. If you live in a fertile valley with plenty of trees around getting food and building materials is all easy enough to do that you can spend time working on a better house. Later, as the settlement grows, people like Smiths and Millers get enough food and other wealth from people that they can both afford nicer materials as well as spend time or money getting a nicer house built.
People who see themselves as 'deserving' a nice house might have harsher penalties for living in a hovel than a lone hunter or poor farming family. But I'd go Occupation->House rather than saying that a House is required for a better occupation. After all, a poor apprentice smith might take a job in your village just because it's the only option available, nice house or no nice house.
Author
Topic: Banished, a Survival Village Builder: Now with legible title! (Read 51703 times)