• Moose
  • Announcements

    • Dirktator

      Please help us for July   06/30/2017

      This month we're hoping for a little bit of a boost this month or next, in addition to covering the regular bills, we could benefit from some hardware upgrades. STEX Collector's Set gifts can now be sent to you via digital download as well as regular mail if you wish! Every donation dollar goes toward keeping Simtropolis online and humming along. Your contribution counts! Hardware Upgrades As our website community software improves with more and more features, and as we bolt on additional features such as chat, the increased load to handle all these new toys is taking the server a bit to task. You may have noticed that we'd been forced to temporarily disable the chat as we worked out allocating resources for more optimal performance. Following this, we've applied a number of 'soft' changes such as caching options and experimented with server configurations (nginx as proxy, for example), so the hardware aspect is also an area we'd like to focus on. The last time we upgraded hardware was back in 2012, prior to the release of SC13. Your contribution means a lot! Your donation will go toward helping us to 1.) migrate to a newer server or 2.) at least get some ram/cpu/storage updates and any other infrastructure hardware or services. Donate and Get a Gift or Donate Any Amount Thanks so much! - Dirktator & The Admins

SimCity (2013) General Discussion

General discussion for SimCity (2013).


Forum Guidelines
  • For general discussion about SimCity (2013)
  • Keep debates civil, criticism constructive, rants to a minimum
  • Personal attacks, useless threads, foul language will be moderated

2,791 topics in this forum

    • 470 Replies
    • 31,378 Views
    • 1,284 Replies
    • 226,690 Views
    • 24 Replies
    • 17,424 Views
    • 44 Replies
    • 16,574 Views
    • 3 Replies
    • 5,820 Views
    • 3 Replies
    • 52 Views
    • 3 Replies
    • 92 Views
    • 0 Replies
    • 279 Views
    • 3 Replies
    • 387 Views
    • 0 Replies
    • 85 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 738 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 450 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 292 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 312 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 292 Views
    • 3 Replies
    • 298 Views
    • 7 Replies
    • 471 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 1,809 Views
    • 0 Replies
    • 196 Views
    • 0 Replies
    • 320 Views
    • 3 Replies
    • 545 Views
    • 7 Replies
    • 2,389 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 284 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 415 Views
    • 3 Replies
    • 1,103 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 330 Views
    • 5 Replies
    • 700 Views
    • 1 Reply
    • 463 Views
    • 0 Replies
    • 143 Views
    • 4 Replies
    • 408 Views
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Featured Topics

  • New Topics

  • Recent Posts

    • Now I can move on. Now, let's if I can pull that off. Now I will go to the Reader right away. Now I have to thank you profoundly. Now I have to tell you that I found 3 files that seems to have the SC4Lot in them. But I can not get the Reader to open any of them the way your posted images do. Here are them: SC4-Suspect.zip
    • Then we don't agree, Piggy-backing simply doesn't happen, it is not how the internet works, I don't know where you get this idea from and it has nothing to do net neutrality, which has always been the default way the internet has worked. You suggest Net Neutrality is a new thing that is crippling the internet, that's simply not true, it's always been a thing and the internet has thrived despite it. That is simply wrong. Sure some parts of the web do require low latency, but if your argument was true, how on earth do those services work under Net Neutrality right now? Things like NetFlix, YouTube and other streaming services absolutely work with Net Neutrality in place. Prioritising packets is not the solution, nor is it necessary. As I mentioned in my post, it's investment in local hosts and mirrors that allow such services to work. So if it's not broke, what are we trying to fix? But more importantly, why are we trying to fix it? LOL. Hysterics, that's your opinion... The fact is, however you look at it, Trump's word means absolutely nothing, he's proven himself to be in an ethical vacuum. But this is important, why would a person like that want to disband Net Neutrality? Doesn't Trump always do things that help big rich individuals and corporations to make more money? Isn't that what he really believes in? So if he wants to ditch Net Neutrality, do you REALLY think it will be for the greater good of the average person? Come on, seriously, if he wants to do it, it's probably nefarious. That was my point, which I tried to make in a rather stupid and humorous way. Why so serious man, I can't have a serious conversation about the joke that is the US president, it's simply too staggeringly ridiculous to think he's in office to take seriously. Trump wants to ditch Net Neutrality, because his rich friends know by doing so, they can monopolise the internet better and make more money. You think you will get your subsidised seat on the plane, but the reality is that the plane will be a private charter and you won't be allowed to fly unless you've got the bucks. But that is again flawed logic, the internet is not free because other people pay more, but you absolutely can pay more for a better service, without compromising the ideology of Net Neutrality. But more doesn't mean you get to use your internet at the expense of others, it just means you get more bandwidth, rather than priority. If you want priority bandwidth, there are service providers who can give you that, but it's much more expensive, because they have exclusive hardware dedicated for their paying customers only. For example, a company can have a super-fast regional fibre-optic pipe that no one else can use. That does not break Net Neutrality rules, because all packets using that pipe must be dealt with on a first come first served basis. But you still get access to a priority pipe with improved access speeds over other service providers. That's what people who think Net Neutrality should be ditched seem to fail to understand. Having those rules does not prevent investment or specific businesses from offering a better service. It simply protects traffic from being prioritised to one service, customer or business over others. No that's not a good thing. NetFlix could pay so much that literally no other video streaming service could possibly work. That's the equivalent of a monopoly and very bad for user choice, it would be a harmful business practise for the consumer. If I paid the same for my internet connection as you, why shouldn't my 4GB anime season download with the same priority as someone else playing a game online? What if I didn't want to leave it running overnight, what if I was waiting for it to finish so I could watch it right away? But this argument is predicated on the idea that somehow I can't download my anime, whilst others play games at the same time. When the reality is, the ISP should have sufficient capacity in the system to allow both things to happily work simultaneously without problems. The issue is all about scale, if your ISP has sufficient capacity to serve everyone's needs, it simply doesn't matter. Take away Net Neutrality laws and the ISP could decide to bork everyone's downloads, so one person could play their game, how is this fair? Especially if we are all paying the same fee for the same service. Why should someone who chooses to play a game have their usage prioritised (i.e. subsidised) by others who's data needs are considered less important. We all pay the same, we should all get the same service, even if we are doing different things. Yes, I'm flaming you... or could it be that I'm simply pointing out you have a very flawed idea of what Net Neutrality means in the real world. I'm sorry, but if that article fits your narrative, it too is simply wrong, because Net Neutrality is not breaking the internet. Again, for that to be true, the internet couldn't work as it has been for the last 15-20 years, yet somehow, despite Net Neutrality being a thing (it is not a new thing either), the internet does work. If you are arguing Net Neutrality is new, you don't know what you are talking about. If you are arguing the internet doesn't work with it, you simply couldn't be more wrong. That's not flaming you, it's just pointing out your argument is completely wrong. The same logic can be applied to many of the arguments presented in that article, it simply doesn't stand up to the most basic and obvious scrutinisation. For example, the article argues that somehow, given prioritisation of packets, a new start-up would be able to gain a leg-up on the established competition. Really?, do you seriously believe if I started a new search engine tomorrow, paying ISPs for priority access over Google, somehow that would help to gain market share? The cost would likely be exorbitant, way more than a typical start-up would reasonably have. It also blissfully ignores the fact that if someone were to do this, Google could simply pay the ISPs more to make their service an even higher priority. If you start such a war where the highest bidder gets priority, isn't it likely that those with the most money and resources will always come out on top? Isn't that exactly why Net Neutrality laws are there, to protect users from such anti-competitive behaviour? You mean exactly as we have been doing since the beginnings of the internet? Again, if it's so harmful, why are things working? Once more this argument is simply turned around and based on flawed logic. It's not like all the laws for Telegraphs were used for the basis of the internet. Just one principle of them, which is that no packets should be prioritised over others based on commercial interests. I'd argue that totally applies to the internet, I'd also argue it's working just fine this way. I'd add too, this still has absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter, PB and the changes made to their service, a point I note you didn't care to comment upon.
    • Wow! It has been years since I have visited Simtroplois and this thread has shocked me. I don't really understand all the hate. C:SL is a ton better than SC2013 for a start.
      My only real bugbear with the game is the traffic simulation in that cars don't use all available lanes, making it really hard to create good functioning road systems. Not sure why people think the graphics are so terrible either. Just have a watch of @Strictoaster's youtube channel, particularly what he is doing on Seenu. This game can look spectacular and very realistic. It has really inspired me to create something detailed rather than the traffic clogged grid mess I have made in the past. The best design decision they made was to have steam workshop support. Like SC4 before it, mods are what really makes this game amazing. Vanilla SC4 was pretty awful too.