stonewolf99

Gridding a city vs not is an older debate than many people realize. in 2600 BCE, in the Indus valley in what is now pakistan, the mud-brick and stone city of Mohenjo-daro was laid out with a grid pattern, and even included plumbing! The Greeks and Romans refined the philosophy of gridded cities, but stressed the importance of a haphazard layout as being more defensible as invaders have a harder time fighting their way in. Many European cities have streets that follow either the routes to water (for livestock, trade, transportation), defensive planning (especially in older sections of once-fortified cities/towns), or smaller towns and villages that were absorbed into the larger urban area as the population grew and development spread. The Romans standardized their new cities mainly along the Hippodamian Model which emphasized a grid layout and specific placement of buildings and "zones" (as SC4 calls them). Conversely, the city of Rome itself is an amalgam of several villages that merged together before anyone considered a large scale urban plan. London is another example of this and also has several streets following the paths of rivers that have been covered over and forced into tunnels . Paris also was, until Napoleon razed large sections of the city to eliminate the narrow, congested, medieval streets and alleys that were easy for the citizens to barricade. The broad avenues of Paris allowed the various regiments stationed in the city to have direct line of sight with each other. Modern urban planning typically follows a more aesthetic approach, which, when combined with a trend of suburban sprawl (at least in America) leads to a proliferation of residential areas with winding, curvy roads and cul-du-sacs. The SC4 game design and limitations make grid planning an efficient choice. Since you're not trying to fend off ravening hordes in the game, how you lay out your city ultimately comes down to individual taste.