I see many people defend the costs related to certain actions within the game as realistic; I for one do agree that many pieces of equipment, or the act of expanding parking space should cost a realistic amount. After all adding a garage spot to a fire station is quite a constructive undertaking realistically.
There are certain financial choices that irk me and I want to discuss them.
- The cost mechanics related to different types of buildings do not seem fairly balanced. Whereas large vehicles like ambulances and fire apparatus are often stored in garage bays attached to a building, police vehicles are the size of a typical passenger car (except specialty vehicles like a armored truck). Why is the cost associated with adding a single parking spot to what is effectively a simple lot for police cars the same amount as adding a whole bay to a fire station building. It seems strange to me. I really think the concept of parking spaces vs sizes of vehicles should be reconsidered. It'd also be very nice to just have a spare vehicle lot; in other words: a building that is just a parking lot to store out of service vehicles (you cant have staff there and you cant respond to calls from there).
- Selling buildings, vehicles, etc.. I realize this entire game is about numbers and credits and coins; however I find it quite unfair and undoubtably unrealistic that you can literally pick up and move a building (not saying remove that feature, I think it's great) but that you are not able to "sell" a building or vehicle for a fraction of its original cost. Nobody will ever buy a used vehicle or used building for the same as its original purchase price, but it's silly to think that the emergency agency just abandons the building or vehicle when they're done with it as opposed to selling it for a partial return. Depending on the age of building, and/or the milage a vehicle has on it, you should be able to sell it for a fraction of its return cost, and the sell price will go down more with wear and tear.
- Note that this will NOT defeat the purpose of coins being used to move buildings because using the coins allows you to move all the vehicles, building expansions, and level upgrades for that building. Whereas if you sell the building, you need to relocate personnel and vehicles, and you will take a penalty by losing a chunk of the original cost...it's realistic AND the premium feature is still worthy of being used.
- It seems only logical that a game like this will eventually include more complex vehicle management and if you keep reading you'll see why I mention this:
- Vehicle accidents that put your unit out of service for days or even weeks (heavily emphasizing the need for a reserve unit parking lot, and the need to keep reserve units on hand, adds more complexity to fleet management)
- Vehicle maintenance and breakdowns with 3 realistic options:
- 1 - Simple static cost associated with maintenance and a random chance of a breakdown
- 2 - A slider based mechanic where a player can select LOW-MEDIUM-HIGH maintenance and the game will vary the levels of breakdowns based on the quality of maintenance selected.
- 3 - Complex implementation involving maintenance yard buildings and the option to send the vehicle for service with a private mechanic as opposed to your own building if you don't feel building your own maintenance building.
- Note: Most agencies, except for the really big ones, do not have their own vehicle maintenance staff or facilities. Older vehicles will be more likely to breakdown or require maintenance.
- Fuel Costs (self explanatory)
- "Expansions" vs. "Building Level Up" is rather poorly done in my opinion. If you put an ambulance into a fire station, then it should be able to generate medical calls. If I'm paying for the parking spot I should be allowed to buy whatever vehicle I want and put it in there. A majority of the expansions, except for a few like the 2 police expansions that add parking, do not contribute anything to the station other than checking a box that makes the game generate a specific call type.
- It seems pointless and just a way to make the game more time consuming / more costly. I understand that I'm pointing out the obvious by stating that previous sentence but there are better ways to make the game "more expensive" and that feel more genuine and gameplay related than simply requiring an expansion that doesn't add anything of value and is set up like a very obstructive feeling like "please wait 7 days and pay 100K for medical missions." It feels cheap, like a very obvious paywall.
- I provided a very good example above, related to vehicular costs, of how to make the game more expensive without making it feel like the devs couldn't think of anything other than "let's just make them pay to unlock the missions, on top of paying for training people, buying the vehicles, and buying the space and buildings to put them in."
- There is nothing realistic about me paying for a figurative "unlock" that doesn't add any physical value to my station and does nothing other than permit the citizens in my jurisdiction to experience medical emergencies, floodings, or wildfires etc..
- In short, buying the vehicle should unlock the potential to spawn the mission and the "expansions" should simply not exist for the most part. There are key types of expansions that actually make sense, such as building a literal jail cell, or building a literal specialty wing/section in a hospital, those things add real visible value that contribute to gameplay.
