Hey Lads, As I recently started to play Cities XXL, I also - for the first time since I had started playing the series back in 2012 - was keen on envisioning a long term, dynamic city project, a project which - over the time - would fundamentally change the city's skyline, its streets, its architecture. (*) So I chose to start with building an American town on the edge of collapsing: Shreveport. Some first impressions: The photos are a bit older, the esplanade was overhauled a bit. Now you may wonder why I would truly consider to ask other people for their opinions (yeah, it is really me, I was not taken as a hostage ). Well, it's pretty simple: the project will go deeper into the materia than anything else I have ever done so far. So I would like to get some feedback about my plans for the city (the plans will be shown below), especially by the American members of the site, e.g. @Kurtis Edwards, @IcyHot, @chocolate_city, @marryson123, @OmniBLACK, @ronrn, @veija2; but of course, anyone is encouraged to give feedback (and yeah, I am not on drugs ) ***** The background story (just 3 short paragraphs): Shreveport, somewhere in Pennsylvania, founded in 1844 by the Shreve Town Company, which was hired some months before by the Government of Pennsylvania to get rid of a logjam that blocked the river. The surrounding area had become a centre for coal mining, and the government hoped to increase the transportation volume by using ships instead of a railway. The logjam was removed, and the city soon developed into a logistic hub. With the increasing mass of coal that was mined, steel companies realized that it may be better to produce closer to the mining sites, and in 1856, the Lackawanna Steel Company built a steel factory about half a mile apart of the initial city blocks on the left side of a larger tributary of the Allegheny River. The small river soon became too small for the masses of steel to be transported, and hence some first railway was constructed in the years 1860-61. Nonetheless, some amount of coal and steel still was transported by ships, too. The Civil War happened to be an economical windfall to the city, as the US Navy needed the steel for new boats. A locomotive factory opened up in the town. ***** Okay, so I don't want to spoil you. Until the 1960s, the city could be described as a boomtown. With the decline of the coal industry in the area, and the car usurping the train, the industrial base was lost, and many people left the city and went for the suburbs. Since that time, the city (and some parts of the county, too) did not really gain any success, and frustration reached an all-time high, which could also be seen in the fact that the majority of voters favoured Donald J. Trump in the recent presidential election. So, and here I need opinions, my reasoning for the fall of the city: 1) there was no diversification within the industrial sector, which rapidly lead to a loss in tax income once the coal and steel crisis hit the companies in the area. 2) when some of the stores had to close due to the lack of attendance, the city's core lost its attractivity, and the richer inhabitants started to leave the city for the suburbs, which even increased the loss of tax income. 3) the city government buildings were mostly made for a bigger city, or a city with a higher tax income, and as the maintainance cost could not be cut off, the cost for the staff had to be reduced, and as this did not help, some positions were not filled. Hence reports and certificates could often not be filed within regular time, public schools needed to cancel some courses, and so on. 4) Some of the suburbs had not been incorporated in earlier times, and most of them have been home to the richer elites of the area, whose tax money could not then not be used to stuff the holes in the treasury. 5) some political bad luck: a highway bridge was proposed to connect some highways on each side of the river and to fill the gap between an existing west-east highway and hence to relieve the traffic on an existing west-east interstate which is located some 15 miles south to the city; but instead of building this, the existing interstate was just expanded, and only a small bridge with one lane for each direction was built. 6) missing long-time visions: instead of trying to make the city's core more attractive to the people (which would of course have needed some monetary support by the state government), precious space was e.g. filled with parking lots. You can already see that in he above images; also, there is an old locomotive maintaining facility which does not really have any function anymore, but which still blocks the area. The central railtracks as well are not really needed anymore, the only trains that come to the station are touristic trains. But the whole route has lost its attractivity to the people. 7) short-sighted conduct of the banks and GSEs during the financial crisis: homeowners, who had tried to refinace their homes and who had lost all their money within the crisis, were evicted and their homes often demolished, as he maintainance cost were too high and there was no sign for close betterment of the market situation. Hence, many properties remained empty, making some of the districts even less attractive to possible new residents. If that sounds familair to you, well, most of my inspiration I found in the wikipedia articles about Scranton and Pittsburgh, both in Pennsylvania. Now if you find some of these points unreasonable, or if you think there needs to be added something, just say it. I hope to hear something by you, guys But please, we can talk about ways to include also "encumbered" topics, like racial tension, but stay focused, it is still XXL For the city getting back on the route of success, I thought that first of all, the highway bridge could finally be built. Afterwards, some hauling companies could use the town as a regional exchange station. The increased income could be used to fill some educational positions, for example. I am again open for your opinions (*) yeah, I know about Titania, which was considered to undergo a radical change; but this change would not have been as radical as in this current town.