> I'm writing some new production code to more realistically
> model competition for region resources, such as lumber, stone,
> horses, etc. Resources may also be things such as demand for
> entertainment.
> Overview:
> Multiple units trying to obtain resources from a region
> each get a chunk proportional to their skill and the size
> of their effort (just as entetainment works now).
> Resources may be replenished, on a scale specific to the
> resource. A city may get 1/3 of its entertainment demand
> back each month. Perhaps 10% of a forest would regrow
> monthly. Maybe only one or two horses would be born for
> each plain region each turn.
Personally, I like the simplistic way things are now. But I can see
how this will make things seem realistic. The effect would curb some
resource abuse etc... but it seems a bit unbalacing to newbies and gives
major advantages to older characters. It might be neat if you put
migratory aspects in the horses so that they roam the plans literally..
tho it would be odd to have horses "missing" as they roam from plain to
plain because of the way travel times work.
Back to addressing how older characters will benefit from the change is
that they will always be one step ahead of a newbie in terms of skill
and units. So that if oldbie unit with the equestrian skill of 7 and
the newbie unit with equestrian 3 compete for horses, the newbie loses.
Granted the learning curve of the skill will allow the newbie to catch
up eventually, it is both more unlikely that the newbie will pursue the
skill of equestrian further as they suddenly declare it unprofitable.
>From Rick Socia's post it seems that profitability from a newbies eyes
seem to be to either follow Dr. Pain's or Varian's example or to have
their units simply work.
Second of all. This resource limitation is also encouraging a warlord
style of play. Rocko's use of licences for entertainers will quickly
catch on not only for entertainers, but for foresters, equestrians,
shipbuilders, everything. Then Olympia loses some of the more personal
flavor that I like and becomes a more turf oriented game. You are
entering my territory, you need a licence for anything you do. You may
not recruit in my lands or I will capture you and terrorise your unit to
my side. Right now, I suppose I can run off and start claiming
territory for my own. However, this starts a conflict with what I see as
"in character" and what I see as a sure way of success in the game. In
this scenario, the newbie loses again. I suppose the newbie could go
out and explore the wilds for his very own plot of land but who will
have been there before him? And once he found it can he hold it? You
might as well have started everyone off in their very own plot of land
and see what they can do for themselves.
> I would like to provide some feedback as to what the state of
> a region's resources are. Some players were initially surprised
> that they didn't see a mention of "wild horses roaming the
> plains" when they visited plain regions. Perhaps they should.
> What if the region report included descriptions of any resources
> available? This could be tagged on skill, so you'd only see
> horses if you had at least equestrian 1.
> Herds of wild horses roam the plains.
> The forests are lush and dense.
> The populace is eager for entertainment.
I think that while the right skills will allow you to see these
wonderful features, observation might also be used to help notice the
same things. Thus perhaps an observation skill of 3 will allow you to
see the status of the region in terms of horses, forests, and
entertainment.
Don't get me wrong. I love this game. I'm just better at finding holes
than good points.
-Tony Wayland [572]