Author Topic: resource balance...  (Read 6855 times)

Alumaani

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 554
  • Karma: +25/-13
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #15 on: May 20, 2014, 08:58:58 AM »
I skimmed over this so sorry if I missed anything but I would suggest that there is no need to trade at the minute as I can build fine without wood, metal or wealth.  When this is implemented trade will be paramount I think?

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #16 on: May 20, 2014, 08:59:23 AM »
Are we to expect another round of potentially starvation-inducing changes ?

No, food auto-balances itself, so food will be left untouched.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #17 on: May 20, 2014, 09:02:22 AM »
I didn't say more metal, per se. I just mean more regions that would produce it. Although another thing that could be done would to have grasslands produce a lot more food than they currently do. As it is right now, very few regions have enough food production on their own to do anything worthwhile with, and while yes, trading food towards a single region would give you a larger settlement, it currently takes far, far too many regions to do so.

The problem is that right now, more food = more people and I think the self-sustainable size of settlements is just about right.

I have an open TODO item that would reduce food production based on population density, which would give a 2nd counterweight to this, and make regions possible that can produce a steady amount of surplus food without dropping in population. But that's also in the far future.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #18 on: May 20, 2014, 09:04:12 AM »
if people want a return for the 1000's of metal they are sitting on, then they need to accept trades of wood or goods, cos no-one has vast quantities of food to trade.

Which is exactly why I need to rebalance. Right now, metal, wood and goods are massively overproduced, while wealth is scarce.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #19 on: May 20, 2014, 09:06:11 AM »
I skimmed over this so sorry if I missed anything but I would suggest that there is no need to trade at the minute as I can build fine without wood, metal or wealth.  When this is implemented trade will be paramount I think?

No, the construction system will stay as it is, I don't want realms completely crippled by lack of resources.

But, for example, one of my settlements has no metal available and its blacksmith, weaponsmith, etc. work at around 30% efficiency. I can still produce weapons, but that is a massive loss there. More importantly, when I focus those buildings, I get things like 45%, 70% - even if I throw massive amounts of workforce at the problem, the best I can hope for is reaching around 100%.

Tan dSerrai

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Karma: +20/-2
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #20 on: May 20, 2014, 09:14:03 AM »
I am in favor of reducing metal somewhat....currently it is of little use as trading good, though I _do_ trade a few hundred away.

I find that I am already in need of wood - but it is not that easy to come by. That likely means wood is just about right (at least in 'my' area of the map).

However, I am unsure if a reduction of metal (which I am in favor of) automatically expands trade. Still, making commodities a bit scarcer is good.

As to trade, what I would like to see (in the long run) are long-distance trade routes, bringing in wealth (or whatever commodity it may be, as long as its necessary for higher end buildings and troops). These traderoutes should impact the territory they cross (be taxable by estateowners), be blockable and be necessary for larger estates. If anyhow possible I would like to see such (system controlled) caravans move on the map...then they could actually be attacked and robbed.  Such long distance traderoutes would serve as incentive to travel the world to establish such routes, serve as point of conflict (you small robber baron will NOT tax 20% of my caravans....or else!), serve as possibility for player interaction.

Andrew

  • Game Master / Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1826
  • Karma: +75/-7
  • Mildly Amused
    • View Profile
    • Lemuria Community Fan Site
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #21 on: May 20, 2014, 09:22:07 AM »
Personally, expanding on the different goods would probably make things more valubale. Metal is generic, but there's clearly a difference between bauxite, bronze, iron, and steel. Not to mention, the "goods" is also incredibly generic. Even a little bit would probably make it so more trades happen.

The major problem though, is that without these things, is there really a serious impediment? If it still gets done regardless, does it matter enough to warrant trading?
Standing for the creation of interesting things since Year 1, Week 5, Day 4.
Favorite cold beverage: Strawberry Shake
My hobbies: Fixing computers, video games, anime, manga, some other stuff, sleep (in no particular order)

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3133
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #22 on: May 20, 2014, 10:38:02 AM »
if people want a return for the 1000's of metal they are sitting on, then they need to accept trades of wood or goods, cos no-one has vast quantities of food to trade.

If I had a need for either of those trade commodities, or a market to onsell them too I would. Goods are not in short supply for most, the islands have almost as much wood as we have metal. I would trade for wealth, but like food finding a buyer with surplus of that is challenging.

Reducing metal is probably needed, but that in isolation will simply reduce the surplus available to trade, it won't create trade opportunities. Right now the best use of metal for me is using it to buy vassals.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2014, 10:50:39 AM by De-Legro »
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Stonedman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 679
  • Karma: +19/-65
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #23 on: May 20, 2014, 11:13:54 AM »
I still don't like the reduction in Metal. Not the way it is massively regionalised at the moment. The west of the map has no mountains at all, virtually no metal produciton. The east of the map has massive ranges and will always sit on massive excess of metal.
Those who have it in excess, will still have it in excess. And sit on it cos no-one will trade them equal food for metal.
Those who don't have it, will now have even less, and wont be able to trade for it because the only thing people trade for is food.
The Rich stay Rich, the poor get poorer.
The East produces troops at 100>200% capacity while the west languishes at 30>70%
Just to remind you, I have a small excess of metal in the north, so this change doesn't really affect me there.
But it will have a bad effect on other kingdoms like Ascalon / Others without direct access to mountains.

Tan dSerrai

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Karma: +20/-2
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #24 on: May 20, 2014, 11:20:21 AM »
Stonedman:
There are quite a few non-mountain estates with a considerable metal production. Forests seem to have metal every now and then....so I suspect that the west will still have metal, just not that much.

Stonedman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 679
  • Karma: +19/-65
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #25 on: May 20, 2014, 11:30:27 AM »
Yeah there is a little metal "occasionally" in forests.
Although in all estates I have at one time or another controlled in the south west, not one had metal.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #26 on: May 20, 2014, 11:45:44 AM »
Those who have it in excess, will still have it in excess. And sit on it cos no-one will trade them equal food for metal.
Those who don't have it, will now have even less, and wont be able to trade for it because the only thing people trade for is food.

You missed the part where I said that I want to rebalance all of the resources except food, yes?

Overproduction of all the other resources is the main reason people only trade for food. Scarcity drives economy, but right now I realize we have way too much of just about everything.

So please everyone stop pretending this is just about metal when I've said multiple times that I'm looking at all the non-food resources. Please. If you want me to keep talking about upcoming development before everything is finished and done, you need to be less preoccupied with your own personal current worries. Because if everything I say is twisted and villified, I'll have to shut up about future developments and just do them.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3133
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #27 on: May 20, 2014, 11:59:18 AM »
I still don't like the reduction in Metal. Not the way it is massively regionalised at the moment. The west of the map has no mountains at all, virtually no metal produciton. The east of the map has massive ranges and will always sit on massive excess of metal.
Those who have it in excess, will still have it in excess. And sit on it cos no-one will trade them equal food for metal.
Those who don't have it, will now have even less, and wont be able to trade for it because the only thing people trade for is food.
The Rich stay Rich, the poor get poorer.
The East produces troops at 100>200% capacity while the west languishes at 30>70%
Just to remind you, I have a small excess of metal in the north, so this change doesn't really affect me there.
But it will have a bad effect on other kingdoms like Ascalon / Others without direct access to mountains.

Equal food for metal is stupid. Metal is simply not that valuable. My current offer is 1:2 food for metal, or for those willing to have variable returns I offer the entire extra metal production gathered in my mountain settlements for the food provided. I am hoping once those regions can build a mine the return will be close to 1:3. If I can actually grow these settlements, then I will need wood trades to support them.

In terms of metal production, my mountains are rubbish due to low population. I have grasslands that produce over 1000 metal each and forest that produce 600-800. Settlements near mountains seem to have lower base metal rates, but the larger population more then covers it.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Stonedman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 679
  • Karma: +19/-65
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #28 on: May 20, 2014, 12:14:58 PM »
Quote
I have grasslands that produce over 1000 metal each

How did you get that?
With a mine ? Last time I tried that a mine did not bring metal into a non metal producing region ?
Was that changed?

Tan dSerrai

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Karma: +20/-2
    • View Profile
Re: resource balance...
« Reply #29 on: May 20, 2014, 12:16:59 PM »
No, mines only produce more metal if there is metal production already present. So no use constructing mine in non-metal estates.

Some non-mountain estates, including grasslands simply seem to have metal, thats it.