soul-breathing
King
Just when I enter the scenerio, at the first turn, enter a city to see details, move mouse to see the resources in the city, then crash
[Feature] Limited Resource Effects
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
soul-breathing
King
Now every happy resourse can be shared by 3 cities. I feel it too few. Could it be increased to 4 or 5 cities per happy resourse?
Imperator Knoedel
Simperator Knoedel
Is the number of cities a resource can supply not increased by civics and/or technologies? If not, that should definitely be a feature.
The current number of affected cities is an arbitrary choice that is geared mostly towards the early to mid game. Larger empires will probably struggle to maintain happiness/health through resources. I am still collecting feedback on that and am willing to balance it further.
However, the reduction of overall effective happiness/health from resources is intentional. If you want to obtain e.g. additional happiness from civics and technology, you should adopt civics that provide happiness and were previously ignored because the happiness was already provided by resources, or you should actually build buildings unlocked by technology that provide happiness (either directly or through resources), another game aspect that could previously be ignored. Large empires may additionally have to rely on the culture/espionage slider for extra happiness.
I have not yet revisited building effects to balance for this, however. I could imagine making this somewhat more pronounced, e.g. give additional happiness to Amphitheatres etc. In short I'd rather balance on this end than extend the number of affected cities so that bare resource effects are as powerful as they were before.
Edit: I could however imagine letting economic civics influence how cities are supplied with resources, e.g. the capital could always be supplied with Redistribution, Mercantilism could prefer core cities over colonies etc.
However, the reduction of overall effective happiness/health from resources is intentional. If you want to obtain e.g. additional happiness from civics and technology, you should adopt civics that provide happiness and were previously ignored because the happiness was already provided by resources, or you should actually build buildings unlocked by technology that provide happiness (either directly or through resources), another game aspect that could previously be ignored. Large empires may additionally have to rely on the culture/espionage slider for extra happiness.
I have not yet revisited building effects to balance for this, however. I could imagine making this somewhat more pronounced, e.g. give additional happiness to Amphitheatres etc. In short I'd rather balance on this end than extend the number of affected cities so that bare resource effects are as powerful as they were before.
Edit: I could however imagine letting economic civics influence how cities are supplied with resources, e.g. the capital could always be supplied with Redistribution, Mercantilism could prefer core cities over colonies etc.
soul-breathing
King
How about to link the number of cities that shared happy resourses with the ages? When in Classical and Medieval, 2 or 3 cities per resourse; Renaissance, 4; Industrial, 5 or 6; Global, 7 or 8; Digital and Future, 9 or 10.
It may represent the improving logitics by ages.
It may represent the improving logitics by ages.
Imperator Knoedel
Simperator Knoedel
Wait, is this tied to city number alone with no consideration of the actual population in it?
Yes, I think we already had this discussion earlier in the thread (or when I originally announced the idea). +1 happiness or health has the same effect on a city if it has 5 or 20 population so it does not make sense factor population into this rule.
I have to admit that this feature has got some points. Start a 3000 BC monarch epic Chinese game last night, Maximum play as usual, but this time I found it hard to be far ahead like before, and I was struggling with my own people, that's realistic in many ways.
Are grains eventually going to be able to be shipped around your empire to provide food? Because grains travel much better than meat and historically were much more likely to be traded (especially intra-empire) so it seems like they should impact cities other than their "home city" more than meats do rather than less.
ozqar
King
(Disclaimer: I haven't tested this development feature)
Just some thoughts, grains have always provided most calories for people, while meat was always a very scarce resource and seafood basically only available near the oceans. The main advantage (nutritionally speaking) of animal-based protein (vs plant-based) is that it's more readily available and complete. So kind of as Hightower says, it would be awesome to represent this if farms provided much more food than pastures and fishing boats and if animals and fish could serve, eg, only 1 city have more of a focus on health. I'm talking of course about the time period before refrigeration, logistics, etc.
Just some thoughts, grains have always provided most calories for people, while meat was always a very scarce resource and seafood basically only available near the oceans. The main advantage (nutritionally speaking) of animal-based protein (vs plant-based) is that it's more readily available and complete. So kind of as Hightower says, it would be awesome to represent this if farms provided much more food than pastures and fishing boats and if animals and fish could serve, eg, only 1 city have more of a focus on health. I'm talking of course about the time period before refrigeration, logistics, etc.
KeeperOT7Keys
did nothing wrong
[QUOTE="Hightower, post: 15136415, member: 208374"Because grains travel much better than meat and historically were much more likely to be traded (especially intra-empire) [/QUOTE]
I think current system is representing the idea well enough, grain is nearly always sent to the your biggest/core city.
I think current system is representing the idea well enough, grain is nearly always sent to the your biggest/core city.
Will resource effects prioritize only by population or will there be other factors? I was thinking that historically speaking priority was given to the core vs the periphery regardless of population. For example, during the Victorian Era food and luxury resources disproportionately left India (a colony with undoubtedly higher population than England) and Southeast Asia towards their colonial masters due to the "Invisible Hand" of the free market. The result being mass-starvation, sickness, disease and unhappiness in South and Southeast Asia. I think with colonialism and/or free enterprise as a civic it might be worthwhile to include the condition that resources prioritize the core, or at least resources do not not prioritize colonies. This would reflect the Malthusian colonialist attitudes of the time.
If I had control I'd also say this should make your colonies more likely to revolt or declare independence.
If I had control I'd also say this should make your colonies more likely to revolt or declare independence.
Similar threads
