Important Dates

Currently Online

Latest Posts

Topic: making farmers consistent

hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1170
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-02-16, 20:13

the-x wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

the difference is that only atlanteans can use more spaces for planting fields as they are NOT blocked from other buildings and they can plant at the shore as well.
other tribes can't use any of the spots in a configuration like this while atlanteans can (although they have only a radius of 2 instead of 3)

what do you think?

I also like the Atlantean way more but we need at least radius 3, never do 2 or 1, this looks not so nice in the game later. Moreover we should think to make farms with more fields, in a new thread? but we need this, if you look at your farmers only having 1,2 or sometimes 3 fields, this is one point i disagree hessenfarmer, this doesnt look nice, nor realistic. I mean nowadys i build my farm next to the mill inbetween roads trees and a sawmill but it still works 100%, farms should be placed outside.

maybe it doesn't look so nice but this is not due to the farmers working radius (as this is defined in the workers definition) it is due to the fact how fast your grain is growing frisians have bigger radius and need more fields as barley is growing very slowly.
any how making a good economy depends on not wasting space so most players I know try to make the farms in a way that they are most efficient. And efficiency has its own beauty hasn't it.
third reason is I am not a fan of changing much in the legacy tribes if not necessary. As I think this issue is a matter of balance we might need to do something to get this fixed but I am reluctant to change something fundamental as working radius due to always subjective senses of beauty.


Top Quote
king_of_nowhere
Avatar
Joined: 2014-09-15, 18:35
Posts: 1527
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-02-16, 20:36

shouldn't farms need at least 4 fields for 100% productivity?

anyway, the current arrangement allows to make the 4x4 grid of farms, which is the most beautiful imho


Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 1493
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: North of Germany
Posted at: 2020-02-16, 20:51

king_of_nowhere wrote:

shouldn't farms need at least 4 fields for 100% productivity?

Yes, they do

anyway, the current arrangement allows to make the 4x4 grid of farms, which is the most beautiful imho

Yes, very beautiful! So I'd appreciate it a lot if the number of needed fields (and each radius) would stay like they are, only exception might be the frisian farm which could use less fields.


“It's a threat to our planet to believe that someone else will save it.” - Robert Swan

Top Quote
Solstice_s_Return
Avatar
Joined: 2020-01-28, 13:24
Posts: 57
Ranking
Likes to be here
Location: Finland
Posted at: 2020-02-16, 23:40

the-x wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

the difference is that only atlanteans can use more spaces for planting fields as they are NOT blocked from other buildings and they can plant at the shore as well.
other tribes can't use any of the spots in a configuration like this while atlanteans can (although they have only a radius of 2 instead of 3)

what do you think?

I also like the Atlantean way more but we need at least radius 3, never do 2 or 1, this looks not so nice in the game later. Moreover we should think to make farms with more fields, in a new thread? but we need this, if you look at your farmers only having 1,2 or sometimes 3 fields, this is one point i disagree hessenfarmer, this doesnt look nice, nor realistic. I mean nowadys i build my farm next to the mill inbetween roads trees and a sawmill but it still works 100%, farms should be placed outside.

I don't think that they should be placed outside. The type of the map determines the play style and the more support there are for different playstyles, the better. If that radius means what I think, then radius of two is just right, but can of course be tribe dependent and also the requirement of fields for 100% productivity as well. However, I agree that a farm with three or maybe even four fields shouldn't reach 100% productivity.

Edited: 2020-02-16, 23:44

Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1170
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-02-17, 09:09

Solstice_s_Return wrote:

I agree that a farm with three or maybe even four fields shouldn't reach 100% productivity.

Why not?


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 340
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2020-02-17, 15:30

hessenfarmer wrote:

Solstice_s_Return wrote:

I agree that a farm with three or maybe even four fields shouldn't reach 100% productivity.

Why not?

Same for me, it looks surreal if you only have 3/4 fields and best way in the middle of the town

Is there any advantage of having only 3/4?


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 340
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2020-02-17, 15:44

Watching replays and everything i mean its better that players place farms more far away and industry closer to the headquarter and not vice versa. In early times civilizations witch more ground were more effective, cause they could produce food better. Hessenfarmer, your right we dont need everything to be realistic, but in this point yes, or if you have as new player the first look at the game.

Edited: 2020-02-17, 15:46

Top Quote
Solstice_s_Return
Avatar
Joined: 2020-01-28, 13:24
Posts: 57
Ranking
Likes to be here
Location: Finland
Posted at: 2020-02-17, 16:31

hessenfarmer wrote:

Solstice_s_Return wrote:

I agree that a farm with three or maybe even four fields shouldn't reach 100% productivity.

Why not?

Mostly for visual reasons, but it makes them also too easy to place. The other side of the coin is obviously that AI benefits from low field requirement, which is a good thing.

Maybe there is a room for improvement: Speeding up the farmer with food. Then it would eat fish or meat and work faster as a result. Two actions per fish or meat would be proportionate to get 50% extra speed and 6-7 active fields effectively used. What do you think?


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 340
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2020-02-17, 16:46

Solstice_s_Return wrote:

Then it would eat fish or meat and work faster as a result. Two actions per fish or meat would be proportionate to get 50% extra speed and 6-7 active fields effectively used. What do you think?

This sounds excellent, as you have a challenge to balance both face-smile.png like that Idea

Edited: 2020-02-17, 16:50

Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 340
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2020-02-17, 16:49

I mean, yes we should not change to much, but this Idea is excellent. And it's really worth the change: Visually it looks more realistiv and logically it gives more challange how to place


Top Quote