Topic: More economic?

king_of_nowhere wrote: then again, we can't make big difference between the various economies, because we have very different maps.

we have very fast maps like crater, where you make contact with your enemy immediately. a tribe that is too strong early would win crater automatically. and there are slow maps like the nile, where you take hours to even make contact with an enemy; a tribe with a late game economy would dominate there.

so, differences between tribes are there, but they can't be too great, least some tribes become unplayable on some maps.

I think that the game should emphasize them instead. The trick would be resource management: more complex societies should be critically dependent on some limited resources for their complexity, so if the Barbarians can get a very large empire early on and then wear out the inevitable Atlanteans come back, they should find themselves in a good position in a late game with low iron, coal etc. For example, is water a limited resource? I think it should be.

Top

Quote

hessenfarmer wrote:

For example, is water a limited resource? I think it should be.

I made a proposal to implement this some time ago. Although I am still appealed by this there were a lot of good arguments against it.

My point is that complex economies should be able to produce more at the cost of consuming more. Natural resources like trees or water should be naturally replenished, but the Atlanteans, for example, should exploit those resources at a rate much faster than the natural replenishment rate, so risking to ruin their economy if they are not quick enough to take out their enemies when they are in a winning position.

Top

Quote

niektory wrote:

king_of_nowhere wrote:

last year tournament, me against the-x on ice wars is a good one. i can't think of others.

I can't find that one...

Seems like memory is fading some times. Last years schedule was round 5 Kon- Mars on Ice wars Don't know if he meant this game though. But you can try https://www.widelands.org/forum/post/29945/

Top

Quote

I like Nordriese's view most

Can we make a list for all the suggestions, that is a little bit more handy than all those long texts? For example to put it into the first post?

• Experience to (basic) workers
• Tech-tree
• Maintenance costs
• slower fights, adjust movement speed
• more stats at least for the end-of-game-window
• more complexity by more wares and pathways
• trading (under construction)
• more economic win conditions (e.g. based on productivity stats)
• more starting conditions
• mods

May I add two more own points:

• a bit like in age of empires, a building called "wonder". Extremely expensive (like material equivalent to many many heroes), attackable from any point of the map and brings victory once finished. Maybe as an upgrade for headquarters.
• Limited capacity of warehouses

If I forgot something, please add it. I just wrote them down from memory without reading the whole thread a third time.

Top

Quote

I think that more than having new features the game needs to refine the old one. In my opinion refining is better than adding.

For example, balancing the old tribes, because I think that Atlanteans are a bit too unbalanced and out of focus. They are supposedly the advanced, slow-burner faction, but they are actually the stronger starter among Barbarians, Empire and Atlantis. I gave a look at their respective basic (small) military buildings and here it is the list: (Legend: x(y) means that the building needs x wares of y types; the .0 .1 .2 .3 means that said ware is produced by nature 0 or a small 1/medium 2/large 3 building, with the complete chain of production of that ware, the ! means that the ware is consumed by some other building and is not just building material)

B. 2x60+80 2(1): 2 blackwood.2.1.0

E. 1x6+60 3(2): 1 !log.1.0 2 !planks.2.1.0

'- 2x6+80 3(3): 1 !granite.1.0 1 !log.1.0 1 !planks.2.1.0

A. 2x6+75 3(3): 1 granite.1.0 1 !log.1.0 1 !planks.2.1.0

A. 3x5+100 5(3): 2 granite.1.0 1 !log.1.0 2 !planks.2.1.0

.

So the Empire has got the worst building, quite expensive and underpowered, while the Atlanteans have by far the best selection. Their guardhouse is on par with the Barbarians' sentry and while it costs a little more, it actually uses less precious materials: granite is free stuff for the Atlanteans (they use it only for construction), log is a quite basic ware and then they only need one refined good, one plank, while the Barbarians need two refined wares, two pieces of blackwood. So, actually, the Barbarians need to develop more their economy to build their sentries than the Atlanteans have to build their guardhouses. Then the Atlanteans have the small tower which is the stronger defensive building of the lot and it is not very expensive compared to other buildings (e.g. the medium sized Empire's outpost).

With the barracks it is the same situation basically, with the Atlanteans having it easier (when they are supposed to have it harder) with, probably, the cheaper barrack.

I think that creating a more diversified and balanced selection of tribes is a priority over technology trees, wonders, trade etc.

Top

Quote