Jump to content
Psweet

Some Thoughts on Scarcity; or, Why Tying Resources to Cities Might Not Be Best

Recommended Posts

If I might add a facet to the discussion of helping rich vs poor...

 

One of the things that got me thinking about this proposal was that it takes so long to build up a warchest.  This has the effect of reducing the frequency of wars, since no one wants to start a [email protected]#$ with themselves at the center unless they are well prepared.  Thus, I think that this change would greatly increase the frequency of wars.  

 

Now, which nations, the large or the small, get hit hardest by wars?  A small nation can be rebuilt from scratch by an alliance bank without any sweat off its brow.  A large nation that gets severely damaged, on the other hand, takes weeks or even longer to rebuild, and that demands a concerted effort, a lot of lost production, and it will take that much longer for them to rebuild their warchest as it was for the next war.  It seems to me that war should be the limiter on the growth of large nations, not arbitrary rules that limit how much profit you're allowed to make from a given resource.  And if we allow wars to become more common, it might do just that.

doesnt the cybernation have nation with billions of war chest size? not good thing to have here!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps rather than completely removing them, we could make them soft caps that get exponentially more difficult to get more of as your nation grows? So the smaller nations would have a tangible benefit in that they have a higher resources produced : infra ratio, but you can still acquire some more slots as you go.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps rather than completely removing them, we could make them soft caps that get exponentially more difficult to get more of as your nation grows? So the smaller nations would have a tangible benefit in that they have a higher resources produced : infra ratio, but you can still acquire some more slots as you go.

 

I think this was suggested in the form of projects -- like a project that increases your steel mill per city by 1 from 3 to 4. Sheepy might implement it at some point.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the way the economy works is one of the if not the biggest achievement of this game, and your suggestion is a pretty radical change to it that i don't think you've thought out as well as you think you have

now, i'm not too worried about smaller nations because, at the end of the day, what is really going to help your smaller nations out is the larger ones sending them money. the vast majority of alliances, i think, have probably figured out that funding your smaller nations through the taxation system is very beneficial. if not, here, have the free info

additionally, let's keep in mind that larger nations are always going to look for raw resources last - manufacturing and commerce will always be more profitable than harvesting raw resources. when this game first started, the people who were selling raw resources were actually selling them at a price that was less than what they were paying in bill upkeep for their improvements

which, really, brings up how hard it is for us to actually make suggestions like this from an objective standpoint, because the war of information is part of the game, and you can have a lot of people arguing in good faith with radically different viewpoints based on what they know about the mechanics of the game. but i digress.

point is, this makes sense from a realism standpoint, but so what? why should cities be capped at five barracks? why only 115% commerce? why only 5 steel mills or 5 drydocks or 5 anything? because this is a game.

farms already take into account your land when we talk about how much they actually produce, so we can use them as a case study to see what this might actually do. when i left, food was about 100 per unit, and it still hovers around that price, which amounts to a reduction in the cost of food per unit over time as a portion of what we're actually spending on resources.

and just because prices have risen doesn't mean the cost of a piece of steel hasn't fallen relative to what we're actually making. making second-stage production even more profitable and based on higher infra makes infra even more powerful at a time when we're currently buffing it relative to investing in cities and military strength, so i can't see how this is workable at all.

so what is the effect of having one change but not the other? a surplus of raw resources that makes them even less profitable and second stage production that much more lucrative by lowering their input costs substantially. this doesn't benefit new nations at all - it does the exact opposite, making raw resource production even more useless than it already is for anyone who has been playing for more than a month.

 

if you want to fix things the way you're saying you do, and keep in mind i don't even agree that there's a problem here, the change you want is for second stage production improvements to become more efficient, which would lower the price of each individual resource but keep the profits the same for those who are making them, making war cheaper without making large changes to the economy.

Edited by Hereno
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

the way the economy works is one of the if not the biggest achievement of this game, and your suggestion is a pretty radical change to it that i don't think you've thought out as well as you think you have

Completely agree, I love how the market functions, and it's that fact that lead to my observation about prices steadily climbing higher even as my nation gobbled up more and more of it..

 

I also made no claims to having thought it through completely.  I'm not so vain as that.  I have already noted that it's a radical change, which is why I advised it be introduced slowly.

 

 

 

additionally, let's keep in mind that larger nations are always going to look for raw resources last - manufacturing and commerce will always be more profitable than harvesting raw resources. when this game first started, the people who were selling raw resources were actually selling them at a price that was less than what they were paying in bill upkeep for their improvements

This, at least, is completely incorrect.  Raw resources are OFTEN more profitable than manufactured ones on a slot-for-slot basis.  As of roughly 24 hours ago, only steel was higher than the one-slot profit of all raw materials.  Bauxite mines were more profitable than gas, aluminum, and munitions.  This is without the projects improving manufactory outputs, admittedly, but to say that raws are never worth producing compared to manufactured resources is rubbish.  They absolutely are.  That some people are/were fooling about the prices they sold out is not the point.  Currently if you have one slot to spend on resources and you're already maxed on steel, you don't put it towards another manufacturing plant, you put it to a bauxite mine.  This is, again, assuming you want max profitability, and don't have all of the resource projects.

 

 

 

and just because prices have risen doesn't mean the cost of a piece of steel hasn't fallen relative to what we're actually making

A fair point, but even if PPP has held steady for the average nation, the average nation also *needs* more steel.  It's not JUST price that's increasing, but price AND quantity.  Thus, it makes sense to increase the quantity that can be produced over time as well.

 

 

 

making second-stage production even more profitable and based on higher infra makes infra even more powerful at a time when we're currently buffing it relative to investing in cities and military strength, so i can't see how this is workable at all.

Also a fair point and something I did not consider at all.

 

 

 

if you want to fix things the way you're saying you do, and keep in mind i don't even agree that there's a problem here, the change you want is for second stage production improvements to become more efficient, which would lower the price of each individual resource but keep the profits the same for those who are making them, making war cheaper without making large changes to the economy.

That might also work.  I simply thought tying the increased production to something the player could control would be interesting and give the player some new choices to make, particularly land which is currently just something you buy when your population density gets high.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This, at least, is completely incorrect.  Raw resources are OFTEN more profitable than manufactured ones on a slot-for-slot basis.  As of roughly 24 hours ago, only steel was higher than the one-slot profit of all raw materials.  Bauxite mines were more profitable than gas, aluminum, and munitions.  This is without the projects improving manufactory outputs, admittedly, but to say that raws are never worth producing compared to manufactured resources is rubbish.  They absolutely are.  That some people are/were fooling about the prices they sold out is not the point.  Currently if you have one slot to spend on resources and you're already maxed on steel, you don't put it towards another manufacturing plant, you put it to a bauxite mine.  This is, again, assuming you want max profitability, and don't have all of the resource projects.

If you can't tell by 99.99% of my posts, I'm actually way too lazy to sit and crunch the numbers correctly on almost anything. I'm also too lazy to sit and think about how this affects everything, but if you're right you're right.

 

A fair point, but even if PPP has held steady for the average nation, the average nation also *needs* more steel.  It's not JUST price that's increasing, but price AND quantity.  Thus, it makes sense to increase the quantity that can be produced over time as well.

Fair point.

 

That might also work.  I simply thought tying the increased production to something the player could control would be interesting and give the player some new choices to make, particularly land which is currently just something you buy when your population density gets high.

I actually prefer your suggestion to mine, but mine is a lot easier to implement. I'd also rather buff infra with your suggestion and reverse the changes that Sheepy is currently doing, but he seems pretty set in stone with what he wants rn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.