Resource production slots, some population, tied to land, not Infra

[Ogaden]

I think there should be some representation of rural areas.  I think each point of land should contribute some population, and that resource production slots should come from land area, not infra.

 

You get one resource production slot (which you can use for farms or mines) every 250 land, and every square mile also gives you 10 more people for rural population.   So me for instance I have 1500 land in my capital, allowing me 6 land points, allowing me to build say, 2 farms, a uranium mine, a bauxite mine and 2 oil wells.  This would also contribute an additional 15000 people to my capital city population.

Edited April 13, 2016 by Ogaden

[fistofdoom]

I kinda like it.

[Alex]

I'm not opposed to the suggestion, though it is a little late to be making such significant changes.

 

EDIT: Before the inevitable "you changed war and screwed us over!1" response, let me just point out that while I realize I have tinkered with the war system, which is arguably "too late to change" it's a more prudent matter when there's an imbalance between player interactions. Here we're talking about something more frivolous, and I'm just not convinced it warrants changing such long-existing mechanics, whereas with the war system (not the subject of this discussion) I believe it was prudent.

[Spooner]

>frivolous

 

To be fair, the useful impact on gameplay : development work ratio is more in this update's favor than something like baseball. Or the alliance recruitment system. Or Social/Economic Policies. Or approval rating. 

 

Totally on board with this change. I think it should only be population, though, not resource slots.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Syrup

[Hereno]

i really like this idea

 

land is useless except for lowering pop density and increasing farm output

 

this gives a way for us to buy improvement slots that is directly not related to infra, which gives us our money

 

that said, i'm not sure i like population being based on land - i think it makes more sense for it to be based on infra, and i worry that adding pop to land would make land a bit overpowered

 

but because land can't be touched, this gives us a way around the whole "having improvements that you don't have slots for" problem. it lets you make score much more accurate because of this, and also means that, for example, we can have improvement destruction chances increased because you're not losing the slot, just the improvement itself, and the slot always remains open

 

additionally, this solves the problem of people getting beat down and not being able to fight back, because their improvement slots remain intact.

 

what i fear with this suggestion, though, is that warchests would start to be a thing again. needing to save up resources for long periods of time in order to wage war effectively pushes the war cycle out further. and this essentially ties our ability to fight to how much stuff we have, rather than the real capabilities of our nations at the time of the declaration. this already exists to a certain extent, though. perhaps a way to render land temporarily unusable, for example, to "capture" improvements with successful ground attacks (and thus removing their positive effect on the nation), would make it so that a lot of tweaking wouldn't be needed but at the same time effectively allow us to temporarily limit improvements during war, keeping things the same as they are now wrt infra level/improvements being destroyed providing a minor setback to the war effort and being beaten down that doesn't override the good effects of a lower infra/city ratio wrt being able to fight against weaker opponents as a result of being knocked down

 

i think it's workable and potentially very good, but you definitely would need to test it out a lot and make sure it's good before putting it live

Edited April 14, 2016 by Hereno