Infrastructure should not contribute score

[Deja]

Greetings all.

As best I can tell, the only use for score is to exclusively to set the boundaries for who can declare war on whom based on those nations' abilities to militarize and make war. Based on the current game mechanics, infrastructure does not affect a nation's ability to militarize nor make war. The things that affect that are 1) city count, 2) improvement count, 3) project count.

One might point out that improvement count is linked to infrastructure, but it's not. Plenty of nations out there with a full complement of improvements and only 200 infra. Improvements themselves are the enabler for military.

In order to reflect the actual warmaking ability of a nation, score should not be inflated by infrastructure, or at the very least, infrastructure's contribution to score should be slashed viciously. Otherwise we end up with absurd, lopsided scenarios like 32 city nations declaring war on 16 city nations.

[Pascal]

I didn't know it was humanly possible to make worse suggestions than Prefontaine.

[epsteindidntkillhimself]

i hope you know that if your idea goes through, you wont be able to beige camp me and blackbeard anymore.

[Potato]

Higher infra = higher risk = higher reward. If you have 4k infra and make a ton of cash every day it should come with some risk, and if you're at 600 infra with no passive income it should come with some benefit (or raiders would find life incredibly hard.) You may not see raiding as a "valid" way to play, but they still exist and shouldn't be pushed out of the game.

[Dryad]

That's untrue at least for the first bit of infra that is necessary to recruit units. Though I'd also say that the score should reflect the nations overall strength and thats both military and economic output.

[Zerkium]

I'm not sure I like removing infrastructure from contributing to nation score.

I do like improvements contributing to nation score, though. Perhaps different improvements could have different weights (e.g. each coal mine is +5 to nation score, iron mine +7 to nation score, etc).

And certain projects should have more weight to score - this guy I fought recently is ~1k nation score and has the nuke project (and is very willing to use them!)

[Deborah Kobayashi]

I dont think it should be removed from the score formula, but should contribute much less proportionally than it does now, giving score to improvements instead, in a balanced way, would be more indicitive of both military and economic output.

[Viselli]

If infrastructure score is removed are you suggesting replacing it with an improvement score? So basically the same thing but you dont lose score as drastically in war because improvements are harder to destroy.

[Maks Maximmillian]

i agree to this but maybe it should be half half as in half of the infra score would be infra and the other half would be improvements