[Flamingmonkey923]

Does anyone else not like the whole 'you get stuck with X and Y resource, and if they suck then too bad' idea? It's not that I'm complaining personally since I have Fish and Wheat, but a lot of people get stuck with resource combos that are basically unuseable. Essentially if you have a single resource that doesn't match one of the two 'ideal' combos, then you're screwed. I'd like to see some sort of improvement to sidestep this, or a new system completely.

[deth2munkies]

This is the suggestions forum. Do you have an actual suggestion on how to change this or is this just a statement of dislike?

[LJ Scott]

You can always delete when you create

Some people manage to make the best of what they have.

I have pigs/lead, which isnt the best, yet Ive been in a 5 bonus (I like to think uranium is a bonus) trade cirlce for approx 100 days of my 200 days in CN.

[Jacob the Malignant]

I can't totally complain..pigs and wheat, but my old nation had pigs and gold, so those were kinda bad. But yeah, if your new, just log onto the forum and find out if your resources are good from the older players, then decide if you should restart or not

[Bob Janova]

There is a serious problem with the game when you are advising people to restart their nation! I've said it before and I will again: to make the resource system work, it needs two things: choice in your native resources, and self balance (i.e. the more people want a certain resource, the harder it becomes to import or the less effective it becomes).

Choice can be implemented by simply being able to choose to change a resource, possibly for a large financial investment, or by something like the Territories suggestion (read Seerow's post).

I suggested a complete self balancing system (the more people have a resource the smaller its effects) a while back, but because the search facilities on this forum are appalling I can't link it for you.

[Brotherington]

If a couple of the bad ones were balanced it wouldn't be such a bad system. Furs especially is retarded.

[Wurzak]

Furs are gold that give $0.5 more. The resources system is horrible. Managing trades was really annoying even when we had only 3 slots. The addition of new resources and the 4th slot made it even worse. The new resources made some old resources, like Gold, suck, before they were rebalanced... and then balanced again and you know how well that worked... At least Gold is decent for nations that hit the infra wall of doom and no other viable options than to spend their cash in tech&land or save up.

[Vinas Solamnus]

Dude, if people didn't have the "not so cool" resources, then what will the people that need that in the combos do? Ure just complaining friend.

I am the Head of Trades in my alliance, and for those people that kind of don't fit in to the combos, you let them use that resource as the "wildcard" instead of the nice fish/wine/gems or something. There is always a way...

Plus, if you really can't achieve something; then get a better alliance, or delete your nation and create a new one.

I had a nation that was about 150 days and older. Deleted, and got a new one with cattle & pigs which is nice

[Wurzak]

Then there's always the option I've been supporting for almost two years: force people to trade with you. Someone doesn't want to trade with you? Get your entire alliance to threaten them, no trade = perma ZI. That's one way to fix the current horrible trade system and it would probably force the admin to do something since new players would complain about the threats.

[Stylesjl]

Wurzak, on Nov 26 2007, 02:31 AM, said:

Then there's always the option I've been supporting for almost two years: force people to trade with you. Someone doesn't want to trade with you? Get your entire alliance to threaten them, no trade = perma ZI. That's one way to fix the current horrible trade system and it would probably force the admin to do something since new players would complain about the threats.

I am suprised that it has never been tried before (or at least, as far as I know)

[SpacingOutMan]

I have lead and silver and I find it hard to manage trades, but no way in Hell am I going to delete my nation just because it's completely unbalanced.

Quote

Dude, if people didn't have the "not so cool" resources, then what will the people that need that in the combos do? Ure just complaining friend.

I see you have cattle and pigs... no wonder why you don't really care. And also, we're talking about trades that don't work with the two best combos in the game. Why should nations who get a bit unlucky get left out? My nation is stuck with the 7-trade bonus combo which isn't bad, but it compares nothing to the Beer, Construction and Fast Food, along with the maximum population boosts. People who have resources that can be used in the best trade combinations won't want to participate in such combos like the 7 bonus.

Quote

Plus, if you really can't achieve something; then get a better alliance, or delete your nation and create a new one.

Why should I have to? That's the question. And having a "better" alliance has nothing to do with the situation at hand.

[Rakarth]

Vinas Solamnus, on Nov 25 2007, 02:37 PM, said:

Dude, if people didn't have the "not so cool" resources, then what will the people that need that in the combos do? Ure just complaining friend.

If you are stuck with furs then you are in trouble. No one needs fur in their trade combo. I have never seen any trade setup that involves fur.

As it is now, if you have the resources that are needed for the construction and beer combo then you will have a lot of people wanting to trade with you. If you only have one of them than you can probably find a way in a lesser trade circle that uses a few wild card resources.

The resources needs a complete workover. One way of doing it would be to make "Affluent Population" better, if we could get atleast a few people to choose affluent population instead of construction and beer then all resources would be better.

[Bob Janova]

Quote

One way of doing it would be to make "Affluent Population" better, if we could get atleast a few people to choose affluent population instead of construction and beer then all resources would be better.

This sort of thing never works, either all resource paths are the same in which case there is no point being careful with trades, or there is a best one in which case we are in the same position as now. The only way to make resources work is for there to be choice and dynamism.

[Seerow]

Bob Janova, on Nov 26 2007, 07:20 AM, said:

This sort of thing never works, either all resource paths are the same in which case there is no point being careful with trades, or there is a best one in which case we are in the same position as now. The only way to make resources work is for there to be choice and dynamism.

Well there are ways to work around it. Say FF stays pop based, Affluent Pop gets a higher base income but lower pop, and the Gold etc get more military/technology strength. For this I particularly like the idea of turning tech cost discounts to effective tech bonus. Between that and efficiency boosts a military setup could be worthwhile. Giving people choice in their base resources lets them have control to some degree what route they want to go with their nation, so long as they can find like minded partners with the other resources.

Of course, this would work much better with a revamped improvement system. Consider more improvements like Border Walls (which benefit the high income low population people far more than those with maxed out pop). The system being changed to be more dynamic with more actual choice involved would be pretty awesome as well, but that's probably a subject for another topic..

[Flamingmonkey923]

I think it'd just be easier to get resources through tech and improvements. Just assume every nation has access to gold mines, coal mines, water, lumber, etc. rather than assuming some nations have access to gems and fish and some have access to lead and furs. The idea is not to luckily have the resource in your nation, but rather to advance far enough technologically to be able to harvest it.

Why don't you start with rock bottom resources like hunted meats and gathered fruits, and as you hit 50 and 100 technology you get to choose which resources to harvest. You can buy an improvement that allows you to switch whatever resources you want to harvest at any time, but you have to pay to switch them (in addition to paying for the improvement itself).

[Emperor Mudd]

I have furs AND gold, and I never have problems getting trades.

Blue powah.

[Gardiewonka]

I have Fish-Furs & trades aren't usually that hard to come by. I just pay people to become long term trade partners. I more often have to replace trade partners because they become inactive & are deleted.

[Flamingmonkey923]

But you will never have the 'ideal' trade set that gets you construction, fast food and beer. I think it'd be a lot more fair to give every nation a chance to have whatever resources they want.

This post has been edited by Flamingmonkey923: 29 November 2007 - 09:30 AM