Topic: questions about the economy

21 — 30 of 62 Posts « previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next »

hessenfarmer Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16 Posts: 2759 One Elder of Players Location: Bavaria	Posted at: 2019-05-28, 17:04 WorldSavior wrote: Nah, that's not true, you'd still have to build enough wells - exactly like in the current situation. But in this case we could simply add the build costs of the wells to the water consuming buildings I think there are better changes possible than this, changing the water resource might be a waste of effort. I don't think so. Making a resource meaningful is always good. But due to the lots of work to achieve this it has very low priority. So we should just keep it like it is for the moment from my side. Top Quote

BoeseKaiser Topic Opener Joined: 2019-02-21, 11:03 Posts: 45 Pry about Widelands	Posted at: 2019-05-28, 17:05 WorldSavior wrote: A barbarian bakery needs two exhausted wells and 4.5 farms. Ouch. I never crunched the numbers, just realised that I needed a lot of farms. 4.5 is big though. for the brewery, it is not that much though, is it? I had the feeling the brewery was ok with 1 well and 1 farm. Top Quote

WorldSavior Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10 Posts: 2144 OS: Linux Version: Recent tournament version One Elder of Players Location: Germany	Posted at: 2019-05-28, 17:08 hessenfarmer wrote: WorldSavior wrote: Nah, that's not true, you'd still have to build enough wells - exactly like in the current situation. But in this case we could simply add the build costs of the wells to the water consuming buildings No, that's a big difference Wanted to save the world, then I got widetracked Top Quote

Nordfriese Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07 Posts: 2083 OS: Debian Testing Version: Latest master One Elder of Players Location: 0x55555d3a34c0	Posted at: 2019-05-29, 16:39 Reducing water doesn't improve the game, it makes it worse. It could be good to remove the resource water completely and let wells always run at 100%. that would be no good either imo, cause in this setup we could completely skip the wells (i.e. bakeries and breweries have their own wells included.) Nah, that's not true, you'd still have to build enough wells - exactly like in the current situation. What is the point of a building that produces infinitely without input wares and without any other requirements (not even spacial)? Wells are way overpowered; and I agree that the water resource should be made more important. a proper setting for water ressources a rework of all old maps or higher default ressources for them resource indicators showing the amount of water as well instead of only showing presence +1 from me. Instead of reworking old maps, we could just increase the default settings, which are fairly low currently. […] proper balancing correction for empire and frisians, which will then be map dependent. How about giving empire wells a higher chance when depleted (they look like they will retain rainwater )? About 10-20% for other tribes and 30-50% for empire… Frisian wells could get a higher working radius, about 4-5 for other tribes and 2 higher for frisians. Top Quote

WorldSavior Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10 Posts: 2144 OS: Linux Version: Recent tournament version One Elder of Players Location: Germany	Posted at: 2019-05-29, 16:57 Nordfriese wrote: Reducing water doesn't improve the game, it makes it worse. It could be good to remove the resource water completely and let wells always run at 100%. that would be no good either imo, cause in this setup we could completely skip the wells (i.e. bakeries and breweries have their own wells included.) Nah, that's not true, you'd still have to build enough wells - exactly like in the current situation. What is the point of a building that produces infinitely without input wares and without any other requirements (not even spacial)? That's not the question. The question is: Why is it a difference if the building requires space or not? a proper setting for water ressources a rework of all old maps or higher default ressources for them resource indicators showing the amount of water as well instead of only showing presence +1 from me. Instead of reworking old maps, we could just increase the default settings, which are fairly low currently. […] proper balancing correction for empire and frisians, which will then be map dependent. How about giving empire wells a higher chance when depleted (they look like they will retain rainwater )? About 10-20% for other tribes and 30-50% for empire… Frisian wells could get a higher working radius, about 4-5 for other tribes and 2 higher for frisians. It's stupid to have to replace wells then all the time. If you want that Widelands changes so radically - why don't you just do your own mod? You don't even play online matches. Wanted to save the world, then I got widetracked Top Quote

Nordfriese Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07 Posts: 2083 OS: Debian Testing Version: Latest master One Elder of Players Location: 0x55555d3a34c0	Posted at: 2019-05-29, 17:30 What is the point of a building that produces infinitely without input wares and without any other requirements (not even spacial)? That's not the question. That depends on how you define "the question". I do ask this question, therefore this question exists, and unless you convince me otherwise, my answer to it is "the well is pointless in the current implementation of water". The question is: This also is not "the question", only another question that is neither more nor less valid than mine. Why is it a difference if the building requires space or not? In my opinion, every building is pointless unless it has some kind of requirement. This can be input wares, nearby immovables, resources in the ground, free space, or whatever. The well has no such requirement as the only applicable one (water resource) is merely a small boost factor, and the well still works way too fine if it is missing. It's stupid to have to replace wells then all the time The same is true for mines. And you can keep depleted wells around, since they´ll still produce for free now and then. You only have to build new wells now and then. If you want that Widelands changes so radically This is not more radical than your proposal: "It could be good to remove the resource water completely and let wells always run at 100%." why don't you just do your own mod? I already do, but most of the time I only play the branches I develop. Playing with further changes there is a high risk of getting bugs that would not happen normally (or not getting bugs that would normally appear), and I have to be always careful not to mess up the version control system with changes that should not be committed. You don't even play online matches. Perhaps I should stop implementing new features because I´m not going to use them in multiplayer games as well? Please explain the relevance of the ability and habit of playing online matches for the permission to make suggestions. Edited: 2019-05-29, 17:32 Top Quote

hessenfarmer Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16 Posts: 2759 One Elder of Players Location: Bavaria	Posted at: 2019-05-29, 17:30 WorldSavior wrote: What is the point of a building that produces infinitely without input wares and without any other requirements (not even spacial)? That's not the question. The question is: Why is it a difference if the building requires space or not? Because it matters where to place this building. In the current design and in the proposed design of 100% you could place wells everywhere, without giving a thought. In this case it is just about having enough build material available, which could be simply added to the water consuming buildings as I was trying to point out in a previous post. How about giving empire wells a higher chance when depleted (they look like they will retain rainwater )? About 10-20% for other tribes and 30-50% for empire… Frisian wells could get a higher working radius, about 4-5 for other tribes and 2 higher for frisians. It's stupid to have to replace wells then all the time. If you want that Widelands changes so radically - why don't you just do your own mod? You don't even play online matches. I don't understand what would be the difference between building new wells after resource is finished, and building new mine after resource is finished or building new quarry after resource is finished or fisher or hunter? This would be just another dimension of the game to take care of. Furthermore the current design is misleading as new players already assumed water to be finite. See start of this discussion. I am glad that Nordfriese decided to not only doing his own mod. Currently we are discussing a problem that a new user threw up. Some other users put in their opinion. This process is called a discussion and it is what this forum is about. This means that sometimes there are opinions that do not fit to your own opinions. Expectation is that everybody at least is considering other peoples opinions and reevaluates his own opinion. Expectation is further that other people and their opinions are not discredited by whatever personal fact (not playing online games isn't a good fact for this anyway). So please stick to arguments. Top Quote

hessenfarmer Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16 Posts: 2759 One Elder of Players Location: Bavaria	Posted at: 2019-05-29, 17:33 Nordfriese wrote: Perhaps I should stop implementing new features because I´m not going to use them in multiplayer games as well? Please don't do that! Top Quote

Nordfriese Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07 Posts: 2083 OS: Debian Testing Version: Latest master One Elder of Players Location: 0x55555d3a34c0	Posted at: 2019-05-29, 17:37 Perhaps I should stop implementing new features because I´m not going to use them in multiplayer games as well? Please don't do that! I didn´t mean it like this This is only to show where the "You don't even play online matches" kind of argument leads when thinking it out consequently… Top Quote

GunChleoc Joined: 2013-10-07, 15:56 Posts: 3317 One Elder of Players Location: RenderedRect	Posted at: 2019-05-29, 17:48 I very rarely play online matches, so I guess I better leave too? Don't worry, just kidding, but please don't tell people they don't have a right to their opinion because their playing style differs from yours. The goal is to see if we can find a solution that's better for everyone than the solution that we currently have. If we can't agree on something better, we can always keep it like it is now. Busy indexing nil values Top Quote

21 — 30 of 62 Posts « previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next »