Resource Super-Nodes

[AnnaC]

These would act like resource nodes but be extremely large, like 1000 tiles radius (give or take a few hundred tiles for diversification reasons). The main difference is they do not directly yield resources themselves, but the point of them would be that any resource node of their type under the supernode's influence would have a greatly marked increase it its quality and quantity.

The feeling behind this idea is that there is really no regional distinctions in the hearthlands; for the most part every SG is just like every other SG. While this is good to have a somewhat equal distribution of resources, it also makes it easy to monopolize the singular high-quality resources once they are found. If a region had generally more improved resources, it would require more cooperation with others to effectively monopolize and protect the resources in a particular region. Having the supernodes not directly yield resources also still keeps the individual resource node distribution the same; although perhaps another option would be have it so under supernodes, the likelyhood of child nodes appearing there may increase, as well.


In any case this would only be effective during world generation, and by then there may be a completely new way regions and resources are distributed, I don't know. But this idea was something I was thinking of in world 5, and I think would be compatible with the current method of resource distribution, but also improve on it.

[TeckXKnight]

Wouldn't that just mean that anyone who settles a super node will be extremely rich and powerful and anyone who doesn't will not be? This doesn't redistribute anything. It would create richer nodes and more nodes but that's it.

[bitza]

not sure if i completely understand, but some sort of dynamic node generation - looks like you touched on it with 'child nodes' - would make the resource part of the game more interesting.

i guess it's all a pipe dream at this point, but mixing up the node locations once in a while could be a lot of fun - tied to in special game events. say a volcano occurs on a mountain and new ore deposits are created underneath, an earthquake occurs and new clay spots are generated, heavy storms create new water nodes, and so on

[AnnaC]

Wouldn't that just mean that anyone who settles a super node will be extremely rich and powerful and anyone who doesn't will not be? This doesn't redistribute anything. It would create richer nodes and more nodes but that's it.

No it doesn't, as there will still be random HQ nodes sporadically distributed across the world as they are now. The only difference is that at regional scales there are more distinct differences between them (rather than they are currently where every SG is essentially the same as the next one over). If you happen to spawn at a resource supernode, you won't first realize it until you notice several good resource nodes of the same type around you (instead of just the random HQ one you can trip over and monopolize). Sure a single person can still monopolize the choiciest one within the region the supernode covers, but there would likely be several other nodes in the area that other people could grab.

So to properly monopolize the multiple nodes you'd need more planning and infrastructure, and coordination with other people. Also that area will develop a reputation for being an area of better X resource than other areas around. The main point is trying to provide more distinction to regions of the world, while not making resource distribution unbalanced.

Of course, if the map generators in general were changed to have real regional diversity, this wouldn't matter (like say a SG in full has very few of terrain types X, but is prominent in terrain types Y, compared to the next SG over). But I'm not sure if the map generator will ever be like that or not.

This adds something fairly simple that might provide regional distinction that doesn't fundamentally change anything major with distribution.

not sure if i completely understand, but some sort of dynamic node generation - looks like you touched on it with 'child nodes' - would make the resource part of the game more interesting.

i guess it's all a pipe dream at this point, but mixing up the node locations once in a while could be a lot of fun - tied to in special game events. say a volcano occurs on a mountain and new ore deposits are created underneath, an earthquake occurs and new clay spots are generated, heavy storms create new water nodes, and so on

Well, it's not really that much of dynamic node generation, as the single resource nodes will generally be distributed the same way (the only possible difference is maybe have the supernodes influence more generation of their resource nodes under its influence than might otherwise have been generated there randomly).

And again, this is only something during world generation, I don't see how it could apply to an existing running world. Although your suggestions about having dynamic events would be interesting (but require a lot more thought with balance).

[Truth0]

Ideas similar to this certainly have been suggested, namely that the map would not have all resources more or less equally distributed but would have more, and higher quality, resources of a certain type, such as ore, while another area has more plentiful and higher quality soil. Therefore a village or number of villages may monopolize the good nodes, but it would only be of a certain type and would encourage trade across the map. Elsewise there has also been the suggestion, as you mentioned, to have certain terrain types in certain areas to again to encourage trade.

Spamming personal claims with alts would still be an issue, but having the resources more spread out would demand greater travel distances (meaning more wine production). I'm surprised they haven't tested this in one of the worlds, but I suppose rewriting the generator to do so was not worth the effort yet.

[SacreDoom]

No, if the quality raise is "greatly increased" it will become nonfunctional and pretty crappy. If the Q level was only raised slightly in these nodes, it could become interesting. Say, cap it at 10-20.

[AnnaC]

No, if the quality raise is "greatly increased" it will become nonfunctional and pretty crappy. If the Q level was only raised slightly in these nodes, it could become interesting. Say, cap it at 10-20.

Oh yeah, actually I was thinking a max of q20+ increase as well. I just never posted it because usually specific values is something for the developers to balance out (since they know more of the factors in the game design).

Again, this is not to make super hq resource nodes; this is to increase regional distinction with regards to resources. You'll still have the random, sporadic, singular hq resources spread out all over the world, so balance issue wouldn't be affected.

[SacreDoom]

Yea, I know putting on specified numbers is usually something for the devs to decide, but I just wanted to clarify, in case you were thinking of other numbers than me.

[sabinati]

it doesn't really make sense to me

[Scilly_guy]

It wouldn't change anything, I like the idea of regionality but this isn't going to stop one village going out and putting personal claims on all the clay nodes in their SG. Perhaps a simple way to add regionality would be to add 9 new crops/foragables each one being unique to 2 SGs, I don't want to suggest making something as big as Silk a regional good, just little things, you won't struggle without them, but they would improve life. The crops would still grow everywhere, but they would take forever and would go down in q outside of their SG.