Resource nodes.

[ninja_yodeler]

Also also ressource nodes. Far too easy to grief, far too hard to defend, far too tedious to discover (far too few existing in general?). In particular obviously river clay. I have shown you the picture how we defended it with crossroads I think and that is the only way and took 13 hours straight work of 5 or 6 people. On a related note I have thought of remodeling ressource spots in a way that a hotspot only determines that you will get for example clay from it, but the actual quality is randomized on let's say a daily base. This way every spot owner gets the chance to good ressources sooner or later. But that might be something for a seperate topic.

This is...Very intriguing to say the least, so I thought I'd make that topic for you.

I think the idea is very neat in itself but I do see a few cons to go with its pro's though namely the randomization.

While daily or every two day randomization would be very cool, having the randomization be complete would be less cool, It would put an end to resource wars forever really, because whereas now where you might raid a village for its q80 clay, with this implemented you wouldn't because the clay would be gone in a day and might be q10

The way I would improve upon this idea (you've probably already thought of it, just not wrote it )
have the resource vary daily or every two days, but cap the change at +/- 15 or 20 at most, that would at least slow the initial resource rush because you have no way of telling whether the clay for example is at it's highest or lowest peak, or somewhere in the middle, This coupled with the re-implementing the perception to quality thing would go a long way to stopping the initial rush, while later game still gives good reason to try out the new seige system.

Also if its not too much to ask, can you post the picture of you defending your ball clay, I'm quite interested in how its done

[Nummy]

Oh noes you will destroy all fun and drama for devs... go away!!!

[TeckXKnight]

So the idea is that resource quality varies temporarily or permanently? I'd appreciate permanently with a leaning towards negative levels, something similar to what we see with crops but without the sliders interfering with the variability. So say a -20/+15 variable so that most areas will actually be pretty low statistically but old spots dry up and new ones pop up. Getting a ridiculously high one will just be outrageously rare and the chances of that node being tapped will be rare.
I'd really like it to be honest.

If it's temporarily, as in it has a set value and then changes up and down daily then resets to normal and recalculates after a new day starts, then I like it a lot less as it'll be fairly pointless.

[Onionfighter]

I see two main problems to resource nodes:

1. The initial land rush.
2. Poor claim dispute mechanics

. . .re-implementing the perception to quality thing would go a long way to stopping the initial rush . . .

I think this is a possible solution. Once you have the stats/skills I would hope there would be a way to actually be provided with graphical clues to where resource nodes are. I have already suggested that the cartography skill could be re-purposed to evaluate geographical resource nodes. It would also be nice if there was more of a geographical logic to resource nodes, like water could be higher q at its source, and lower downstream.

Addressing the second problem, it should take more work to keep a place claimed (like upkeep for personal claims), and it should be easier to prevent quality griefing.

[Onionfighter]

I see two main problems to resource nodes:

1. The initial land rush.
2. Poor claim dispute mechanics

. . .re-implementing the perception to quality thing would go a long way to stopping the initial rush . . .

I think this is a possible solution. Once you have the stats/skills I would hope there would be a way to actually be provided with graphical clues to where resource nodes are. I have already suggested that the cartography skill could be re-purposed to evaluate geographical resource nodes. It would also be nice if there was more of a geographical logic to resource nodes, like water could be higher q at its source, and lower downstream.

Addressing the second problem, it should take more work to keep a place claimed (like upkeep for personal claims), and it should be easier to prevent quality griefing.

Also, I hate the idea of quality nodes being temporary. This removes the incentive to actually invest in or fight over an area.

[TeckXKnight]

Also, I hate the idea of quality nodes being temporary. This removes the incentive to actually invest in or fight over an area.

Fair point but perhaps we could just have the ability, as players and villages, to maintain and improve quality. Perhaps, if nothing else, reduce the negative penalties the land can potentially take. That way well developed land is incredibly valuable still and yet there can be places in the world worth colonizing, they'll just be rare to occur and be more four dimensional.

[ninja_yodeler]

I cant really tell if your addressing burgs or what I said so I'll answer for mine

So the idea is that resource quality varies temporarily or permanently?

Varies temporarily. slowly moving each day between the +/-15 or 20, this is not set by internal timers though, it changes slowly so if you were to dig the same spot once every hour or so you would see it happening. you might experience weeks of the node being at its lowest point before slowly rising to its "base" quality perhaps only for and hour before plummeting back down.

old spots dry up and new ones pop up

that is what everyone wants except for those who hold the highest quality I am no exception and would love to see this.

Getting a ridiculously high one will just be outrageously rare and the chances of that node being tapped will be rare.

I suppose going by what I added to Burg's (dont know if I even remained on his original course) the rareness of high quality wouldn't be lessened It'd just be harder to tell, if the difference levels (the +/- 15) were even higher than that then It would be even harder to tell. Coupled with the old way of having your perc linked to the max q you can see (how I understood it anyway) then you have effectively added some welcome diversity to nodes, you have pretty much stopped that initial resource rush at the start of the world and helped lessen the gap between people who started on day one and people who start only a day or two later which in terms of resources is usually quite big

At least thats what I think it will do but as always I may be wording it wrong or just delusional and need to find my corner

this hasnt been edited to accommodate any posts after teckX's first so yeah

[ninja_yodeler]

I see two main problems to resource nodes:

1. The initial land rush.
2. Poor claim dispute mechanics

. . .re-implementing the perception to quality thing would go a long way to stopping the initial rush . . .

I think this is a possible solution. Once you have the stats/skills I would hope there would be a way to actually be provided with graphical clues to where resource nodes are. I have already suggested that the cartography skill could be re-purposed to evaluate geographical resource nodes. It would also be nice if there was more of a geographical logic to resource nodes, like water could be higher q at its source, and lower downstream.

Addressing the second problem, it should take more work to keep a place claimed (like upkeep for personal claims), and it should be easier to prevent quality griefing.

sorry for double post but;
That gives me the mental image of having your regional map and on it numbers on the different terrains that are the peaks of that node, however with a skill linked and capped which will affect how accurate the estimation of the q is, and how close to the centre of the node the number is marked?
If that's along the lines of what you mean then really cool, if not I dont fully get it, but still sounds cool


EDIT;

Also, I hate the idea of quality nodes being temporary. This removes the incentive to actually invest in or fight over an area.

Fair point but perhaps we could just have the ability, as players and villages, to maintain and improve quality. Perhaps, if nothing else, reduce the negative penalties the land can potentially take. That way well developed land is incredibly valuable still and yet there can be places in the world worth colonizing, they'll just be rare to occur and be more four dimensional.

That also sounds very nice so long as measures are taken to at least lessen the benefits of botting this ability (whatever those measures are, I can think of none.)

[TeckXKnight]

Ya, my point was to have higher negatives than positives per progression and what you're describing matches up with what I was describing as the permanent scenario rather than the temporary one.
I'm not sure how to make it something that's difficult to bot. Perhaps just require expensive items to maintain it. Expensive in the amount of time, energy, and resources it takes to produce them. Requiring one of these once in awhile rather than lots of little things all of the time. It provides incentives to get to later stages of the game and to push for rarer resources to maintain your main land.

[ninja_yodeler]

Ya, my point was to have higher negatives than positives per progression and what you're describing matches up with what I was describing as the permanent scenario rather than the temporary one.
I'm not sure how to make it something that's difficult to bot. Perhaps just require expensive items to maintain it. Expensive in the amount of time, energy, and resources it takes to produce them. Requiring one of these once in awhile rather than lots of little things all of the time. It provides incentives to get to later stages of the game and to push for rarer resources to maintain your main land.

Fair enough, I'm not very good with properly wording what I mean so others can comprehend the idea

and I do agree with the rest of that