Resource system redesign (Arlequin's suggestion)

[Sicofonte]

Arlequin, I can't wait for you posting this as a whole suggestion

[I would like that] all resources had a meter to record how exhausted they are, and a constant value to set how fast they regenerate. Gathering would slow down as the resource becomes exhausted.
Regeneration wouldn't be lineal. It would be slower when the resource is almost exhaust (meaning you need extra effort to get it back to productive levels).

Some resources (animals, plants), could be set to zero regeneration when they have been exploited to extinction, then they would need to be reseeded again.

They could be tamed in the same way herbs are farmed, too.

Also, gathering of animals as resources should return objects, not grams. So after a fixed project you gather one sheep, or one elephant, and then you use your butcher knife or whatever else to turn it into meat, bones, etc. Those objects would decay fast and wouldn't be repairable.

Some machines, like irrigation systems, could increase the regeneration rate.

Simple, realistic, easy to implement, easy to understand (people, don't look at the "non linear" thingy)
GREAT. I do want this!


Plants and animals could be reseeded by special and complex projects (one for extraction "alive" from a place, one for transporting "alive" to the next place, and a last one for introduction in the final place, all of them with chance of fail).


Taming projects would be similar to hunting projects, but producing tamed animals (vehicles? machines? a new kind of data-base object?)


Hunting projects could produce the usual resources they produce, or whole preys (and then a new project for quartering or whatever is needed).


Some resources (as stone, limestone, hematite) wouldn't be renewable in any kind (regeneration rate zero or almost zero). They would run out slowly (initial availability really huge) until they get depleted. Then, new machines called Mines could be built up for alowing more resource extraction.

[N-Aldwitch]

This would basically be an entire rework of the framework (err) of Cantr. It would quite literally be so big that I reckon we'd rename Cantr to Cantr 3..

As always, my staff would be available to assist in coding if need be..

[Racetyme]

I like some parts, but it is way, way to sweeping. I think the suggestion needs to be broken up. I like the gradual disappearance of resources, but the rest is too sweeping for me.

[formerly known as hf]

Depletion of natural resources

My first topic on these forums...
A drum which I banged for about two years after that, then gave up.

Resources caps were eventuall introduced via 'max no. resource gatherers'. Which, whilst appealing to my ideal of resource limits, was, I still think, a pretty odd way to go about it.

(Personally, I would have monitored level of collection in each location over time, and developed a per-resource limit, some which can regenerative - similar much to arlequin's suggestion)

Although, the major pitfall of that is what happens once resources are gone. It would kill many areas. But I's have seen that as something good - Cantrians need incentives to up sticks and move (as Jos pondered upon before...)

But, hey, we have gatherer limits now, and that's what we work with IG - it's Cantr's version of resource limiting...


Edit: Whatever happened to Theorist, Industrialist and Pirog?

[Arlequin]

Arlequin, I can't wait for you posting this as a whole suggestion

I'm not supporting my own suggestion because I know it's too much off the way. It was just a bit of dilettantism.

I just believe it would fit better a more Resource Management Strategy Game style (a. k. a. Civilization) instead of a RPG NPC System + Resource Camping Game style (a.k.a. Ultima Online).

At least, as said, it would need to be splitted. Maybe the resource depletion part could be more feasible. It would add some "tension" to the highly populated areas, nomadic versus stablished cultures, maybe cycles of poverty/hunger... often, the most interesting ages in History are those that you wouldn't like to live.

[Arlequin]

The kind of change I would suggest AND support:

Allow unlimited resource gathering slots, though, over the location cap, make gathering speed decrease slightly over proportional rate.

So locations must choose between latifundia (few owners exploiting large amounts of land) or minifundia (many owners exploiting small pieces of land).

This is a rip-off from above, with no regeneration or exhaustion or changes to the animal system.

[Frits]

It would add some "tension" to the highly populated areas, nomadic versus stablished cultures, maybe cycles of poverty/hunger... often, the most interesting ages in History are those that you wouldn't like to live.

Off topic but i feel this is a good point. On the one hand without free resources i think for many players cantr would lose a lot of appeal but on the other hand scarcity and true need would make for much more interdependent communities and could lead to a much more violent, lifelike and interesting game. Not unlikely though players would quit in numbers and the effects of scarcity would therefore disappear and it would ruin the game altogether.

[Sicofonte]

Allow unlimited resource gathering slots, though, over the location cap, make gathering speed decrease slightly over proportional rate.

So locations must choose between latifundia (few owners exploiting large amounts of land) or minifundia (many owners exploiting small pieces of land).

I support it. But I still support the first one.

no regeneration or exhaustion or changes to the animal system.

I do think individualized animals have (at least) part of the guilty about the lag. Millions of DB entries can't be good for performance, no matter the optimization of the DB. So the part of the suggestion changing animals into resources is mainly for performance and simplicity: no need of new code (but migration behaviour, something similar as it is now), just remove the individualized animals' code, and add animals to places as resources, i.e. RD stuff (and it could be automated with a script changing things like "20 hawks" to "resource: hawks").
The rest of the suggestion (depletion and regeneration of resources, new machines for handle it, and artificial (in-game) introduction of resources into places that hadn't them) is for realism and encouraging new kinds of interaction among cultures.

[DELGRAD]

Field dressing or butchering of kills I do not like, but I think characters could live with it.

Resource depletion bad, very bad. Eventually no more... then having to build mines.

How is a character to ever get anything done?
Not saying resource depletion is a bad idea.
Nor am I saying it could not work, but OH so very bad.

I do not like them,
but overall Sicofonte I have to give your ideas a thumbs up.

[Sicofonte]

Field dressing or butchering of kills I do not like, but I think characters could live with it.

Currently, you can hunt once a day, each spicies (but not having sucess each day), and you get the result instantly.
With the conversion to a hunting project, the action would take several turns, what is frowned upon by the players. But this would be the only real change regarding the outcome. Numbers for the hunting can be adjusted so the results of one day "project-hunting" being equal to the current expected outcome for 7 days "instant-hunting".
Same with the improvement of skills and strength.

Resource depletion bad, very bad. Eventually no more... then having to build mines.

How is a character to ever get anything done?
Not saying resource depletion is a bad idea.
Nor am I saying it could not work, but OH so very bad.

No, man, don't worry.
Resource depletion for animals and plants would produce an effect similar to the current derived form animals extinction:
- If resources become too low, people (characters) have to act accordingly, regulating the hunting, in order to ensure a sustainable economy (this is brings new objectives for a government in Cantr, I do like it).
Of course, the threshold would be fair enough to allow docens of people careless working without getting in supply troubles (except maybe for some kind of delicate animal or plant's resources).

The resource depletion for non renewable resources, the one that seems that makes you worry about, won't be a problem for anyone during the first CENTURIES of a city. I mean, a stone quarry should be able of producing metric tonnes before it begins to decrease its outcome.
So only really old and developed cities would have to worry about mines, after three or four real-life playing years.

What do you think about? It is still scaring?

[shapukas]

Yes it is

[Pie]

I think this is a great idea.

But it needs to be implumented properly.

there needs to be some sort of message sent to the players in events, that says that it's low, so that new carricters know what's going on, and so that nobody feels overwelmed with the prospect of haveing to do the math to see when it's going to go under.

[Sicofonte]

There would be an indicator of the resources, when you click on a resource to gather it:

Here you can see an abundant supply of (that resource). Note that a person can gather XXX grams each day... blahblah.
If you have a (that tool) you can gather YYY grams each day.
If you have a (that machine) you can gather ZZZ grams each day.

Supply could be:
- overflowing: Up to 120% of the normal production; all the slots of the place are available for gathering that resource.
- abundant: 100% of the base production; all the slots available.
- high: 100% of the base production; up to 3/4 of the slots available.
- enough: normal production; no more than half of the slots available.
- scarce: around 80% of the production, no more than half of the slots available.
- almost depleted: 50% of the base production; no more than 1/4 of the slots available.
- depleted: 10% of the base production; no more than 1/4 of the slots available.


Note: If a place is running out of one of its resources, it doesn't affect the total slots of that place, but only the maximum of the slots that can be used in that resource.


I think that any place that distributes more or less uniformly the total slots among all its resources, should be able of working without interruption (holding all the available slots) without any loss of production in their renewable resources. Sustainability.

If the people of a place want to explote thoroughtly one of the resources, they will have to bother about technologies for boosting the production and improving the renewability of the resource, or be aware that eventually they will have to move to another place.


And ther non-renewable resources could/should last around five or ten thounsands labour days.

For example, a 10 workers with pickaxes could be digging for stone for three real-life years, before they have to bother about building a mine, and then they would had gathered enought stone for building up 1,000 halls.

Still scared?

[shapukas]

Well, in this case, maby not

[Liljum]

Won't acctually this make things harder for the characters? Life is hard as it is.

How would you determin how much must have been collected to be depleted? If this would take a step further with a fixed amount. How would thing develop? Soon there would only be rare resources left. And those can't be used since the iron/steel needed to make anything of it are totaly depleted. Unless... recyceling is implemented.

EDIT:

But this would make characters work on something else for a while for regeneration. Which would make the rare resources get used more often. So, they would do other stuff instead of collecting for a time.