Resources everywhere in no time & don't like Bazar

[BCM]

Hi,

at first I have to say, that I'm very impressed about 0 A.D.

I haven't played games on my computer for a long time, but 0 A.D. let me start doing it again.

Still there are so many great things of the game, I won't like boring you in reading too much in things not helping, I will write suggestions.

But don't feel sad about my criticism - it's realy a great game.

I know that 0 A.D. is based on Age of Empires and not of The Settlers.

I don't know anythoung about AoE, but a lot about The Settlers.

Of course I know, that 0 A.D. will NOT be a clone of The Settlers (even I would like if someone would make a fork of 0 A.D. and implement Settlers 1 or 2 ).

One thing of 0 A.D. looks very strange to me: you collect resources somewhere, but can use it EVERYWHERE in NO TIME.

So you can go with a citizen far, far away, build a new civic center and the many other buildings, using all the resources collected in the far away part in no time.

I would like to know, if it is the same in AoE?

I strongly assume 0 A.D. will not implement single-resource-localization (like it is concept of The Settlers).

But how about this suggestion: without showing animated transportation of the resources, maybe simple make the building-time depending on the distance of the closest resource dropsite?

So for example, when the closest resource dropsite is on the left part of the screen, a building in the center will be build two times faster than the same building on the right side (of course by the same count of citizens).

Still this idea has a big lack: in the example above, going far, far away, you can build first a resource dropsite and then other buildings close to it.

So in this case, at least each dropsite has to keep the amount of resources in it.

Opinions? Suggestions?

And by the way one thing more: I'm not so happy about the (new) trade-system.

Because of different geographic areas, some resources are hard to get, for example (often) metal. Concentrating on creating food in a lot of easier way and trade it to metal (or the need of getting wood in a dessert) looks not so nice to me.

Of course I know that the trade-rate is changing, the more you use it, I don't like it.

Oh, I can say it in other words:

different maps have different personality: one is a very dry dessert, other a very woody wood, ...

This should result in different strategies.

But with trading: simple get the most easy resource and trade it to others.

Opinions? Suggestions?

Finaly repeating: don't worry about my criticism, 0 A.D. is really a great game!!!

Edited January 9, 2012 by BCM

[Almin]

I think it's great that one can use the resources everywhere on the amp in no time, because the style of 0 A.D., to be in the tradition of Age of Empires, is what makes the game great. Also I think that too much complexity doesn't influence the gameplay in a positive way, but these are just my two cents.

[BCM]

And by the way one thing more: I'm not so happy about the (new) trade-system.

Because of different geographic areas, some resources are hard to get, for example (often) metal. Concentrating on creating food in a lot of easier way and trade it to metal (or the need of getting wood in a dessert) looks not so nice to me.

Of course I know that the trade-rate is changing, the more you use it, I don't like it.

Oh, I can say it in other words:

different maps have different personality: one is a very dry dessert, other a very woody wood, ...

This should result in different strategies.

But with trading: simple get the most easy resource and trade it to others.

When I'd written this words, I hadn't (much) experience and this was only result of my thinkings.

But in the meantime I've confirmed it: in my last game (Death Canyon II), finaly I concentrated only on getting food and exchanged it to the other resources.

Still I don't won the game, but that was the closest one I'd played on Death Canyon II.

So finaly I have to say, that I don't like the Bazar (at least not in the current working kind).

Am I the only one thinking so?

[gudo]

Because of different geographic areas, some resources are hard to get, for example (often) metal. Concentrating on creating food in a lot of easier way and trade it to metal (or the need of getting wood in a dessert) looks not so nice to me.

...

different maps have different personality: one is a very dry dessert, other a very woody wood, ...

This should result in different strategies.

But with trading: simple get the most easy resource and trade it to others.

It would be pretty cool if we were able to define barter rates in the map files (like light data.) That way, we could have wood cost more in deserts, less in forest heavy maps, etc.

[ribez]

in my last games practically i use my women only for farming, and use the market to buy metal/wood/stone only when needed. Probably the exchange rate should decrease more quickly and increase more slowly, to force players to search other mines/trees and use the market only when real needed.

but i like the market: for me, it only needs to be tweaked.

It would be pretty cool if we were able to define barter rates in the map files (like light data.) That way, we could have wood cost more in deserts, less in forest heavy maps, etc.

nice idea

Edited January 10, 2012 by ribez

[Mythos_Ruler]

It would be pretty cool if we were able to define barter rates in the map files (like light data.) That way, we could have wood cost more in deserts, less in forest heavy maps, etc.

Perhaps the designer could choose a "biome" for their map, which comes with all sorts of tweaked features, like adjusted market rates, ambient sounds, etc.

but i like the market: for me, it only needs to be tweaked.

Yeah, the current rates will be tweaked before the game goes Gold.