We need more resources - Stop deforestation!

[skalen]

After playing some matches on normal mode, I have reached the conclusion that resources need to be richer. I would say a 50% boost in every resource would be ideal, specially in trees and metals.

My reasoning:

- After every match I played, they would last about 20-30 minutes because I was forced to attack before I ran out of resources near me (meaning expansion was inevitable.. but I had to fight for it)

- Reaching the third age was almost never done because resources were so hard to get and the match was finished before I even got there

Finally, my main reason:

- I have never been able to build a wonder on a normal 1v1 game. This is because resources scarce way too much and end up being less useful by the end of a match. I would rather but 20 units then a wonder, since it takes time and resources I don't have.

So, stop the deforestation! We need trees to hold more wood, since it is the most needed resource in the game and the hardest to find. It depletes too quickly!

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

The limitation of resources should probably be something possibly managed by the pre-game settings, but scarcity of them introduces two important aspects of the game which characterize different phases of it. The first phase, (not as in the village, town, et cetera) which could be called mid-game, is a period of intense struggle for territory so that nations will be able to exploit the resources which they fight over. When practically every resource is exhausted, there initiates the late game phase, where resources are acquired through trade, farming, and bartering. Thus, by having very limited resources, the game has stages which make it develop into a different game experience from one moment to the next.

[Ryze]

The limitation of resources should probably be something possibly managed by the pre-game settings, but scarcity of them introduces two important aspects of the game which characterize different phases of it. The first phase, (not as in the village, town, et cetera) which could be called mid-game, is a period of intense struggle for territory so that nations will be able to exploit the resources which they fight over. When practically every resource is exhausted, there initiates the late game phase, where resources are acquired through trade, farming, and bartering. Thus, by having very limited resources, the game has stages which make it develop into a different game experience from one moment to the next.

I agree with the OP because the scarcity of resources constrains the player to a single tactic: rush the resources faster than your enemy or lose (assuming an equally smart opponent, like a multiplayer game).

A higher abundance of resources would give the choice between rushing and turtling:

- If you rush, you can gather more resources from various locations on the map (giving you a distinct advantage over your opponent).

- If you turtle, you sacrifice wealth for safety BUT, thanks to the abundance of resources, you still have time to challenge your opponent for control of those resources' locations.

This^ would allow a greater variety of tactics while still favoring the rusher. The difference is that a very good player that turtles may be able to challenge the rusher's map domination. On the other hand, a very competent rusher will be able to overwhelm the turtler most of the time due to the disparity of resources gathered.

What I say is, don't make the game with a 'One Tactic To Rull Them All' -style of gameplay (hooray for my totally uncreative pun).

[Lion.Kanzen]

see awful empire earth 2. nothing to explain this. more resources increases micromanaging

[LordGood]

Building a trade empire is key in this game, you might be surprised to see how many resources you can grind out of a single land route, or better yet a sea route. Good dedication can grind out tens of thousands of resources relatively quickly.

(land routes are a pain due to the lag generated by unit pathing though)

[Zeta1127]

And sea routes are a tremendous pain on maps such as Continent, where trade is being conducted along the coastline of a single landmass, as opposed to between two different landmasses (which seems to work a lot better), with trade ships often getting stuck on each other going the opposite way thanks to pathfinder, I have even seen the same behavior with workers on land. The pathfinder will make this game into something truly special, especially with formations.

[Lion.Kanzen]

For me the best battle formation in a Rts was Rise and Fall. More easy battalion mode. Actually is free after Midway bankrupt.

Developed by Stainless Steel Studios. Is incredibly our game in Alpha is more superior to many RTS. Even the people can't believe. Ask for every release if is a final version XD.

Ok try Deep Forest, is impossibly to deforest that map, even I try but, enemy was destroyed before that.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[serveurix]

A higher abundance of resources would give the choice between rushing and turtling:

This depends on the type of map you choose. One some you can afford to turtle, on some others you can't.

You need to adapt your strategy to the terrain.

[Ryze]

This depends on the type of map you choose. One some you can afford to turtle, on some others you can't.

You need to adapt your strategy to the terrain.

To some degree, yes. In Acropolis-style of maps, it should be highly viable, while in a flat desert map, rush would be more desirable. On the other hand, with too few resouces you are forced to rush in almost every map because your rusher enemy will otherwise have an overwhelming advantage in resources that can't be countered with farming and trading.

To reaffirm my point: I just want enough resources available on the map so that a turtler still has some time to challenge a rusher's map domination. Key-word here is SOME. If the turtler fails to achieve it fast enough, he'll lose.

What I ask is an amount of resources that will allow, for example, a 30 minute time window for the turtler to try it... Because, if the rusher strips the map of all resources, attemping to destroy and occupy is territory is a rather unprofitable endeavour (don't forget the population limit and the diminishing returns from farming).

P.S.: Check out my topic about minable rubble; it would help a little in solving this problem.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Ryze

[skalen]

You guys don't understand. We can try and deforestate deep forest and won't because it is too hard. What I mean is that we need to add to many storage buildings along the way and buy more and more workers.

If trees had 300 wood instead on 200 this would not be a problem. Maybe a variation in trees, some with up to 400 would be nice. We are forced to move way to fast sometimes. Sometimes it's before I reached the second age or even built some barracks.

Take not on this people:

- Building just a port with 3 fishing boats is equivalent to almost 4 trees. That is insane.