| David Walker (Little Upsilon) | Friday, March 2, 2012 - 11:38 am 
i just put this up for Public Voting:
"All the Natural Resources polls have been passed and accepted, and I could find 6 that span back to 2007. THE GMs have announced repeatedly that they support Natural Resources varied with each country.
Some resources such as wood and stone are available to all countries but vary wildly in quantity. Others like oil and uranium are only found in some countries. Reprocessing of raw materials can take place in any country.
To solve the balancing issue of economic and military players, I ask that the GMs bring forth proposals for Natural Resources with countries that have raw materials not be able to have any war protection what so ever. This would also be irrespective of war level and new players can only claim a C3 that is not one of these countries.
This would allow development of the war aspect of the game while combining it with an economic aspect. Players could still trade in all commodities and still opt out of war if they choose not to hold one of these countries.
I think this would preserve allt he benefits we have at the moment while increasing excitement and activity within the game." |
| Andy (White Giant) | Friday, March 2, 2012 - 03:57 pm
I agree and we think that this will be a great addition to the game. We also think that finding some rare resources in space will have an additional value in the game.
The problem, as always is development time.
We have some major war improvements on our list that are important to complete, also some more help features for starters and we want to implement missions.
Resources are then a very high priority.
It will mean that resources must be discovered (could be a type of a mission) and that only where these resources are found you can setup a corporation to mine them and also, their quantity will be limited and after some time, the mine will be exhausted and the corporation will close.
This means that the math of mining corporations will have to change, with a price for the mining concession, enough profit along the way to repay all the setup costs, the cost of the mining concession and the royalties to the country and then some profit too. |
| David Walker (Little Upsilon) | Friday, March 2, 2012 - 05:38 pm
Thank you for replying Andy and it's great you agree. Good to know it is rising on the list of priorities. |
| Christopher Michael (Golden Rainbow) | Saturday, March 3, 2012 - 07:34 pm
This may not be popular.....but, I do not like this at all (if it is going to be as stated above).
We already have very few industries that actually make money reliably; this will take a complete class of products off the shelf unless you want to go 'hunt' the natural resource (not interested).
Then, as if having to go on a quest to find a resource isn't bad enough, your industry EXPIRES after so long?? (I know, the 'real lifers' will come out of the wood works on that comment).
David, ANY country that has a natural resource will not have ANY war protection? So if my country just has wood in it, I won't be allowed any war protection? I simply do not understand the mentality for that line of thinking.
I absolutely agree that something needs to be done about the war game since that is the biggest gripe I see on the forums....constantly. My answer to that is and always will be....go to Fearless Blue if you want to fight. From what I understand from folks here on the forum, there isn't much of that going on over there........so, what's the gripe?? Some, and I won't mention names, want to raid empires that have very little protection. That's not war.....that's bullying and taking advantage of the system, hence, the war levels.
I know I may be a minority on these issues, but I have said what I think. I did not write this with the intentions of giving someone the choice of becoming angry with me (and it is a choice). |
| David Walker (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, March 4, 2012 - 05:24 am
Christopher, you have misunderstood what I wrote. You use wood as an example and yet I said there were certain natural resources (including wood as an example) that all countries had.
I was thinking those countries that covered parts of an oil field or uranium deposits would not be able to be war protected.
What I propose does not allow the strong to raid the weak but does provide a reason to fight over access to some natural resources.
I understand your concerns but I think once proposals are made they will allay your concerns, and then is the time to bash them about a bit to perfect them.
I would expect no empire to leave open a valuable country that could be raided on an oil field but would provide strong defences and try to hold it against any conquests. It seems to me, to be a perfect solution between economic and military aspects of the game. |
| Christopher Michael (Golden Rainbow) | Sunday, March 4, 2012 - 06:42 am
David, thanks for trying to explain your proposals in more detail. You are a diplomat at heart!
Human beings in general do not like sudden change, and I think that is part of my issue with the proposals.
I guess we'll see how things turn out......... |
| Gothamloki (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 5, 2012 - 05:54 am
So, the proposal here is to drop everyone's warlevel protections and make them open to raiding by major powers should they happen to be sitting on oil or something else of value? Everyone will be required to play the war game regardless of their preference, correct? Or relinquish countries they already own should a resource become available there? Or are these resources going to exclusive to particular areas (and always the same places and not in others)? |
| Christopher Michael (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, March 5, 2012 - 06:58 am
All appropriate concerns Gothamloki.....some of the same that I have.
Although David explained the proposal a bit better, I am still very much against the war levels protections being taken away if our countries happen to be sitting on oil.
The war players will end up with all the vital resources, while econ players will be 'out of luck'. At this time, I have NO interest in the war game, so players like me with moderate to large economies and CEO's have a great deal to be concerned with. |
| Steven Ryan | Monday, March 5, 2012 - 08:22 am
just make it so anyone can attack anyone |
| David Walker (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 5, 2012 - 11:23 am
There's no reason why (using oil as an example) that the oil fields can be gradually phased in using C3s that are available. I would suggest that an oil field covers a small group of countries. Players could also be given a choice if they're in the area of a field if they want to accept expansion of a field and want to drop war protection.
There would many oil fields I would expect on 1 world and all players would still be able to trade in oil. It would probably be wise to seek an alliance with a military player and mutual benefits can flow.
I don't believe anybody should be forced to relinquish any countries nor be forced into war. |
| Gothamloki (Fearless Blue) | Monday, March 5, 2012 - 04:37 pm
I dont know David. I think we should consider FB for a moment.... In an effort to rejuv the war game, you have a "war world" with much better war rewards, and certain military products can be produced only there (same idea as restricting natural resources).... and yet it's practically empty.... the result is an economy that suffers from too much C3 automation and concentration of particular industries in a few players hands. (How many players can produce and sell cruise missiles now on LU? Not nearly as many as before the restriction on production. However, on FB you have a glut, a lot of it produced in C3s automatically.) Wont this happen in any region sitting on a huge oil field? The empires with huge militaries (same empires that need war rewards to support their military-industrial complexes) would be the only ones interested and capable of operating in that region. Assuming they have the resources to capture, defend, and then invest to develop that resource. Will the world economies suffer catastrophic shortages if someone blows up half of the oil corps in the oil region? (The idea is neat, but wow... topped with the restrictions on intra-empire commerce and finance... you're talking chaos. That can only be solved with more automation in the economy to smooth out these episodes.... think supply fairy.)
There's also the idea of resource exhaustion.... hope it happens long enough after upgrading to allow a profit. (Literally means, each corp has much less potential.... Doesnt matter if these corps can produce 100% more than they do now.... that production is now guaranteed to be shortlived and only up to a certain value. Think about that... you're guaranteed only so-much, no more... that's what exhaustion means.)
A vast majority of my empire on LU rests on the planets equator, being tropical and having several thousand miles of ocean coast, realistically I should have an unlimited number of years of rubber and fish production at "sustainable" levels. (If I dont over-use my rubber forests each year, they should last indefinitely, shouldn't they? They grow each year... a.k.a. resource conservation. Same with my fishing grounds offshore. If I only use so much each year, they should be there year after year... and should "recover" from over-production one year with a year of under-production... farmers do it with their farms to preserve the quality of the soil and thus its production capability.) Resource exhaustion should be limited to only those types of resources that are in fact non-renewable. Other resources, like rubber, should be renewable in that if you dont exhaust them yourself through over-production, they replenish naturally and can be extended via planting of more rubber crops.
If you really want to link war, why not instead "introduce new resource-rich areas". There are quite a few "uninhabitable" land areas on each world (islands and the like) and lots of ocean, and lots of extraplanetary space.... set-up new no-war-protection regions here that allow for mining or ocean drilling or space mining with super-production, that are then required to be defended and have a limited supply. (Might also introduce some good naval PvPs). |
| Christopher Michael | Monday, March 5, 2012 - 11:08 pm
I know the GM's have already said they are on board to make changes in resource availability and exhaustion. So from what I've read from them, there IS going to be changes in the way we do business (natural resources).
I can only hope for and ask that the changes be thought out thoroughly, think of the consequences and anticipate unintended consequences.
We already live in a world where the richest resources are in too few hands; do we want the same situation here in SC? I for one do not.
If (oil for instance) is going to be part of this new 'war enhancement', then make renewable energies viable (wind, solar, NUCLEAR that actually makes a sustained profit) and accessible to everyone.
I also really like the idea that Goth said in his last paragraph......new no-war protection regions. I don't like to war, but I do like to watch a good one! . |
