Looking over the suggestions forums lately, gardening seems like one of the most unpopular aspects of the game.
I think I'd generally agree with this - It is extremely hard to market the game when you have to explain you earn money for massive wars through selling various plants/trees etc.
For existing players this is something that we can all look beyond quite easily - Its just a balanced way to make money based on land, which you acquire by doing well. For new players, though, it isn't the most exciting concept.
This isn't really about what you, personally, want. I don't mind the farming element, but I accept it isn't a very appealing factor when trying to market the game. That is a problem.
What possible alternatives are there?
I have two possible ideas:
1.) Do a straightforward swap of the current Tree, Bush, Plants, Grass to something like:
Whereby land stolen is suitable only for one of the above. The current process of "cultivating" land could be replaced by having to "fill" this land with the appropriate "facilities". (Or removed altogether)
Rather than your raw resources being "grown" into their final selling state, they are "manufactured". (We could leave this as being possible in a single tick, or have it spread out).
This change would obviously require the replacement of Gardeners and Harvesters.
Gardeners -> "Civilian Employees"
Harvesters -> "Engineers"
Civilian Employees could serve a similar purpose to gardeners atm. They could be involved in the "cultivation/making ready" of facilities to make use of new land, as well as still being available as an option to flak.
Engineers would be required to carry out the production of raw resources.
(Civilian employees would also fulfill the "Refining" function that gardeners currently carry out in "growing" seeds) You are told how many employees you need to maximize production from your land, having to guess this is and always has been a joke for new players.
! - This particular idea does present the problem of the weather, particularly "winter" no longer having a strategic impact on gameplay. I see no reason, though, why weather can't still impact on gameplay (if this is still thought of as desirable). Winter, storms, tornadoes, snow - All still have a massive impact on production. These things make manufacturing more difficult, logistics harder. Its more difficult to transport goods in bad conditions. (Thus bad weather and winter as a realistic environmental factor is still a strong possibility.)
---
2.) Rather than having 4 individual resources, have land that is suitable for various areas of manufacturing. For example:
The benefit of the second idea is removing the "resource" element of the game, which I know some people find a bit fiddly.
-
This is, for the most part, an aesthetic change. It isn't massively changing the mechanics of the game - I'm just trying to help make the game appeal to a wider audience.
I think I'd generally agree with this - It is extremely hard to market the game when you have to explain you earn money for massive wars through selling various plants/trees etc.
For existing players this is something that we can all look beyond quite easily - Its just a balanced way to make money based on land, which you acquire by doing well. For new players, though, it isn't the most exciting concept.
This isn't really about what you, personally, want. I don't mind the farming element, but I accept it isn't a very appealing factor when trying to market the game. That is a problem.
What possible alternatives are there?
I have two possible ideas:
1.) Do a straightforward swap of the current Tree, Bush, Plants, Grass to something like:
- Oil -> (Refined to Petrol)
- Ores -> (Refined to Precious Metals)
- Uranium -> (Nuclear Energy (in Units))
- Sand -> (Glass)
Whereby land stolen is suitable only for one of the above. The current process of "cultivating" land could be replaced by having to "fill" this land with the appropriate "facilities". (Or removed altogether)
Rather than your raw resources being "grown" into their final selling state, they are "manufactured". (We could leave this as being possible in a single tick, or have it spread out).
This change would obviously require the replacement of Gardeners and Harvesters.
Gardeners -> "Civilian Employees"
Harvesters -> "Engineers"
Civilian Employees could serve a similar purpose to gardeners atm. They could be involved in the "cultivation/making ready" of facilities to make use of new land, as well as still being available as an option to flak.
Engineers would be required to carry out the production of raw resources.
(Civilian employees would also fulfill the "Refining" function that gardeners currently carry out in "growing" seeds) You are told how many employees you need to maximize production from your land, having to guess this is and always has been a joke for new players.
! - This particular idea does present the problem of the weather, particularly "winter" no longer having a strategic impact on gameplay. I see no reason, though, why weather can't still impact on gameplay (if this is still thought of as desirable). Winter, storms, tornadoes, snow - All still have a massive impact on production. These things make manufacturing more difficult, logistics harder. Its more difficult to transport goods in bad conditions. (Thus bad weather and winter as a realistic environmental factor is still a strong possibility.)
---
2.) Rather than having 4 individual resources, have land that is suitable for various areas of manufacturing. For example:
- Agriculture
- Business
- Oilfields
- Health Care
The benefit of the second idea is removing the "resource" element of the game, which I know some people find a bit fiddly.
-
This is, for the most part, an aesthetic change. It isn't massively changing the mechanics of the game - I'm just trying to help make the game appeal to a wider audience.
Last edited:
