DESIGN: Economy Details for v.2

skdiw · **Joined:** Mon Sep 01, 2003 2:17 am **Posts:** 643

Aquitaine wrote:

skdiw wrote:

EntropyAvatar wrote:

I'll assume for now that it's steeper than linear.

Obviously you arent very good at math (y=999x ?). Whatever, we know what you mean.

Quote:

Please watch your tone. This is a good discussion, but blatant disrespect is against forum policy and I'm quite a jerk about it.

Thanks.

Aquitaine

It was suppose to be a joke. We all know what EA meant--like everybody is carefully reviewing everything they write and never make a typo. Losen up.

EA wrote:

I do feel that minerals and food should match though... because otherwise food production seems doomed to become an after thought mid late game (as it was in MOO2 after Weather Controllers +Terraforming...basically enough to stop the auto placement from wasting people on it.)

How about food importance = min importance = 40% beginning and 10-20% end. I prefer min having a slightly more importance.

Krikkitone · **Joined:** Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm **Posts:** 1274

Quote:

How about food importance = min importance = 40% beginning and 10-20% end. I prefer min having a slightly more importance.

That is accomplished easily enough by having highly productive Ultra Rich+Very Rich mineral worlds and making terraforming very difficult.

Because if Ultra/Very Rich worlds are highly productive,

and mineral productivity keeps up with mineral need,

then only 10-20% of the pop would be needed as soon as you colonized some of those worlds.

And unless food is going to have some use other than keeping people alive, it should only increase in productivity may be 5* at most.

FreeOrion

DESIGN: Economy Details for v.2

Who is online