A dichotomy based primarily on what type of resource can be produced more effectively doesn't seem very interesting - I'd much rather see significant differences in what the resources are used for.
Um, was that ever in question? Industry, Research, and "influence" were never intended to be used for remotely similar things.
It seems Bigjoe5 was picturing a situation where, for example, influence would have some additional flavour depending on whether you focused on population growth or infrastructure growth.
If you are suggesting that influence generated on a high infrastructure planet would in some cases function differently from infrastructure generated on a high population planet -- that's not going to work, any more than certain species RP is more effective for shield techs. There's no distinguishing one PP/influencePoint/RP from another once it is produced.
I don`t see why infrastructure and population should *just* influence resource production.
I'm not saying that. Up till this post that is all you have described it doing. I'm trying to find out in concrete terms how you propose they actually be different.
Population could do stuff related to troops or espionage as well,
Like what? Espionage seems a stretch. You could tie ground troop numbers to population. Not super-compelling, but a possibility.
...and infrastructure could do stuff related to PP allocation on a particular planet, for example.
I'm strongly against added another layer that limits how many PP you can spend per turn. If Geoff can countenance throwing out the current per part/building PP limit system, then we should discuss replacing it with a per planet limit, probably based on infrastructure.
There could also be techs and buildings which have a stronger effect on planets with a high population or infrastructure, or buildings which can only be build on a planet with population or infrastructure exceeding a certain amount.
This IMHO is more stuff that would probably be sensible to do if
we had both pop and infrastructure meters, but doesn't justify the existence of both.
Players with high population should be able do interesting stuff that players with only high infrastructure can`t do, and vice versa, allowing them to use their resources in very different ways.
Yeah, you keep making such, vague statements. But with the exception of the PP allocation, you don't seem to be able to list any of these different, interesting things. EDIT:
and while PP allocation may be a justification for the infrastructure meter, it certainly isn't' a justification for infrastructure mirroring population in production boosting.