Thanks for the reply Brian, it is great to be able to get feedback from BHG. You made some good points; here are a few of my (rambling) thoughts:
I'm not concerned that infinite mines will lead to players not needing to expand. Infinite resources actually encourage early expansion, as compared to games such as AoK, since the number of vils that can work a resource must be limited, therefore a player has to expand in order to increase the amount of resources that can be gathered. EE demonstrates this clearly. In AoK one could, for a while, use only one or two gold piles to supply all your gold needs. These would become exhausted, forcing the player to expand, but for a time only a few piles are needed as they can be intensively mined. In EE, as well all know, with a 6 vil limit you simply had to expand and set up new mines as one or two mines simly couldn't supply enough gold/iron for your needs except in the early game. So clearly and logically infinite resources in RoN will force expansion and conflict, which is a good thing.
BTW, you noted that areas running ot of a resource hasn't been an issue in human history. I would disagree there - the Egyptians exhausted the Timna copper mines, forcing them to find foreign sources. The famous Laurion mines that powered Athen's greatness, which where worked out by the 3rd century B.C. Banská Štiavnica, Joachimsthal, Bere Ferrers, Rudna Glava, Cornwall, there are countless examples of wealthy mining centers that depleted the precious resources of a region, leading to a decline in power and influence. In fact, you would be hard pressed to find one mine worked for the last 1000 years that is still workable today without the enormously greater mining technologies we now have.
Oil is another great example of my idea of technologies "renewing" a finite resource. Present day oil reserves are large; but if we were limited to the technology of the 20's and 30's, we would be in a severe oil crunch, because the vast majority of our present oil reserves are only accessable using modern techology, e.g. deep sea drilling, tar sands, modern refining, etc. In other words, it is a perfect example of my idea. As our tecnology improves, our finite reserves of oil increase, not because new oil magically appears, but because unusable oil deposits become accessable. The same pattern has occured in every mining field; indeed the copper mines at Timna that the Pharoahs exhausted sat dormant for centuries until modern mining techniques made them usuable again, a perfect example of technology increasing the size of a finite resource.
Simply put, from a stand point of realism, finite resources is the only option, there has never been a historical infinite mineral/metal resource. If there is, I want shares in it But realism takes a back set to gameplay, hence I would not argue against infinite resources on the basis of realism.The potential problem of infinite resources is twofold, as I see it:
1) The number of mines controlled fixes the amount of units that can be produced. This can lead to situations such as the following: Player 1 has 4 metal mines, player 2 has 6. Player 2 can in principle produce 50% more tanks, and thus will win eventually, on average. Player 1 therefore has only a short time to take mines from player 2 before the edge in numbers seals his fate. This sort of thing occured often in EE, where a player got more iron mines, and his opponent had to quickly retake some or perish. This is not a problem to many players, it helps make games shorter and encourages early expansion, and is good for desperate battles over resources. But I like being able to match my opponent's production from fewer resource site, for a short time, as it makes the game hang in the balance nicely. For example, one player grabs more mines, with a short term econ cost, but will in the long run extract more resources, and at a faster rate. The other player can for a time match the first player's output, (i.e. in AoK by adding another mine on the opposite side of a gold pile) but will soon fall behind, and has only a short time to take or deny a resource from the enemy. This is not a major problem - properly done, infinite resources can work very well, by adjusting the cost of setting up new resource sites against the increase in gathering, players will need to be careful in how they balance econ expansion vs military developemnet. The good old guns or butter challenge.
2) Here is the bigger issue: Will infinite resources result in a "dumbed down" econ model? Example, in EE, econ was a (small) step backwards from AoK, for me. Since mines had a max limit of 6 vils it was a fairly simple matter after playing the game a bit to fall into a mechanical "build a drop site, assign 6 vils" sort of econ developement. The optimum time to upgrade tc's could be calculated, so you would know when to upgrade tc's at your mines. Farming was simple, just grab the vils, make a granary. And so on, in EE it seemed that the econ side of things was more mechanical, less descision based than AoK.
Many players probably like it that way, but I prefer more player thought to be required for the econ, in terms of having to decide when upgrades are worth it, when to shift to a different area, balancing resources, etc. In AoK, for example, an econ of fewer vils can outperform a larger vil econ, if used properly. Repitting resource sites to make vils work more efficiently, preventing crowding, getting upgrades at the right time (not to early, not to late) rewarded a player who had a better knowledge of how the game worked, and I liked that. A good example is gold piles, in AoK they are finite, thus a player is presented with descisions, e.g. how intensively to mine, how fast to use the gold, when to switch miners to a new pile. Or should a distant pile be tc'ed, with gives protection and vil production, but is more expensive and slow, or should it be mined? Should the player mine the riskier center gold early, or keep the mining in safer areas at first? When to get wb and handcart, and farm upgrades? In a nutshell, finite resources in AoK forced me to make econ and military descisions in the game, because those mines wouldn't last forever. I had to be aware that gold and stone would run out, and decide how to deal with that.
I just hope RoN has as much, or even more, thought required to optimize an econ, and that the descisions will need to be made on the fly. Remember, descisions that have only one real answer aren't really descisions. AoK had it's fair share of those, but it had enough real descicisons that its econ took some skill to optimize, and that made it interesting to me. On the whole I think infinite resources can work well, so long as there are real descisions to be made, and that a clever player can out-econ a less skilled player, even if he has a disadvantage in resouces sites available. It certainly looks promising - in particular regarding borders and special resources, which it seems will give me the depth I'm looking for - so I'm eager to see what BHG will do with RoN!
Pros of infinite resources:
* Forces early expansion
* Prevents late game "trash wars" after precious resources are exhausted
Cons of infinite resources:
* Possibly less econ depth
* Might lead to swifter changes in player power due to a player with fewer mines cannot equal gather rate of other player
Infinite resources can work well, I hope BHG does a good job on the econ. They have the talent and ability, and I know I'll be getting my copy as soon as it hits the shelves. Thanks for the reply, looking forward to finding out more about the game as time goes on.
Little_Wing
Oh as I was young and easy in the mercy of his means,
Time held me green and dying
Though I sang in my chains like the sea.
[This message has been edited by Little_Wing (edited 09-25-2002 @ 01:07 PM).]