BGForums

BattleGoat Studios
It is currently Dec 13 2017

All times are UTC-05:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Jan 24 2006 
Offline
Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Posts: 86
Location: Venezia - l'italia del nord
hello

a small topic about an argument i haven't found here.

during some games where i need to support my agricolture i added other "farms" and i haven't found that water demand has grown.

is it me that haven't see it or the two things aren't connected?

i think is not needed to say that agricolture is first customer of water's company.

someone can answer me?

_________________
konan


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jan 24 2006 
Offline
Brigadier Gen.
User avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Posts: 597
Location: Netherlands
nice one i think indeed they are seperate...


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jan 24 2006 
Offline
Supreme Ruler
User avatar

Joined: Jun 04 2002
Posts: 20458
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Hydroponics plants do not increase demand for water.

_________________
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 16 2006 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Jul 09 2006
Posts: 12
Location: St. Marys, KS
but what about regular farms? I do not think they use water, however I think they should, most farms in todays society, at least here I do not know in other countries use irrigation systems, so I think that regular farms should use some water, and there are some instances where the get irrigation from rivers or lakes etc. but this is not as common anymore, but still prevalent, I think if possible in update 6 or if not, in the new engine there should be a small water cost tied to farms, maybe 1 water/unit per 20/ag units.. any other opinions/thoughts??


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 16 2006 
Offline
Brigadier Gen.

Joined: Aug 10 2005
Posts: 576
Location: Venice - the Doge's palace on the Pacific.
...Your point is valid... But don't you think the econ model is already complex enough?

_________________
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously [but otherwise, they do not worry and are happy].


Top
   
 Post subject: Ditto
PostPosted: Jul 17 2006 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Jul 09 2006
Posts: 12
Location: St. Marys, KS
Il Duce, your point is also valid, so I believe this then becomes a matter of opinion and/or preference on the depth of the economic model. Because I personally think that the economic model is very complex, and while at first may be hard to grasp, and you may not fully understand it and have to ask questions on this forum. However, for me I like this aspect, I love the depth and complexity of the economic model. The more one item has an affect on another item the better, you have to really pay attention and manage what you are doing, while some people may not lkike this aspect because they have to micromanage or the economic model is too complicated, if you give it time and just work with it you will figure it out. I think the deeper the complexity the more realistic it becomes, that's what I love about this game you have to be careful and pay attention to so many little things, you can't just declare war on everybody and achieve victory, you have to imploy dimplomacy, raise/lower taxes, keep your people and military happy, etc. there are so many little things that can creep up and bite you in the butt, if you don't watch out. Just like in the real world, this is the closest simulation to controlling your own country in all realistic ways and aspects as I have ever played. I love the complexity, you obviously think it is already complicated enough, and I imagine there are many more out there who think as you, and probably few who agree with me. But to me I think that the agr. should require some water use. I vouch we agree to disagree here, lol.
Thanks


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 18 2006 
Offline
General
User avatar

Joined: May 23 2006
Posts: 2973
Location: Texas
I'm not taking sides, but one aspect that might have bearing on this question is the terrain production concept. In my current north America game, my agricultural terrain production is at 100% and currently producing over 60 million excess food per year. I don't have a single agricultural facility online. I'm assuming basic Agri complexes represent massive corporate combines...and terrain production is more the small farmer. (I understand that I might be wrong) Are you suggesting that water usage be tied to all food production, or just that produced by Agriculture facilities? I am relatively sure that smaller farms rely less heavily upon artificial irrigation. In any case, it complicates the question.
Another thought... the commodity is Fresh Water. Mayhaps the farmers are using non-potable water or even sewage? :P
In either case, I could play with another commodity detail to handle, or not. :)

_________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 18 2006 
Offline
Brigadier Gen.
User avatar

Joined: Aug 14 2004
Posts: 906
Location: Canada, BC
I agree. Agriculture should use water. Esp, hydroponics.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 18 2006 
Offline
General
User avatar

Joined: Apr 22 2005
Posts: 2246
Location: Woods Bend, Alabama,USA
Well farmers around here do use water for farming but they pump it out of the rivers and lakes themselves. So actually it does take water but its being taken from the terrain itself. So it shouldn't cost u any water in the game.

_________________
In war destroy everything even the livestock.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 18 2006 
Offline
General
User avatar

Joined: May 23 2006
Posts: 2973
Location: Texas
maybe have agricultural production levels reduce available terrain production for fresh water?

_________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 18 2006 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Jul 09 2006
Posts: 12
Location: St. Marys, KS
Berg, I agree with you that some farms are irrigated from a natural source (rivers, lakes, ponds, etc.) But the percentage of those compared to farms that require some type of man-made irrigation system is small. There are probably some regions and places in the world where rivers and lakes are the primary source of irrigation, the nile or amazon basin probably. And I at first was thinking that these regions would not need the water requirement for ag. and regions such as kansas in the U.S would, but then I realized that such a system would be hard to do and would be hard to research and get it right for every region. So I thought that a relatively small amount of water could be required (less than a real region in need of artificial irrigation would need) in order to compensate for farms which get their irrigation naturally. So a number such as 1 unit water per 20 ag is what i initially thought, but that could be reduced farther. and Lightbringer you bring up a good point, I hadn't thought about that. But I would say the same thing should still apply, because even small farmers have to water their crops artificially. and if nothing else I do like your idea of having the terrian production availibility for water to be reduced by ag.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 18 2006 
Offline
General
User avatar

Joined: May 23 2006
Posts: 2973
Location: Texas
Thank you, and I do agree in principle about Ag sucking up water. I live in Texas and have been listening to public debate about panhandle Ag lowering the water table there as long as I can recall. The idea to tie Ag and terrain water sort of popped out of my brain, but the more I think about it, it makes sense. Farmers don't need water that has been treated for drinking, but if they are sucking water from a river like a litter of dogs at their momma's teats, then that river can less easily supply small local water treatment plants.

_________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Jul 18 2006 
Offline
Brigadier Gen.

Joined: Aug 10 2005
Posts: 576
Location: Venice - the Doge's palace on the Pacific.
Pretty interesting, I suppose, but if you want to get truly complex, consider the following:

1) Certificates of deposit. The game has no provision for 'savings.' What if the WM offered a simple Term CD - with penalties for early withdrawal and a one-, three-, six- or twelve-month term.

2) Futures. Power companies buy oil futures for real delivery. Farmers sell grain futures to lock in profitablity. I had a whole implementation model worked out for this in the context of the game, but I won't bore you with it. Futures are a vital component of world economies, and they would add a whole new dimension to the economy.

3) A black market feature, where partisans and guerillas purchase weapons, and mercenaries are available for hire.

_________________
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously [but otherwise, they do not worry and are happy].


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC-05:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited