Put me down for being in Camp #3.  I want a happy medium between "good lord almighty, I'm getting a headache from the complexity!" and "durrh, what are resources?".

I largely agree with what you're saying, and the last part (which I highlighted) most of all.

As fun as the Camp #1 economy *could* be, I do feel it would be needlessly complicated for too many people.  Even I only enjoy micromanaging my empire up to a point -- usually around the time it's become medium-sized (your definition of "medium" may vary, of course).  Once my empire becomes large, I find micro-managing to be a real pain in the ass....so the less of it that I have to deal with (or have to delegate to a not-always-competent AI), the better. 

While I do believe Brad could probably develop decent AI governors for the first type of economy (for those of us who would end up relying on it/them), I'd rather he didn't have to spend the time & effort doing so.  I'd much prefer he spent his time working on the overall strategic and tactical AI instead. 

Thanks for the update and also the improved CAMP_3  model.

CAMP_3  sounds definitely better...  one suggestion is providing an   ON/OFF/PRIORITY   setting as mentioned by another member. 

The ON setting is exactly what's described within the original post for CAMP_3.

The OFF setting instructs the game not to send  Resource_XX  to this town.

The  PRIORITY  setting instructs the game to send a majority(80%) of  Resource_XX  to this town.   Thus if a player has 5 towns producing "Night Guards" then the one town with PRIORITY would recieve the majority of the resource.

Imo the most important thing is that the system scales and preforms well while being interesting

camp 2 is too simple and boring

camp 1 has the potential to have micromanagement issues

camp 3 needs to have good A.I. to work out what you wanna do

Camp 3 will work except for number 3. I want the option to directly control where resources are sent. I enjoy micromanagement.

Camp 3 with the option to land in camp 1.  Perhaps have camp 3 be the way the game is shipped with the improvements in U.I. and A.I. needed for camp 1 be something that's added later via an update to the game engine.

not bad

i dont feel the need to manage every route and stuff but i prefer if the system would allow to decide AT LEAST to distribute the resourse in a different way

i hated the civ system in the end where a single resourse meant the same as 10x or where  a iron at rome is the same that having it at madrid

this system sux

so imo the camp#3 could work if it allows lets say to move more iron to the border to build faster weapons or more food to the capital to feed the abitants and stuff like that, if you dont wanna make ppl move resourse 1 by 1 at least some generic choice like export/import low/medium/high

i really loved the trading of anno 1701 i find it cool that a resourse takes more to get to destination and there is a risk to be intercepted

there is still the option to make trade routes automated and just setup in the towns some choice about them or even in a recap screen

imo its more about a good ui that could make a little sophisticated system really user friendly and fun

Count me in for system three. Sophistication minus a million sliders is the way to go.

I don't like the idea of resources following some AI and getting distributed without my input.  I feel the player loses too much control and the game goes on autopilot.  Don't forget the lessons learned from MOO3.  Micromanagment was removed and the game became unrecognizeable and boring.  In a turn based game, we should be focusing on the actions/decisions a player has to make each turn.  If micromanagement becomes too heavy, then I feel it is better to abstract the system rather than to automate decisions with AI.  That being said, here are some ideas...

RAW MATERIAL PRODUCTION AND RAIDING
Use abstract logistics for raw materials.  All production, minus losses from raiding go to a common pool.  I would also make caravan guarding/raiding abstract.  Have players assign troops to defend from enemy raids, but don't make the players move these troops and there would not be a need for careful caravan pathing.  The caravans shown on the map might highlight target rich raiding areas.   This system creates an important decision for player:  How to distribute forces between merchant guards who protect the transport of raw materials, Realm defense(protecting real assets like the mines or cities) and offense without much overhead. 

Raiding, unlike the abstract caravan defense, could be an action taken by any army in an opposing players territory.  The damage done and spoils would be determined by the proximity to important assets like cities and mines, the amount of troops raiding and the number/quality of troops assigned to caravan defense.  The successful raiding army could be considered to be carrying the raided goods and would have to make it to a friendly city to make use of the loot.  If an enemy army would defeat an army carrying raided goods, they would get the goods.  This type of system creates a way for a player to hurt an enemies economy, help their own, and is also completely optional and doesn't require AI.

Finished goods/semi-finished goods like swords, magic potions, raw recruits, etc.. Could be micromanaged.  This introduces important decisions about where to build important buildings.  I'd also include a system of autoforwarding similar to other games like Warlords to automove production goods to other cities(with delays for distance).  Once these goods are in transit, they become succeptable to raiding just like raw materials.  Thus, most smart players would limit production and assembly to some key hubs.

I hesitate between choices 2 and 3, but I greatly fear the micromanagement of choice 1. I played a lot of Colonization, and the beginning was always a lot more interesting than the end due to having to micromanage many more cities (the number of ressources was at most doubling from the beginning to the end). If Elemental is due to have more and more ressources as the technology improves, this could make for a micromanagement hell. AI governors are not a solution, as having them make a few number of frustrating decisions would make many players (like me) go back to micromanage. Micromanagement is a hard drug to avoid for many players...

If you are still open for suggestions, I would suggest something similar to choice 2, but with some more shuffling around of ressources by the player.

Let have mostly everything be a ressource, but in broad categories (sword, spear, axe -> iron weapons/steel weapons; helmet, armor, shield -> leather armors/iron armors; etc.)

The ressources do not accumulate over time, you either have access to them, or you don't. So a small mine would give you 1 iron ressource, a bigger 2 ressources... A blacksmith will convert 1 iron ressource into 1 weapon ressource. This is not per turn, but simply indicate that all the iron you mine is converted into weapons. Then this 1 weapon ressource allows you to train in that town soldiers with any iron weapon.

Ressources can be traded between towns. You send a caravan from one to the other with a specific ressource. Once the caravan is sent, you lose access to 1 unit of the ressource from the source town, but you only get access to it at the destination once the caravan arrive. After that, other caravans are sent, but only as target for foes (like in Galciv 2). Destroying the caravan prevent the destination access to the ressource until another caravan reaches it. The delay in moving ressources, and the small number of actual ressources per cities (maybe ~3-5 per small cities) around should prevent most micromanagement from choice 1. But they will allow sending ressources from your mining towns to your capital, unlike choice 2.

Caveat: I haven't had a chance to read the 218 replies ahead of me yet.

I like the third option a lot.  As I was reading, I leaned toward Camp #1, but saw the concerns of Camp #2 as very legitamate.  In the third option, you basically replace sliders with "build more of stuff where you want it".  This does 2 major things:

1. It limits flexibility
2. It means you incur a cost to your resource infrastructure

i think this is fair, and brings up a fair amount of strategy.  Do I put all of my proverbial eggs in one basket, and build up one (or a few) uber-cities that can crank out soldiers like no tomorrow; or do I spread out my production capacity; or, do I concentrate production capacity for certain units, but ensure all cities can build some bare minimum for my army (heavy infantry, archers, whatever).

I think a key to making this work would be to have not just upgradeable city infrastructure, but expandable city infrastructure: the "more blacksmiths" Frogboy referred to.

Finally, I don't think it's necessary to apply an artificial penalty if you assign resources to a far-away city.  This could be naturally balanced in two ways:

1. The time to get the first batch of resources could be delayed.  After the first batch, they flow naturally.  (The "caravan" idea here, but without the micromanagement).
2. Longer resource lines (supply lines) are easier to cut.

My vote changes to #3.  If that doesn't work out, then #1.  Its awesome that we have input on something so critical to the game.  You guys rock!

Resources should be flowing to where they're being used, not to where they aren't, in option 3. I would consider it a bug or a flaw in empire management if resources are somehow going someplace that you didn't want them.

By which I mean, if you've got a giant empire and you have a mega "factory city" on the west coast but the west coast is pacified and you want all raw materials to head east to production facilities closer to the front, then you should shut down the buildings on the west coast side (blacksmiths, etc.). Shutting down production is something that was mentioned specifically in the "Camp 3" update, and that (plus being able to set a priority) should provide plenty of flexibility.

And if you've got warehouses, it'd be important to place them in useful areas - that is, near blacksmiths or maybe in "hub" centers so they could be shipped to locations that need them if you have times of surplus and times of scarcity.