{The List} Resources

[ThePlagueRat]

Hmm, a bit like that campaign in C3C... Age of Discovery.
Where the sugar plantation spawned a treasure every 5th. turn.
So a factory can spawn dye or saltpeter, but it have to be in limited amounts so the idea of strategic resource is kept alive..

Well, say you would make guns, and you had steel, but no saltpeter. You were going to recruit 8 dragoons from different cities in 1 turn, but could only recruit 3 because your output of saltpeter was 3 per turn from let's say 1 factory.

So you could switch mode on factories too perhaps?

3 modes...
normal(+ 50% shield),
produce( some resources per turn)
consumer goods( some luxuries per turn )

Would give more freedom to the player! And of course, resources should be quantified in the next game to allow for more interresting play... and many more different resources to allow for new trade possibilites. They could make it a real nice trading game if they did some work on this.

[CiverDan]

I put some ideas that probably belonged in this thread in the Trade Thread. Part of it dealt mainly with apossible reource depletion model. Have resources deplete over time as you build stuff, depletion rate is slowed or stopped with certain tech. Certain tech can find u new source also. Also, Please no more "losing my horse source" when the enemy takes the "source".

[Fatwreck]

the one hing that needs to be done is to remove the silly idea that ONE resource can cover your whole empires demands...

[ThePlagueRat]

Originally posted by Fatwreck
the one hing that needs to be done is to remove the silly idea that ONE resource can cover your whole empires demands...

Yep, actually that's what I meant with this quantifying idea I got.

[DarkSlayer]

If you want a colonization style resource managment then say so, but then the game will be colonization where you harwest different resources, and work the resources to produce new products. etc etc ...

I think the resource/trade in civ3 is kinda weird... but then, thats civ ... stick to the civ style, not colonization style...

Personaly I want a civ 4 engine where I can mod it to create a colonization 2 ... but that is dreaming.

The suggestions I find interesting is the option to put a resource on a world market for others to bid on... And some minor changes to how resources work...
... then you could establish WTO which will give you a better price but force you to accept the highest bid...

"need saltpeter to produce gunpowder units" etc ... some of those things need a bit adjustments

money/resources/trade is closely linked together, and should really be discussed in the same thread.
The colony consept has to be improved alot, as a way of gething resources, trade and a few more thing.
Trade as a consept has to be improved alot. Trade in civ3 is like not important at all to win the game.
Resources that only provide terrain bonuses like an extra shield/food is stuff I find useless.

[ThePlagueRat]

Originally posted by DarkSlayer

Personaly I want a civ 4 engine where I can mod it to create a colonization 2 ... but that is dreaming.

Yup! that's my dream too.
Then the game engine has got to support a system of quantified resources in which one or more resource types could be manufactured into another on a variable scale. Just as in Settlers, Victoria, Colonization, etc. How that is done in detail, should of course be moddable as you say!


e.g. The default setup need not be complicated:
To produce Artillery you don't need a Weaponsmith, but you must collect iron and saltpeter from either a trade route or from your own lands. Riflemen would then need a a lesser amount of the same for their Guns.


e.g. Or you can mod it to be more realistic (and complicated):
You make Artillery require steel and saltpeter and a Weaponsmith in one or more cities, also a Steel Mill to make steel out of iron an coal, and adjust the amounts needed for each unit. Modders can even make up their own resources.

Would that be nice? would suit everyone's need.
so IMO moddability is very important!

[mr Rura]

"Dye and Saltpeter could also be synthetically produced with a factory or a chemical factory".

Please notice that some units such as rifleman don't need saltpeter, because in the times rifleman exists, saltpeter exists in abundance. It's written in civilizopedia... Synthetic production of resources is possible rather in modern times, when rifleman is obsolete. I hope you understand.
_______________
I don't like the fact that there is only one size of resources. I think there should be at least two sizes: big and small.

I agree that resource should be counted in a sensible way. The fact that one resource is satisfying the whole civilization is a very stupid idea. The big resource would contain for instance 10 "units" of a resource, and the small - three or four. This amount can be doubled if there is a road on the tile.

Most resources are needed only to build a unit - iron, aluminum or so on. But for example oil isn't needed to build any unit - only to supply some units. So there should be two types of strategic resources: production and supply resources. Production resources are used only during building a unit and supply resources are needed only to maintain them. Both building and supplying units don't consumes the resources. It only tells how much we can build and how much we can supply. The amount of iron tells us how many tanks can we build at one time [in how many cities] and the amount of oil how many we can support.

Some resources can be both supply and production - coal [prodution of ships and supply for ironclad], perhaps saltpeter [because it can run out] or other.

Example: our civilization has got one big iron and two small oil tiles. All are with roads and mines. So we have got 20 iron and 16 oil. So 20 cities can produce tanks at once but only 16 existing tanks can be moved in one turn.

This system of resources is not only realistic, but also simple, so I think it's quite good idea. I don't know if it would be possible to stockpile resources, but probably it's not a good idea.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

First of all, I think that all three types of resources: Bonus/Luxury/Strategic should have appearance and disappearance ratios. Second of all, I think it would be great to have a concept of resource 'size'. This could simply be a number from 1 (the smallest) to 10 (the largest). The size of a resource effects its base appearance and disappearance ratio!
In addition, the disappearance ratio of most resources will be effected by the number of cities within your empire! The larger your empire, the greater the chance of a single resource vanishing! Each additional source of a single resource will, obviously, reduce its chance of disappearing. Other factors which should effect the disappearance ratio of a resource are:

a) # of cities over size 12 (or 8?)

b) The number of improvements/wonders in your empire which specifically require that resource (eg, each coal plant in your empire will increase the chance of your coal resource drying up!)

c) The number of civs you're trading the resource to!

d) The number of units you build using that resource.

If units in the field lose a resource which they would require a constant supply of (such as tanks and oil) then they will begin to lose 1hp per turn until you get it back to a fort or city!
If Improvements that require a constant source of a resource lose that resource (such as an ironworks losing coal and/or iron) will cease to function until a new source of the resource is found.

Such a system would not be THAT big a change from the civ3 resource system, but would have a HUGE effect on the playing style you adopt. For instance, not only will ICS's have to deal with the problem of inherent corruption, but they might have to look out for constant loss of vital resources. In addition, though, it will force players into a constant search for more sources of a resource-even if they THINK they have plenty!!

Lastly, certain improvements and techs should be able to REDUCE the disappearance ratio of resources!
Anyway, those are MY THOUGHTS on the matter-hope you like them !

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hi guys,

Another idea I had for resources was the concept of 'Banned Resources' and 'The Black Market'. If you ask me, though, many of the ideas I'm suggesting for resources could be incorporated into Civ3 without too much difficulty!

My idea was that, with the advent of Code of Laws-or a similar tech-you should be able to go to the trade advisor screen and click on a resource, even if you don’t have it yet, to indicate you want it to be banned. This means that you gain NO benefits from the resource, and can no longer trade it through diplomatic channels!! It should be possible, however, to build a small “wonder” called ‘The Black Market’-as an example. This Wonder has the effect of increasing happiness and corruption, whilst lowering culture and War Weariness-Civ wide! It would also have a higher than normal maintainence cost than other, similar types of Small wonders. The other effect of this wonder, though, is that you can turn “Banned” resources into “Contraband” resources-a mid-point between banned and un-banned. Once you’ve indicated you want a resource to be “Contraband”, you can then click on it, in the trade screen, and a pop-up box will ask if you want to trade this contraband a) Internally b) Externally c) Both or d) neither. If you select a, then your empire gets the normal benefits of that resource, plus a bonus happy face for it-but at the cost of increased corruption in any cities which have the resource in their radius! If you choose b) Then you go to the diplomacy screen, and choose which Civ(s) you want to trade the resource to. You get a set gpt for the trade based on several factors: 1) Distance between Civs; 2) # of said resource owned between both civs and 3) The ‘rarity’ of the resource (luxuries are more ‘rare’ than strategic resources, and strategic resources are based on appearance and disappearance ratios!). If the resource is also banned in the other civ, then the gpt value is doubled AND the trade has negative impacts on the other Civs culture and corruption-Civ Wide. That civ does get the ‘benefits’ of the resource, however (like happiness effects!). It should also be possible to build improvements or wonders which off-set, and even cancel, the negative impacts of Contraband trade. Also, if you trade in banned resources, then your reputation takes a hit amongst other civs-especially those who might also have banned said resources! The purpose of the UN, in this system is that you can pass a ‘resolution’ DEMANDING that a resource be banned-you might do this if an enemy Civ is gaining too much benefit from a resource, has a monopoly on that resource or just to increase the value of the resource for your own benefit (You have the resource, but you want to increase it’s trade value by turning it into contraband!) If the UN assembly gives you the vote, then the resource is automatically banned for ALL CIVS-though it can still be turned into Contraband through normal means! Equally, you can demand, via the UN, to have a ban on a resource lifted! This would greatly increase the importance of the UN, especially for the building player-as said player would have a greater influence over the vote, and more control over when a vote is taken!
Anyway, that’s my 2c worth-any other thoughts?

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[lajzar]

That doesn't make sense. Why would anyone ban iron? Or wheat?

As for the 'luxury' resources, I think the whole model needs overhauling.

I any case, I think you have the beneficiary of contraband wrong. Except for the Opium wars, the War on Drugs, and US Prohibition, I can't think of any examples of contraband being a significant factor. Of these, only the Opium War resulted in the government (ie player) receiving any benefit. Your model would make it entirely too easy for a government to benefit from what is historically very exceptional circumstances.

[cumi]

Hi,

anybody thought on that, that maybe wood (forest) could be also a strategic resource. That would be needed for the units in the beginning of the game, for the basic units, like archer, spearman, etc. If you cut down the forest, you loose the resource..

[lajzar]

Personally, one idea I want to see is a terrain requirement option for special units. Ships (the bigger wooden ones anyway) should require a forest to be in the city radius. Sure, you could make timber a special resource as per civ3, but that doesn't model shipbuilding historically. Equally, camel riders should require desert in the city radius. I can't think of other examples offhand, but this flag would work well in a fantasy mod.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hi Guys,

Look, I realise that my idea is FAR from perfect, but I DEFINITELY feel that we need some way of representing contraband and 'The Black Market' in Civ games! Also, there MIGHT be situations, albeit unlikely, where you might ban the trade of iron. Mostly it might be as a means of convincing your trade partners to ALSO ban the trade, thus perhaps denying an enemy his ONLY access to that resource! I'll admit, though, that banned resources would MOSTLY only apply to luxuries!
Just as an additional note, though, other governments have profited from so-called 'banned resources.
For instance, both the Warlords of Afghanistan and the former Tailban regime were (and are, in some cases) major producers of heroin. Also, many African nations STILL profit from the illegal trade in ivory, rhino and gorilla body parts-just to name a few!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[mr Rura]

Cumi - wood as resource? it's pointless... wood exists almost everywhere...

[joncha]

Originally posted by mr Rura
Cumi - wood as resource? it's pointless... wood exists almost everywhere...

Not so pointless, as Lajzar pointed out in terms of shipbuilding. Access to lumber has historically been very important, especially access to the right lumber.

There was a hint of this with the "Cedars of Lebanon" in the first C3C scenario, but I think it could use some more elaboration. I think the city-radius idea could work well for shipbuiding, but I wouldn't want to see it apply to all resources.

jon.