The Forests are GONE!?!? Depleting Resources

[curtsibling]

Good brainstorming here, guys!

[Exile]

To answer Harry;

My next project, well under way now, is the AGE of BRONZE. Starts 1800 BC and runs to 300 BC, with 5 year turn increments. Only about 300 or so turns, so not so bad. Tech paradigm much closer to the default rate so tech will advance somewhat quickly. The civs are; Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Hurrians, Hittites, Greeks, and Persians.

The game will be "tilted" to favor the Greeks, however, through their government and a few events. The others will present both challenges and military adventure.

The Barbarians will be active. My experience with them in AoC has given me some insight into how they function, and thus, how to use them effectively and, more important, somewhat predictably as well. The Hyksos WILL invade Egypt. The Sea Peoples WILL attack the coasts of the eatern Mediterranean. The Arameans WILL cause turmoil in the fertile crescent.

I've also managed to find a good historical account of the Hittite empire and will therefore create a much fuller simulation of it than any scenario I've spotted before now. In fact, I almost created a scen based exclusively on the Hittite empire's rise and fall, but it seemed naturally to fit within the context of the broader, bronze age scenario.

Of course, Fairline graphics will be utilized throughout, though I may have to call on Gareth to provide a few tidbits here and there.

Paul Cullivan, if you're still out there, anything you could tell me about possible pitfalls and problems would surely be appreciated. I've been playing Ancient Empires and Seeds of Greatness now for the last few months off and on, and now know those scens pretty well.

[beingofone]

Sounds really COOL Exile.

I like the Civs you picked all good choices.

It should be interesting to see how you develop the Persian Empire to me especially.
The Hyksos invasion will be barbarian, kind of curios to see how you pull that off and what you have in mind.

What is the name of the book you are using to reference the Hittites?

Good luck Exile - this one should be really interesting

[Exile]

Encyclopedia Britannica Macropedia

Great article on the Hittites.

Hits all the high points quick.

[ravagon]

Two things I can think of about proposed ideas

1) Maybe I'm missing something but I just don't see why players would wait to sell off 'improvement' type resources?
Unless you gain something from their presence there's absolutely no incentive to keep them. Cash you can always find a use for. Getting new improvements/units sooner, etc ... Even if your cities are under attack (hence you may lose more gold if you have more in your treasury) you're still better off than you would be if an enemy captured a city and you lost half of your 'resources' anyway ...

2) If you do have hostile resource 'units' you'll have to keep them a little away from your cities as you won't be able to use the tiles otherwise.
I presume 'settler' type units do actually attack if they have an attack rating? I've seen engineers do it but I'm not sure about settlers.
Perhaps more to the point if resource-gathering is a major part of the game - will the AI actually send settler-types out on seek-and-destroy missions (as players almost certainly will) or just go after those resources in very close proximity?

'Resource' defence values will need to be pretty low too unless you want a campaign fought entirely by hi-attack value marauding woodcutters scything their way through legions of foes.

[Boco]

Has anyone ever put a number in the improvement upkeep field that was too large? I wonder if it could be set so that it actually gives money to the player. If so, that could give another incentive to keeping the improvement around. Otherwise most players will follow Ravagnon's advice, unless...

And gold stored in the form of resources" doesn't appear when enemy armies demand tribute.

Tweaking the scen so that enemy tribute demands are both very likely and very bad news is the key to the resource improvement idea.

I'm pretty sure that enemy air resource units won't prevent you from using those tiles for cities.

[valmont]

The consequences of destroying non-renewable resources are more than economic, it's just that they can be ignored because they are not felt instantaneously. Deforestation causes soil erosion and flash flooding. Mining contaminates water supplies.

The trade-off should be more than just whether the proceeds from the destruction are worth more to the player now or later. The player should have to balance present gain against future problems that may be costly to address.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Boco

I'm pretty sure that enemy air resource units won't prevent you from using those tiles for cities.

Mmmm? I'm pretty sure I've seen my resources reallocated in my city screen whenever enemy bombers are around ...
I've certainly never gone in and checked carefully though so it may have just been a display issue.


Following on from Valmonts comments on flash-flooding - how about a 'walled-off' section of the map with a single city (with a very large pop growth rate). Whenever some condition is met, say after every 5 deforestation events (this is for ToT right? ), and the city is hit by a range 1 nuke unit that appears right next to it?
You'll get the 10 heat points (iirc?) for the detonation. Enough of these and you'll eventually trigger a global warming event which could of course be re-worded into something more appropriate.

[Exile]

Some replies;

1. No, not for ToT.

2. Agree about long-term consequences for destruction of resources. How do you represent that?

3. I can't do anything about a Civ2 player's urge to sell off everything right away . . . . but I do have a few ideas.

This next scenario will be only 300 turns, 5 years/turn, and the tech paradigm will be 1:1(so far, and subject to change). Things will move very quickly compared to other scenarios I've put together. There will not be a lot of high defense units. This scenario will start with most of the map occupied by barb cities. Your job, whether as Egypt, Greeks, Babylon, Assyria, or the Hittites, will be to conquer, conquer, conquer. Once that's done, and the barb cities aren't so numerous, the question then becomes one of coalitions, diplomacy, and judicious back-stabbing. I'm hoping that, in an evironment like this, where better units are just over the horizon, and conquering armies wander about looking for prey, the decision on whether or not to deplete resources NOW or wait for better units/improvements to come along is pertinent.

[Cyrion]

Very interesting concept, Exile!

I am sure you'll find the right way to make it a dreadful choice! (to sell or not to sell, that is the question...)

And the era you've chosen make my finger itch to play it!

Sounds like another "chef d'oeuvre" in the making!

[Boco]

Originally posted by Boco
I'm pretty sure that enemy air resource units won't prevent you from using those tiles for cities.

Originally posted by ravagon
Mmmm? I'm pretty sure I've seen my resources reallocated in my city screen whenever enemy bombers are around ...
I've certainly never gone in and checked carefully though so it may have just been a display issue.

I just realized that the enemy air units that didn't block friendly use of the city square they occupied had a 0 af. When the af > 0, the squares were not available for use by citizens.

[Exile]

Not surprising, Boco.

Oh, for the days of civ1 when I could take an air force and "pillage" land improvements. Centuries of work could disappear in 2 or 3 turns. Enemy industrial complexes shorn of their resources and reduced to penury. *wist*

[:) Smiley]

I'm hoping that, in an evironment like this, where better units are just over the horizon, and conquering armies wander about looking for prey, the decision on whether or not to deplete resources NOW or wait for better units/improvements to come along is pertinent.

In Civ, it's almost always good to exploit a resource as soon as you can due to exponential growth. Implementing side effects or having the resource get better with age might be an alternative.