Idea about strategic resources

[MattPilot]

I know a lot of people get mad when they don't have the resource they need, or they can't get it because of resource scarcity (like me .


Well, why not make every unit buildable, but if you don't have the resource it requires, it costs X amount more. I'd suggest a factor of 5, because anything less would destroy the value of strategic resources within the game.

Every resource is available somewhere in the world, though the amount is another question. So to reflect this in the game, each civ should be able to 'scrap' together some resources, but at a higher price. <- thus the longer build time.

So a battleship, for example, wouldn't cost 200 shields, but a thousand. So civs who don't have the resource aren't at a complete loss, and civs who do hold the resource are still at an advantage. Infact, they could build 5 BB's in the same amount of time (given same amount of shield production).


Thoughts?

[vmxa1]

A 70 shields Knight would be 350 shields or about the same as a a wonder. I doubt that would be of much use to anyone.

May work for Sword or some units of 30 or less, but really you would be better of with more archers or spears.

[Antrine]

I think this is a Great idea!!

The other way I have looked it, is to establish some kind of world black market (or neutral market) of a percentage of the collective corruption of all civs. This including all strategic resources so they can be purchased albeit more expensively.

Of course this may be all something for Civ 4 or the like.

[Antrine]

Additionally, I would cap it at x2 cost. As well, another game concept is extending 'limits' of certain units like battleships, same as Armies are now.

[Jaybe]

Strategic Resource availability reflects not only the physical resource, but also the technology and focus to use it. As a player I would always do the "right" or "most advantageous" thing given the technology, but a resource lack adds to the challenge and lessens my control of the situation, sort'a like George W. how feels now re Iraq and the economy.

[Xorbon]

Originally posted by Antrine
...
Of course this may be all something for Civ 4 or the like.

I'm pretty sure somebody with the time could mod this into the game. Just make doubles of all the units, but with higher costs and no resource requirements. It sounds like a tedious job to me though.

[patcon]

I like strategic resources the way they are right now, with maybe two small tweaks. It's a critical factor in why you go to war (to get a resource you don't have but want or deny a resource to an opponent) and how you prosecute a war (to cut off an opponent's supply through trade embargo or route interdiction).
(1) allow a civ to trade away a strategic resource even if it only has 1 or to trade for extra, if it can get a good enough bargain
(2) allow a civ with extra resources to develop a "strategic reserve" to provide that resource if it is lost later, say 1 turn without the resource for each turn with an extra (2 turns for 2 extra, etc.)

[okblacke]

Re: Idea about strategic resources

Originally posted by MattPilot
Thoughts?

I....don't think I like it. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I just don't think I like it. I think it would piss me off more than not having a resource.

I think the system could be "fixed" by improving the trade and diplomacy systems.

The problem with a fix like this one, or other fixes that involve making comparable troops, is that they end up decreasing the value of resources.

I dunno. This probably should be one of the more tweakable rules. The "Seven Kingdoms" had a great set-up where you could pick the number of resources (though they were strictly revenue/population generating).

[ok]

[Switch]

Why not just increase the appearance ratio in the editor, if your not satisfied with the number of resources already available? Personally I'm fine with how it is now, but to each his/her own.

[MattPilot]

thats not the point switch.

The point is to keep resources still rare and important, but allow civs without them to still manufacture those units, but at a higher price!

[Switch]

Originally posted by MattPilot
thats not the point switch.

The point is to keep resources still rare and important, but allow civs without them to still manufacture those units, but at a higher price!

Oh, sorry...Well, in that case, I have an idea (though it would either require tedious modding or Civ4). For every unit that requires a resource, have another unit that is similar, but twice as expensive and slightly under-powered. I think just having a 2x multiplier on price isn't enough to keep resources viability, but 3x would making the units pointless...if it's 2x but underpowered (though still more powerful than older units), this I think would create a fine balance. Or instead of underpowering it, it could just have 1 attack removed and it starts with only a conscript's HP.

[Antrine]

2x cost and conscript if you do not 'own' the resource. Think of the pre-WWII Japanese buying US 'scrap iron' and then later not able to adequately 'improve' production later in the war. I do not know in detail how much 'real' effect this had, however the outcome was a 'turkey shoot'. So at least that's what our pilots 'called it' after awhile.

Additionally, this could be implemented now in CSC whenever you acquire a resource through trade from another AI. 2x cost, conscripts by building units with any resource you don't control, however only have via trade.

[MattPilot]

thats a great idea guys! I'll add that to my custom game!

Thanks

[Antrine]

Please share!

How would you carry that out?

[MattPilot]

dunno if you want that. I've modified everything from citizens to Governments to Resources' bonus.
I will release it as a mod in the file section, but i'll have to continue my tests (been testing 3 weeks now )