About resources and building units with them.

[ContradictioN]

I think its a good idea, It also reminds me that the style of buildings has been effected by the resources available, especialy Egypt.

So instead of choosing what style you want, the land you get, will decide on what your cities will look like.

But thats also complicated, hopefully stuff like this can be edited in

[SerapisIV]

I think that a large all-encompassing resource scheme would be great, but lets not forget what Firaxis has already announced, 16 special resources, 8 being production limiting/enabling resources. I was focusing my thoughts mainly towards more modern buildings with steel as there has been little mention of a lumber resource.

[TechWins]

Ok lets say you need steel resources to research Automobile. You don't have any steel resources that would mean for the whole game you would never be able to have automobile, mass production, recycling, and environmentalism. Lets say you need horse resources to research horseback riding but again you don't have any horse resources. You won't even be able to research over half of the techs. (These assumptions are based on the tech tree of Civ2.)

That is why I feel that it could really screw up a lot of the game with the requirement of a specific resource for a tech. I also don't feel that a specific resource should be required for building a certain city improvement.

[ContradictioN]

But! This is how it is in the real world, and I believe if it could be done properly, it could make the games very very interesting.

resources could also be sold at a price, so if you had most of the worlds oil, you could sell it at a low or high price, but if you sold it at a high price, some countries might not be able to afford it, and so you won't make much profit from it if its too high.

This could easily spark wars.

It's fun in both sides, If you were a country without oil, and you need oil to keep your modern city happy, you would need to buy it from a country, but if they are either not wanting to sell it to you or selling it at a high price, then you could be forced to go to war with that country, or vice versa. makes the game much more interesting and there is actual sense in going to war rather than just going to war for the sake of it

[SerapisIV]

I don't like the idea of resources being required for technology, I was only looking at resources being required for tangible production, such as buildings and units.

[TechWins]

Contradiction, the game is about controlling a whole civilization not just managing resources therefore it's not a resource management simulator. I guess you're one of the players that enjoys realism before fun. I know for a fact that Civ will always be fun before realism and I'm very thankful for that. So with that being said, something as complicated, boring, yet realistic shouldn't and won't be in Civ ever.

[ContradictioN]

no no I am a guy who wants realism to be fun, I just like to try and work out how it can be done, but most people seem to think that realism doesn't = fun. And to me they have very closed minds.

I'm glad Sid has a very open mind

[TechWins]

no no I am a guy who wants realism to be fun, I just like to try and work out how it can be done, but most people seem to think that realism doesn't = fun. And to me they have very closed minds.

You've misunderstood what I said. What I said is that I like fun before realism. Not that I don't like realism. It's just that I think fun should be the top priority. If realism adds fun then I'm all for it but if realism takes away from fun then I don't want it.

I'm glad Sid has a very open mind

Yes, Sid is very opened minded (as you can tell by his new project, Sim Golf). I do think that Sid is another fun before realism guy, as well.