Making Trade Essential...One Energy + One Metal + One Manufacturing Point =...

[Youngsun]

OK Mark has brought up "AI issue" here and I want to tell you guys something..

Anyone played these before?

HOMM series(simple resource system with national level resource pool)
Imperialism(complex resource system with national level resource pool)
Colonisation(complex resource system with city level resource storage)

None of these games I listed above suffered from "AI incompetence" in terms of resource management and they are all better in general AI than that of civ and sometimes kick the human opponent's arse. Even the most civ-like game like Colonisation handled the system superbly while having the most difficult resource storage mechanism "city level resource storage"
Colonisation is one of Sid Meier's babies too and it showed the possibility to people resource system can work good in civ-style game. Furthermore What I had in mind for the system was that use of national level resource pool which is one step easier/simpler than colonisation's city level storage mechanism while using reduced number of resource items which have/had been crucial to Human history such as oil and coal. Colonisation was released almost 6 years ago and you guys seriously think AI developers of today can't handle something that was handled good 6 years ago?

quote: Firaxis were even to consider adopting the intermediate system, so you might want to focus your efforts there.

After so many years of waiting and hope, expectation may grow big but I'm not asking something that are impossible to implement or not interesting to enjoy.

young newbie forever

quote: your right im not a newbie,

haha I knew it I knew it I haven't seen your town idea. where is it?

Fiera

quote: Nah... fear not, I'll send you my opinion via email and you'll post it here with the right words...

Yes Sir! you're the boss

cyclotron7

quote: full-blown resource system is excessive and translates into work, not play.

What gives you that idea? Are you saying those tens of thousands of people who played HOMM,Colonisation and Imperialsim were working rather than enjoying the game to ultimate pleasure?

Roman

quote: Personally, I would like to see a full-blown resource system you describe

You should follow what your heart tells you.

quote: Firaxis must also appease those that like to keep the game simple.

There are 4 kind of people here.

1."Everything has to be simple" kind of people(a game like civ doesn't suit them at all)
2."Everything has to be complex" kind of people(their brains need some surgery to lower their IQ down)
3. "Some parts of game needs to be more complex while others kept simple" kind of people(These are true civIII builders)
4. "Keep that! Keep those! it worked good! never change it!" kind of people, who are afraid of changes and feel comfortable with old ways(Counter-revolutionaries who want to make civIII nothing more than modified/beautified version of the same old civII. This kind of people are very good at making things tidy and neat but lack creativity)

Firaxis should listen to those people of category number three.
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited February 19, 2001).]

[Lancer]

5. Very interested, taking it all in, but being quiet.

One thing I'd like to say, 60 posts is a fairly large amount. It shows that there's interest, and I hope Sid & Co pick up on it. I hope they kick around some of these ideas...

[young newbie forever]

youngson. my idea about towns is in my first thread with the a,b,c, empires (the one where i made something that could be explaind in 3 words into somthing real long and complicated)



i like smileys

[Cyclotron]

Youngson, I find your "kinds of people" list to be divisive, personally offensive, and misrepresentative of your opponents.

quote: There are 4 kind of people here. 1."Everything has to be simple" kind of people(a game like civ doesn't suit them at all)

I haven't seen anyone like this. Are you accusing me of being simple? Civ doesn't suit me, huh? So I guess I just have been playing for all these years, and I really shoudn't be, hmmm? This is a joke.

quote: 2."Everything has to be complex" kind of people(their brains need some surgery to lower their IQ down)

I don't see any of these, either. I think your system is too complex, but I wouldn't put you here.

quote: 3. "Some parts of game needs to be more complex while others kept simple" kind of people(These are true civIII builders)

I consider myself here, and I consider everyone else here.

quote: 4. "Keep that! Keep those! it worked good! never change it!" kind of people, who are afraid of changes and feel comfortable with old ways(Counter-revolutionaries who want to make civIII nothing more than modified/beautified version of the same old civII. This kind of people are very good at making things tidy and neat but lack creativity)

I don't see any of these, either!!!

I think that overall, you have put people into four groups, three of which are entirely fictitious and don't exist. Your post looks to me like a silly attempt to denounce those who do not agree with you, by portraying them as extremist. I find this post offensive... why don't you argue for your ideas, instead of putting down others?

quote: Firaxis should listen to those people of category number three.

Actually, Firaxis should listen to everybody, as everybody's input is important. One-sided input makes a one-sided game.

------------------
"Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames..."
- Marsil, called the Pretender

[Youngsun]

Lancer

quote: One thing I'd like to say, 60 posts is a fairly large amount. It shows that there's interest, and I hope Sid & Co pick up on it. I hope they kick around some of these ideas...

I certainly hope so.

young newbie forever
There have been many similar ideas around Apolyton and I do like the idea of having distant mine complex,work camp, town or whatever which collect special resources.
I do support the idea young newbie forever.

cyclotron7

If I offended you, I'm sorry. Having read that thing again now I feel that was little bit way off the track.
I shouldn't have said that.

quote: I find this post offensive... why don't you argue for your ideas, instead of putting down others?

No intention of putting others down never! and I did argue my idea that resource system doesn't raise serious AI problem by providing examples of other games which managed the resource system successfully. My arguement(resource system and AI issue)and the statement(kinds of people)were two separate things and both of them are not related in any manner. Also you didn't make successful rebuttal against my argument about AI issue and rather concentrated your vigour on attacking my silly statement.

[Cyclotron]

All is forgiven. I would like to apologize myself for repeatedly spelling your sn wrong, and I will now remember "Youngsun" and not "Youngson".

As for your arguments, I must actually say that I agree with your point on the AI, and so have no need to form a rebuttal. I have always thought that omitting features because the AI "can't cope" is more of an excuse than a reason. If Firaxis needs more time to have the AI catch up to the features, so be it. I meant that I agreed with Mark that you guys were going way overboard, not the AI issue.

And as for your resource argument, my last comment (work, not play) has gone unanswered... you gave me examples of three games where this was not true, but I have never so much as laid eyes on these games so this is a mute point to me. Besides, Civ3 will be a game of itself so we should discuss it in its own terms.

The reason I spoke against your "silly statement" is because I am not easily offended, but when I am I tend to get a little overheated... sorry if I was too "vigorous"

------------------
"Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames..."
- Marsil, called the Pretender

[young newbie forever]

Youngson, thanks for supporting my idea.

now back to the topic that does NOT involve cycltron and youngson argueing. ( im not dissing just want to get back to what this topic was started for )

my final arguement (in my eyes)

bad= units requiring different resources or they cant be made. economic sanctions from your biggest oil producer crippling you. thirty years to hoard the resources to build one battle ship whip is sunk by a real cheap bomber while still in port. not being able to go to war becouse of economic worries. EX. well if i attack this guy who no one cares about hell sanction me wich wont hurt me to much but he gives me occaisional lumber which is rare on my continent and becouse it is needed to make the tiremes i need to get troops to himn, lets leave him alone and starve to death in my dessert.However if firaxis does go this way please make sanctions hurt the a1 as much as me and make the a1 smart so they dont sanction me at random.

GOOD= anything i said and making resources help you alot but not kill you if taken away.

final arguement= its not realistic for certain units to cost exact things becouse in history civs have used different resources to make the same things ( i bet the pyramids would have been a little different if built in europe. actualy i think they were built by aliens but thats just me )

p.s. calm down cycletron

p.p.s. if firaxis is watching UPDATE THE SITE!!!! *breaks down in tears*

edit. cycletron you posted 28 second before me!!
[This message has been edited by young newbie forever (edited February 20, 2001).]

[Mister Pleasant]

You'll just confuse the poor AI. Anyone here play Space Empires IV. Really good game - but . . .
You capture an AI planet and find that the planet is brimming with organic resources but has no minerals. What has the AI built? Inprovements dedicated to mining minerals. I have the bad feeling that the AI will be stumped by complex combinations. Sorry, but even a pentium 4 ain't HAL!

[GaryGuanine]

I think we have to worry about over-complicating the game. We're talking about making things quicker if resources such as coal or iron are nearby.

Civ2 already does that by increasing the number of shields given to the city. Until the cities get very large, that one square can really make a difference, as it should, but it already does. As for commercial things, gold adds a lot of trade to a city. Trade is then directly translated into lightbulbs and coins, as it should be.

Trade has really little to do with the physical act of manufacturing something, unless you're talking about technological innovation, which trade in Civ2 already helps. I agree that trading with other civs isn't important enough, but we shouldn't make it the point of the game. That would be taking a remarkably capitalist track in the history of the world.

As for wars being fought for particular resources, it's really a modern concept. Up until the modern era, wars were fought because the other guys were different. Again, we have to look at the history of the world without our capitalist goggles on.

Gary

[yin26]

I made a similar argument against an ever-complex negotiations model. Just as the computer can't handle even barely complex negotiations with a human player (though it might parrot a good response every so often), I'm afraid a resource model that requires the computer to do more than it does now is just asking for trouble.

Consider, as has been just noted, that comps usually just sit on resources. In the case of SMAC, even, the comp could NEVER match a skilled player who mastered the resource model (as in one or two maxed out cities could match resource production with the computer's ENTIRE production!).

So as with the negotiations model, this increased complexity could work well in games against another human being, but most of us will be playing against the computer (hotseat and PBEM being the rare but horribly drawn-out exception).

However, simple supply and demand issues could be made to work with profound implications in such a way that the computer can manage a great economic fight. Consider Railroad Tycoon. The computer ran the stock market quite well since it was a relatively simple mathmetical process. Of course, human players eventually figured out fool-proof methods to beat the computer anyway, but at least the casual player hardly stood a chance.

I'd shoot for something in that range with Civ3...and hope that Sid has some tricks up his sleeve to keep the jaded players on their toes.
[This message has been edited by yin26 (edited February 20, 2001).]

[Henrik]

In imperialsim the computer handles all rescourses very good, all 20 of them.
Why wouldnt Firaxis be able to do as good as SSI?

[yin26]

Please See: SMAC

However, with Sid firmly in the mix, we may see a whole new ballgame...

[Cyclotron]

Young Newbie Forever:

I couldn't agree more. Non-essential (but helpful) resources are the way to go. 'Nuff said.

[Mark_Everson]

quote: Originally posted by Henrik on 02-20-2001 03:39 AM In imperialsim the computer handles all rescourses very good, all 20 of them. Why wouldnt Firaxis be able to do as good as SSI?

Because it never has been able to, and I don't have any faith in that changing...

[me_irate]

here is my personal opinion how the resource system should work. First i believe all goods(for trade and your own use) should go into one large empire storehouse. From this you should be able to use it in any city or trade it. Trade i believe should be done like it was in imperialism, which in my experiance has the best, trade-resource system ive played. In this you could buy and sell resources that you have extra and buy what you need. Also i don't believe that resources should be very plentiful; and scattered in pockets around the world. Like oil in the middle east and spices in the orient really are. That way to get such items you would have to conquer or trade for them. Necessary items would be infrequently located in other regions, for instance stone could be mined in every mountain, and iron in 1/5 of the mountains.

Also not being able to get certain materials would be realistic. The reason the egyptians were conquered was that they only had bronze weapons and the Assirians had iron weapons which egyptians had no access to. Resources such as stone, wood, and such would be easy to come by and thus not a problem to find the required resources to build walls, and certain buildings.

Heres an example how i think it should work

You have a size 10 city. you have 5 workers farming which provides enough food to grow, you have 1 working mining getting 1 stone and 1 bronze a turn. and another choping wood, and three workers for building(3 shields per turn). to build a city wall it will take 20 shields and 5 stone which equals 7 turns. thus when the wall gets finished you have an extra 2 stone which would be stored for some other town or for trade.