Trade dominance ? let civ iii be a civ game.

[Cyclotron]

Youngsun, I don't see how or why energy or shields could be stockpiled. Industrial strength cannot be stored, as excess industry is probably used for re-tooling for the next project.

Energy also cannot be stored, at least not in amounts that could sustain a factory or city.

I don't really like having the "domesticated animals" factor in energy. I mean, this is largely dependent on population. If anything, once domestication is discovered, the amount of energy produced per population poin goes to 2 instead of 1, etc.

------------------
Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames...

[Roman]

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 03-27-2001 02:03 PM Youngsun, I don't see how or why energy or shields could be stockpiled. Industrial strength cannot be stored, as excess industry is probably used for re-tooling for the next project. Energy also cannot be stored, at least not in amounts that could sustain a factory or city.

These are legitimate concerns. Electricity currently cannot be stored at a large enough scale for industrial applications, but energy also comes in the form of coal, oil, etc. that certainly can be stockpiled. As you say, industrial strength also cannot be stored, but raw materials can.

[raingoon]

It's true, energy cannot be stored, and though raw material and and energy producing resources certainly may be stored, I'm not sure it should be. I would have to say best to always keep it simple as Rhuarc suggests. So I prefer the idea of leaving simple animal power, firewood, etc. abstracted under the general heading of "manpower" in the game.

Are there any huge game balance problems that would come from stockpiling either natural resources or raw material? You can certainly imagine the benefits from stockpiling oil or coal. You might literally trade them, you might steal somebody else's, etc. But I just don't know...

[raingoon]

IF this is true...

If anybody hasn't seen the thread, go check it out. This is claimed to be from the May issue of CGW. They quote a preview of Civ 3 as confirming that:

quote: ..."now game worlds sport raw materials that when sitting within a city's sphere of influence can be used for the good of the player's civilization...in firaxis' design the raw map resources tie directly into the gameplay [as opposed to CTP] rather than functioning strictly as a source of revenue raw goods can be used to build certain types of units or to make your citizens happier. you can also use them to amplify your power, and possibly even win the game...

Sounds real enough. I get the feeling it's not "energy" per se, but just different types of raw material. Sort of a mid-step from the way it was to the kind of thing we're discussing. If so, not bad! Keeping it at the city level, using raw material for certain units... I wonder "use them to amplify your power" means. Wow, I hope this is true...

[Cyclotron]

Good: "Amplify your power"
Bad: "Define your power" (mandatory system)

I have faith that Firaxis will do the right thing.

Anyway, and example of the energy model:

I want to build a Musketeer unit in my capital, Cyclocity.
Cyclocity has a population of 8, and a total shield income of 6.
A musketeer takes 20 energy and 40 shields to build.

Normally, I can build a musketeer in 7 turns. Although I will have enough energy by the 3rd turn, I do not have enough production so the extra energy will be lost.

I have, however, discovered domestication, which increases my energy to two per population point. Even so, Shields are the limiting factor, so there is no difference (although it would be if I had a lot of shields).

I have built two more improvements: A factory, and a water wheel.

The waterwheel gives me +3 energy per turn, as there are 3 river spaces in my city radius that I am working. The factory affects shields, increasing them by 50%. Now Cyclocity produces 19 energy (2*8 population, +3 river), and 9 shields. I can now produce a musketeer in 5 turns.

You ask, "but here energy really isn't very important, so why do I need it?"

Well, its not very important in the middle ages with musketeers. But when I want to build a battleship (250 shields, 300 energy) it is obvious that stuff like that water wheel will help me out.

Actual Factors for improvements listed bove:

ANCIENT:
- The discovery of domestication increases the energy output of one population point to 2, instead of 1.
MIDDLE AGES:
- The water wheel gives +1 energy for each worked river square in the city radius.
INDUSTRIAL:
- Coal plants, with coal, add +25% to the amount of population energy accrued each turn.
- Oil plants, with oil, add +50% to the amount of population energy accrued each turn.
MODERN:
- The offshore platform reveals offshore oil, and gives the city +1 energy for each worked ocean square.
- Natural Gas plants, with gas, add +35% to the amount of population energy accrued each turn.
- Wind farms add +1 energy for each tile of hills and arable land that is not improved with farming or irrigation (so mined hills still produce).
- Solar plants add +10 to energy.
- The Hydroelectric plant replaces the water wheel, adding +3 energy per worked river tile.
- Nuclear plants, with Uranium, add +75% to population energy, but there is a 3% chance of meltdown.
- The Containment dome improvement decreases the chance of nuclear meltdown to 1%.

------------------
Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames...

[raingoon]

Cyclotron, I gotta hand it to you. You seem to have a real clear vision for this stuff. I mean, this brings the energy model into the realm of a real mock-up, something I hope Firaxis can take a second look at if it's not too late...

[Cyclotron]

Thanks raingoon!

I think the most important thing is that us resource debaters get one good system we all agree on, and then try to present that to the powers-that-be. I mean, nobody will listen to us if we are perpetually arguing. Arguing must serve a purpose, and I really want to get a system that everyone agrees on here so we can put all our support into the idea.

[b]About the idea of stockpiles:[b]

Besides my bias because they are IMO too messy and difficult, there is the matter that stockpiling is just a, well, more complicated method of achieving the same goal.

We have established that energy cannot be stockpiled, and that an intangible thing like industrial might also cannot be stockpiled.

If you consider a factory that takes 5 coal a turn, for example, as long as you have at least 5 coal being mined, any excess will be useless to you. You could trade this externally, instead, right? Okay, so if you have an income of 10 you trade 5 of it per turn to a foreign city. He now also has 5 per turn for his coal factory.

However, in the above scenario, wouldn't my system work exactly the same way, except without messy numbers? If my city mines coal, I can trade it to other cities so they too have coal. Excesses are considered lost until I decide to trade, at which point my excess becomes a trade route to another Civ.

These two systems accomplish the same goal, but one is more simple and less of a headache. The "realism" you would get by the above system is negated by the fact you would need to have "recipes" for units... since once you quantate resources, everything needs a certain amount, and you are back to basic mandatory resources. Trade routes are easier, long term like real life trade, and they have no recipies or yearly incomes to think about and no calculations to make. In the long run, the leader of a kingdom doesn't sit around and count coal. Usually, private merchants handle trade, and trade in real life was (and is) conducted on a mass scale. In a course of thousands of years like in Civilization, a market shortage or excess is a drop in the pail. There is really no need to simulate such small happenings, and it would make Civ3 more work than play.

In conclusion, I say two things:

1) Stockpiling of resources is mutually exclusive with the very nature of the energy/supplementary resource system, and
2) Stockpiling is unrealistic over the long term and is too complicated and small for good and correct gameplay.

------------------
Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames...

[TheSocialist]

I think stockpiling of resources should be allowed. Say you're mining 7 coal per turn and you only use 5 coal each turn. If you can stockpile the extra 2 coal, then when you or other civs run out of coal you'll be sitting on a stockpile of it. This is, of course, assuming that resources eventually run out.
[This message has been edited by TheSocialist (edited March 27, 2001).]

[Cyclotron]

I don't think resources will run out. I can't think of a time so far that a major fossil fuel or uranium deposit has just suddenly ran out, although this could happen in the future. For the purposes of the game, however, resources should be permanent (unless the terrain is tampered with, i.e. transformation).

------------------
Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames...

[GaryGuanine]

I give up.

I'm just so psyched about the newly released information, I realized that they are just going to do the right thing. I'm sure when I see the final game I'm going to say, "Wow, that's better than my system, and more intuitive." That's how it always is with these guys.

Gary

[lord of the mark]

quote: Originally posted by GaryGuanine on 03-26-2001 12:26 AM Youngsun, I kinda see where you're going, but I just think it's wrong. No, I won't admit that. If I want to have a wealthy capitalist country, trade should be my main objective, a good thing. If I'm running a religious fundamentalist civ then, to me, trade is a bad thing. If my civilization is communist, then international trade is often seen as a bad thing. Forcing civilizations to engage in international trade is wrong. Again, this brings up the point that you're taking away choices, and making choices, as cyclotron always says, is what makes Civ games great. Gary [This message has been edited by GaryGuanine (edited March 26, 2001).]

Communist block - Cuba to USSR and Eastern Europe - Sugar. in return oil, manufactured products. USSR to Eastern Europe - Oil and raw materials. Eastern europe to USSR - Relatively advanced manufactures, consumer products.

No multinationals, no banks, no exchanges, but trade nonetheless.

Applies even more strongly to "fundie" regimes.

Lord of the Mark

[raingoon]

With respect to energy resources used in production, I guess now we can say we know at least this much about Civ 3:

1) Only shields will be in the production box, same as Civ 2;
2) however, some units will require a certain resource/"raw material" in order to build;
2) Resources are seeded on the map and all cities linked to a city that possesses a resource are supplied with that resource.

From this alone, it seems that "energy" is again being abstracted, although raw material is now a real factor in the game. I would hope much of what we're saying here is still viable and maybe even useful to anyone working on this part of the game.

[Youngsun]

quote: 1) Only shields will be in the production box, same as Civ 2; 2) however, some units will require a certain resource/"raw material" in order to build; 3) Resources are seeded on the map and all cities linked to a city that possesses a resource are supplied with that resource.

Nice summary raingoon!

Shileds are there but they are not the same as the one in civII. In civII, shields represented both works+resources but since a resource got splited from the shield and allows to build certain things, I see the shields as pure works or labours.

Trade will be commodity based, I believe and this is like my dreams come true!

The "culture" aspect was the other shocker,too!
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited March 28, 2001).]

[TheSocialist]

I still think stockpiling should still be allowed. What if you have control of all the major coal deposits in the world and your the most technologically advanced with the largest army and you want to put a coal embargo on everyone else so they become your vassels? Will the extra coal you mine just disappear?
[This message has been edited by TheSocialist (edited March 28, 2001).]

[GaryGuanine]

My favorite people are those who come into a discussion when it's nearly over, and take things out of context.

Gary