{The List} Resources

[Nikolai]

Introduction

Resources is an important part of Civ. It was a big addition to Civ3, how can it become better in Civ4?

Summary

Resources were not the most debated subject when making this list, but all participants seem to agree that it should stay. The general meaning seems to be that it should be expanded. The radical ideas was the most debated subject.

Related threads

Resources: How to handle http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=104022

Table of Contents

1 - General
2 - Food
3 - Syntetics
4 - Radical ideas
5 - Trade and stockpiling

The ideas

1 - General
1.1 - List of resources
-Coffee
-Tobacco
-Sugar
-Venger

Copper (needed for some ancient and modern units
Stone (Strategic - for wonders/improvements : eg. Pyramids, Hanging Gardens)
Mongoloid Cow

Luxury:
Resin
Slaves
Marble
-Wernazuma III

cotton
-DaleC76

RAW RESOURCES:
Horses (for mounted units)
Iron (for many things)
Coal (for RR's & PP's)
KNO3 (Saltpeter) I prefer Sulfur instead (same use though)
Rubber (many uses) - replaced later with component Synthetic Rubber
Oil - replaced MUCH later with Synthetic Fuels
Uranium - replaced MUCH later with a product of Fusion Power (MAYBE)
Aluminum
Timber (for building WOODEN larger ships) - available in any forest - if timber is added, then timber/stone would be needed for many buildings?
Stone (for building structures) - available from any mountain/hill

FINISHED GOODS:
Spears (no resource) - spearmen
Pikes (Iron) - pikemen
Muskets (Iron+KNO3) - musketmen
Rifles (Iron+KNO3 or none) - riflemen
Light Machine Guns(no resouce) -guerilla
Machine Guns (Iron+rubber) - infantry
Mech Inf (Rubber+Iron+Oil) -mech inf unit
Swords (Iron) - swordsmen + med inf
(sidenote: horsemen would be horse+spear, knights would be swords+horses, cavalry muskets/rifles+horses...)
Tanks (Iron+Rubber+Oil)
Fighter (Oil+Iron/Aluminum?)
Galley (none)
Frigate (Timber+Iron+KNO3)
etc...
(Posted by piratebrun)

1.2 - Some units requiring resources to build

Cameleers require desert terrain in the city to build. If you arent fighting in a desert, they have no particular advantage anyway.

Elephants require the ivory spcial resource in your empire, and a jungle tile in the city (for a local habitat). Again, elephants, while good, arent essential.

'Large wooden ships' require a forest tile in the city radius. If you dont have forest, with the right tech, your terraformers can transform plaisn to forest, and even so, the earliest, lightest ships dont require forest (a cludge so you can always leave even the smallest island), and modern ships arent wooden.
(Posted by lajzar)

1.3 - Make fish appear on right place

It would be nice if the Earth map had its fish ressources in the right place. I'm saying this because I remember it was quite something to make it on the "Marla's Earth map" for Civ3
(Posted by Trifna)

2 - Food
2.1 - Sharing

-there should be some way to share food resources, there should be no reason to have two cities near each other, linked via road with one overflowing with food and the other starving.
-Bleyn

2.2 - Food only tiles

- "Rice" tiles : can't produce anything else than food, but lots of it, say five or six, and more with irrigation / railroad / farmland.
-Spiffor

3 - Synthetics
3.1 - Resources produced in factories
3.1.1 - Strategic resources

-Rubber should be able to be synthetically produced in certain factories after a certain date, say after the civilization discovers Synthetic Fossil Fuels... After that time rubber can be found on the map, grown, or produced in Rubber factories
-DarkCloud

3.1.2 - Luxuries

There should be a way to build manufactured luxuries (cars, hi-fi, but also some manufactured medieval ones). A specific improvement, say "car factory" should be available if you have the needed resources (coal, iron and oil), and would turn one shield into a luxury. It would also cease to function when you stop having these resources. You couldn't build more "luxury producing improvements" than the number of civs, and only one per city
-Spiffor

3.1.3 - Other resources
Dye and Saltpepper could also be synthetically produced with a factory or a chemical factory
-Wernazuma III/DarkCloud

3.1.4 - Raw materials into resources

Maybe you can turn raw materials into new resources, that can be traded.

eg: You start near Barley. If you build a brewer, it can be turned into Beer, a luxury resource with +1 food. You could use it to supply your empire, or you could trade it off to another civ.
-Mongoloid Cow

3.2 - Un-historical resopurce restrictions

1) unlogic and historical failures: 3 cases of recource restrictions
a) slapeter as strategic recource you need for gun powder. Stupidity. Salpeter isn't a strategic recource in fact (wake up in shool, ask your chemistry teacher) but always available where enemies or humens are. But inthe game it may happen that you don't have Salpeter recource and then you can build the versions of that gun powder weapons.
b) oil as condition for tank and motor ships / early air units also ask yout teacher. If you have coal (and do know the chemistery or refining coal) you can make the same.That was made until end of 2nd world war from Hitler as Germany didn't have oil but lot of coal. It's a bad joke in the game that oil is rare and your research already is until rockets and atom power but you are still using horses for your troops.
-Dreifels

I don't know for saltpeter, but oil made from coal(at least under WW2) is less efficent and not as good as the original. Maybe that should be reflected?
-Nikolai

4 - Radical ideas
4.1 - Each resource having its own uses and traits

In regard for resources, instead of having them divided into Strategic / Luxury / Food / Other, maybe each resources has its own uses and traits.

For example:
Take the idea of a new resource Silver. Out of all of the above categories, it would best fit into the luxury or other category, even though it was used differently. So instead, give it its own traits :
- Gives x amount of money into the treasury each turn
- Tradeable (can be traded)
- City Trade Bonus of y trade production
- Happiness benifit of 1

The idea could be applied to all resources, and although it might get a bit complicated, the importance of each, individual resource is enhanced.
-Mongoloid Cow

4.2 - Civ3 way vs. resource quantity

In a poll from late 2003, the vote was between keeping the old Civ3 way or giving resources quantities. The result of the poll was ~64% in favour of resource quantities. Here's the ideas:

4.2.1 - Resources giving a quantity
4.2.1.1 - Resources giving a quantity, the rest can be stored or traded

The current system of ON/OFF resources can be modified to have additional instances of those resources provide bonuses to the civ, so as not to make them useless.

If changed, then one iron supply would provide enough iron to build perhaps 5 swordsmen per turn. If you only work on 3 in a given turn, then you put two iron into storage, which can be stockpiled for later use, or traded away.

This solves the problem of one instance of a resource being enough for any empire, big or small. Also, it opens up the game to a lot more trading possibilites. You could continue to buy oil even if you have it, because more is always better. Any resource you don't use on a given turn is added to a stockpile (so if you lose connection, you can operate on reserves for a while).
(Posted by Fosse)

4.2.1.2 - Resource quantity supporting an X number of units/factories

Each instance of a resource should be given a number , so you might see a lump of iron with 100 over it. Now, that now means your empire has access to 100 units of iron. That 100 units of iron would support a certain number of units or factories or so forth. Now, once you mine it, or build a road, that is all you need to do, now you have 100 units. Now, lets say you need a much bigger army, or more factories, whatever-well, you can no koinger uswe those 100 point, but need to trade for more or capture more iron. That simple. In essence, each tile of a resource would take you only so far-of course, if you strike it rich with one reosurce, you can trade it for handsome profits. But this also negates the possibility of one civ having a monopoly, since now you can spread out resources more widely.
(Posted by GePap)

4.2.1.3 - Alternate idea on quantity

In Civ3, if a civilization has access to a single strategic resource, then that civ has access to that resource as if it was infinite. These resources should have finite values attached to them in Civ4. Each source on the map would produce a certain number of 'units' of the appropriate resource per turn. For instance, there could be 3 sizes of iron deposits which produce either 20, 30, or 50 units of iron per turn (the numbers are just examples). As the game progresses (tech-wise), certain resources could become more abundant. For example, iron sources could produce more once engineering is discovered.

Any collected resources could be traded to other civs, used for upkeep of units/improvements, or in the building of new units/improvements.

1/ Trade with other civs would involve the trading of a specific number of units/turn of a particular resource (eg. trade could involve 10 units of oil per turn). If a civ is unable to provide the agreed upon amount of a resource, that civ must provide compensation to the other civ, or the deal is cancelled and the one who broke the deal suffers a reputation hit.

2/ Upkeep: some improvements and units would have upkeep that uses a certain number of units of one or more resources each turn. For example, a coal plant could use one unit of coal per turn, and a battleship could use two units of oil per turn. If resource upkeep can't be paid for an improvement, that improvement has its effects reduced or it stops functioning altogether. If a unit doesn't have its resource upkeep paid, one or more of its stats would be reduced (i.e. attack str, defense str, moves, etc.) depending on what resource it is lacking (eg. lacking iron/saltpeter could mean reduced att/def; lacking oil/coal/uranium could mean reduced movement, etc.). If a unit goes for several turns without having its resource upkeep paid, it would lose an experience level ( to a minimum of conscript level).

3/ Building certain units or improvements could require access to a strategic resource. As a simple way of doing this, as long as a player has a surplus of a resource (after factoring in trade to other civs and upkeep), then that player may use that resource to create the appropriate units or improvements. Units and improvements that require access to a resource to build wouldn't necessarily require that same resource for upkeep (and vice versa).

4/ Leftovers: There are a few options as to what the game could do with any surplus units of a resource: the player could be allowed to stockpile surplus resources; any surplus could be converted into gold and/or shields; or the surplus could simply be lost to waste. Or there could be some combination of the above. If the player is allowed to stockpile, there should be limits to how big the stockpile is allowed to get.
(Posted by Xorbon)

4.2.2 - Several luxury sources giving a bigger effect

for luxuries it might be a good idea to increase the effect when you got multiple sources, that way it might add some extra things to think about when you're about to trade with another empire. It might even be an incentive to stop export before the trade agreement is over deteriorating relations with that other civ.
(Posted by Senator)

4.2.3 - On strategic resources

on strategic resources i don't think a system with one oil deposit being able to provide oil for like 10 cities is good. (cuz you got small villages and huge mass-production cities) It's not even the size of a city that mathers it should be related to the amounts of shields produced per turn that sets the amount of oil needed then.
keeping that in mind i think a system where a 'unit' of oil(for example) means you can produce 5 oil using units each turn as maximum is better. then again a tank uses less than an airplane, you'd need to set a number of oil that is needed for every unit.
(Posted by Senator)

4.2.4 - Replace current resource shield system

The main problem, for me, is that the current resource system makes the resource shield concept meaningless.

In earlier civs, the resource shields that one could get from hills and deserts and so on were justified by the fact that stuff like coal, iron and oil was being extracted from them. But with the resource system we have now, all linked up cities can get all the coal, oil and iron they need. But production is still decided by the number of hills and mines. This makes no sense. I mean, what are all those mines on the grassland extracting? It's not coal, iron, aluminium, oil, etc.

The resource shields should be replaced by a raw material x productive power figure. Raw materials would be extracted from squares instead of shields, and productive power would be calculated by the population of the city, and any industrial improvements.

You'd also need some sort of market to allow raw materials to flow to where they're needed.
(Posted by Sandman)

4.2.5 - Population as main source of shields

How about having population as the main source of shields, with strategic resources and terrain giving factory-like percentage bonuses, rather than discrete numbers of shields?
(Posted by Sandman)

4.2.6 - Tech affecting resource output

Another big change-with tech changes, the visibility of sources would change- mines of iron you could have never gotten before now are avaliable, or exiting mines now yeiled far more- creating an even bigger bond of tech with resources. Finally, as tech changed, the necessity would change- primarilly, you might waste less, so that same gets you further. All this could be done without any significant change to the shield system of city production.

But what you could introduce is manufactured goods-for example, forms of luxuries that are made (like TV's, or cars, whatever)-so that if your factories are idling and not building units or buildings, they can build luxuries you can not only use for internal happiness, but to trade.
(Posted by GePap)

4.2.7 - Fresh water as resource, affecting food supply and city growth

On resources, one idea I am playing with in my head is making fresh water such a resource- in order to support people or make irrigation tiles, you need fresh water (which is already true in civ3)-the difference being that each tile would have a sort of fresh water production- and remove the arbitrary limit of 6 and 12 for cities- cities should be able to grow as big as food supply (which for good sakes, MUST be something than can be moved around, how far to be determined by tech levels) and water supply allow. Th danger of huge cities shoul be the omnipresent danger of great pandemics (and addition to any civ game that I see as a must, but not a resource issue). The point of aqueducts woul be to tap new water resources for cties (thus allowing growth, but not a must for all cities not next to rivers), while sewers would limit disease.
(Posted by GePap)

4.2.8 - Some questions that must be decided upon

1. Do we want named resources to still expire? Is this dependent on the rate one produces units or improvements that require them?

2. Are surplus resources stored? If so, how? Invisibly with no limit? Transparently with no control? As a city improvement? As a tile improvement? (IMO it would be good if reserves could be targeted).

3. Are luxury named resources quantified?

4. Obviously a mine built in 1000 B.C. will not produce a named resource at the rate one built in the modern day would. To what extent is the resource rate dependent on a tile improvement and its era?

5. Can an AI manage successfully a complicated system, both for itself and the player who doesn't want to get involved except when necessary?
(Posted by Merp)

4.2.9 - Extend the Civ3 system

Shield production of city squares is independant of those resources being present or not. To take clay from a hill and produce pottery doesn't require oil or aluminium presence on that square.

But on the other hand, if mere access is enough for luxury goods (other than gems!), some kind of a mine is necessary to access the resources (except horses of course!).

Having just one resource spot supplying a civilization that controls nearly 50% of world population is quite weird. Which is why I voted for the limited quantities of the resource for each spot. Some spots may have just a little bit of aluminim, and other enormous amounts that will supply you all game long. But that should also depend on how fast you use it up. Which implies that each unit must have a resource quantity specification as well.
(I would not vote for complicating with having only a given amount available per turn depending on our extraction investment, but rather to simply deduct the quantity used up from the reserve, until it is exhausted).

If you have several spots of the same resource, of course you should be able to indicate which one you'd like to use first. Obviously better to start using up border resources while you have them... just in case.

Obviously, there should be more resources.
- Natural gas for instance, for energy production (see the thread on "energy" with my idea on this, which implies using up coal, oil, gas or uranium resource depending on the power plant you build).
- Copper for electrical appliances.
And... all depends on how much complexity you want to introduce.

Given that resource are seldom surfacing, there would be need to have specialized mining workers (there was that kind of unit in Settlers n°something) looking for them. It's OK to have some appearing right away when we discover the appropriate technology, but we should be able to discover new ones through geological exploration, rather than just wait for the God AI to have some appear or go take it by force from our neighbor.

And obviously, those geological explorers should be able to search on water and therefore become amphibious at some point of technological advance.

Trading those resources would then of course negociate a quota, either a bulk buy for a given lumpsum, or that many for so much every turn.
[i](Posted by grap1705)[/b]

[Nikolai]

4.2.10 - Using the Colonization model

Personally I would suggest using the Colonization model. Here are the advantages to remind those who have forgotten and/or are not familiar with them:

(1) Resources are quatified and can/need to be distributed explicity using physical trade networks.

(2) Resources needed to be converted into finished goods.

(3) Resources & finished goods need to be combined in fixed numbers to build stuff. (Ex, need 100 tools to build cannon, etc)

(4) The concept of labor disbribution/specialization.
You assigned a certain number of carpenters, blacksmiths, etc and they would build finished goods at a rate proportional to the number of people assigned to work on it. MUCH BETTER THAN THIS "SHIELD" CRAP in CIV!!!

Personally, I hope (but is probably not going to happen) is that Civ 4 use the underlying Colonization model rather than the underlying Civ 1 model. It was in many many many ways way SUPERIOR.
(Posted by polypheus)

I really did like the Colonization resource model. This might get too complex for a game with as many eras and resources as civ though. I do like the idea of getting specific resources from the land/resource deposits, and finished goods too for trade. Also horses should be able to be "found" as resources then moved into the city so they can be "grown" (using food) once acquired, then traded with civs who have no access to these.

A warehouse building (ala Colon) could be built in cities to make storage space (no warehouse, 100 of each max, warehouse1, +100, warehouse2 +200, etc...) Supply would be per city, perhaps you could click on the city, get a popup menu, click "send goods" then click the good, how much, and to what city (be getting tgt cursor and clickon city), and it will be dispatched automatically (via auto-caravans or built&stocked caravans). Once cities are linked via RR's then strategic resources will be in a "regional pool" of RR connected cities. Perhaps food could be shared reginally via RR's too. Harbors/airports... they would fit in as well somehow. Perhaps commercial docks would allow oversea areas to be linked to the same "region".
(Posted by piratebrun)

To actually MAKE a unit, a population unit would be dragged and dropped on the "city units area" (again ala Colon) then a list of what units were available via the existing finished goods would be given.

obsolete finished goods could be sold to lesser equipped civs for whatever the lesser civ will offer in trade, or "recycled" for their base components at a rate of something like 1/2 - eg 50 muskets could be scrapped for 25 iron/25 KNO3.

for finished goods, to make/equip a pop unit with them would not only require the resource, but the tech perhaps? or at least a tech to "understand" guns well enough to use them? or mebbe not, indigenous peoples have had no problems soon adapting to modern warfare technology if they have access to it.
(Posted by piratebrun)

4.2.11 - A model in the middle of Civ3 and quantity

How about a model that's somewhere in the middle between the binary 'Have/Have Not' Civ3 system, and a really complicated resource quantity system?

Specifically, instead of just two resource states (1 and 0), have a broader spectrum of resource states, say from 0 to 5.

These would be: Absent, Scarce, Adequate, Plentiful, Abundant and Super-Abundant.

Now, availability of a resource would depend on a variety of things. Firstly, the number of worked resource sites would strongly influence the availability. Having two iron ore sites would raise your supply from adequate to plentiful, for example. Secondly, the size of your civ would affect the availability of the resource. A single city civ with high technology and an oil site would have abundant or super-abundant oil supplies. But a huge continent-striding civ with the same amount of oil would only have adequate or even scarce oil supplies. Certain improvements (mass transit, for example) would reduce the effect of a large population base.

Thirdly, higher levels of technology would increase the resource yield from mined sites, although they'd also increase demand for the resource as well. Forthly, you could trade with other civs to increase your supply of a certain resource, or sell them your excess resources.

The final factor would be technology again. This time, however, it doesn't increase the output of resource extraction, but simply confers a basic benefit upon your whole civilization. For example, once you research animal husbandry (or some such thing), your supply of horses is permanently set to 'adequate', and you don't need to worry about finding a horse resource. Similarly, once you get 'organic chemistry' your supply of oil is set to 'scarce'. This means that you can still build and use units that use oil, but you're going to be at a serious disadvantage against a civ that has plentiful oil supplies.

The effect of the different levels of availability would be fairly simple. Units which needed oil to be built would be very expensive if oil was scarce in your civ, and inexpensive if oil was abundant. Upkeep costs, movement, stats, happiness, terrain improvements, etc, could be dependant on the availability of resources.

Note that having very high levels of resource availability would not be that beneficial - it would usually be more useful to trade them instead.
(Posted by Sandman)

4.2.12 - Quantity of a resource giving bonus effects

My idea is that when you have lets say 5 horses in your possesion, then you should get a +1 to movment of mounted units. It could be explained that you have the best breed in the world , and they are stronger.

The same applies to iron --> get 5 of them and you can smelt the pure iron --> +1 to defense...

Then you could play the game like in a real world, where resources matter a lot. There's been many wars for resources.
(Posted bykhai)

4.2.13 - Resource disappearance

First of all, I think that all three types of resources: Bonus/Luxury/Strategic should have appearance and disappearance ratios. Second of all, I think it would be great to have a concept of resource 'size'. This could simply be a number from 1 (the smallest) to 10 (the largest). The size of a resource effects its base appearance and disappearance ratio!
In addition, the disappearance ratio of most resources will be effected by the number of cities within your empire! The larger your empire, the greater the chance of a single resource vanishing! Each additional source of a single resource will, obviously, reduce its chance of disappearing. Other factors which should effect the disappearance ratio of a resource are:

a) # of cities over size 12 (or 8?)

b) The number of improvements/wonders in your empire which specifically require that resource (eg, each coal plant in your empire will increase the chance of your coal resource drying up!)

c) The number of civs you're trading the resource to!

d) The number of units you build using that resource.

If units in the field lose a resource which they would require a constant supply of (such as tanks and oil) then they will begin to lose 1hp per turn until you get it back to a fort or city!
If Improvements that require a constant source of a resource lose that resource (such as an ironworks losing coal and/or iron) will cease to function until a new source of the resource is found.

Such a system would not be THAT big a change from the civ3 resource system, but would have a HUGE effect on the playing style you adopt. For instance, not only will ICS's have to deal with the problem of inherent corruption, but they might have to look out for constant loss of vital resources. In addition, though, it will force players into a constant search for more sources of a resource-even if they THINK they have plenty!!

Lastly, certain improvements and techs should be able to REDUCE the disappearance ratio of resources!
Anyway, those are MY THOUGHTS on the matter-hope you like them
(Posted by The_Aussie_Lurker)

5 - Trade and stockpiling
5.1 - Resource screen rather than trade screen

- a Resource screen rather than a trade one. You can see all the ressources u have access to or stockpiled and can decide (click) to trade it or transform it for example (if u have a factory and it can be transformed). For both luxuries and strategic.
-LouLong

5.2 - Stockpiling
- ability to stockpile some resources (non plant nor animal) to prepare for war for example.
We would like to be able to produce synthetic luxuries, etc.
-LouLong

5.3 - Trading under a system of resource quantity
5.3.1 - Being able to trade away all sources of a resource

when we have only one supply of a given resource, why should we not be able to trade if we so wish? If I have only one horse spot but am building tanks and armoured infantry, what do I care about horses anymore, while much less advanced civs may be very interested in them?
[i](Posted by grap1705)[/b]

5.3.2 - Being able to trade a resource which the trading parter can't use due to tech

As for buying resources, it happened that I was not able to buy oil which I had none of, from another civ that had lots of. the only explanation I could think of was that it was because I was the only one to have discovered petroleum at that stage of the game. But why wouldn't I be able to buy oil from a civ that doesn't know what to do with it? The western world precisely built its economy of third world oil. We had the tehnology, they didn't but had the resource. So if this is the explanation of why oil wasn't available to buy, it is a very unrealistic feature.
[i](Posted by grap1705)[/b]

5.3.3 - Trade specific amounts of a resource

I would like to see a system where you could offer to trade resources in specific amounts per turn, and in most cases your offer would be accepted, but the profit you would gain or price you would pay would depend on the relations between the two countries as well as the supply/demand factor. (and perhaps other factors) Of course, then the resource-tile would have a specific turn output, that would be stockpiled, used for production, or sold as you wish. - As it is in Victoria, but they use a common world market for resource trading...
(Posted by ThePlagueRat)

5.3.4 - World Market

I would actually be fond of a "World Market." You could place a resource on the market on turn 1, then on turn 2 you'd have the other player's offers. Then you can select who among them gets it.
It would help to establish real "prices" in the mind of the player. In Civ 3, things cost what the AI tells you they cost, and you just have to shrug and accept it. If there were bids then things would cost what people are willing to pay. Kind of neat, I think.

This would be in addition to the system of calling one Civ up and hammering a price out right then and there.
(Posted by Fosse)

5.3.5 - Banned resources/The Black Market

Another idea I had for resources was the concept of 'Banned Resources' and 'The Black Market'. If you ask me, though, many of the ideas I'm suggesting for resources could be incorporated into Civ3 without too much difficulty!

My idea was that, with the advent of Code of Laws-or a similar tech-you should be able to go to the trade advisor screen and click on a resource, even if you don’t have it yet, to indicate you want it to be banned. This means that you gain NO benefits from the resource, and can no longer trade it through diplomatic channels!! It should be possible, however, to build a small “wonder” called ‘The Black Market’-as an example. This Wonder has the effect of increasing happiness and corruption, whilst lowering culture and War Weariness-Civ wide! It would also have a higher than normal maintainence cost than other, similar types of Small wonders. The other effect of this wonder, though, is that you can turn “Banned” resources into “Contraband” resources-a mid-point between banned and un-banned. Once you’ve indicated you want a resource to be “Contraband”, you can then click on it, in the trade screen, and a pop-up box will ask if you want to trade this contraband a) Internally b) Externally c) Both or d) neither. If you select a, then your empire gets the normal benefits of that resource, plus a bonus happy face for it-but at the cost of increased corruption in any cities which have the resource in their radius! If you choose b) Then you go to the diplomacy screen, and choose which Civ(s) you want to trade the resource to. You get a set gpt for the trade based on several factors: 1) Distance between Civs; 2) # of said resource owned between both civs and 3) The ‘rarity’ of the resource (luxuries are more ‘rare’ than strategic resources, and strategic resources are based on appearance and disappearance ratios!). If the resource is also banned in the other civ, then the gpt value is doubled AND the trade has negative impacts on the other Civs culture and corruption-Civ Wide. That civ does get the ‘benefits’ of the resource, however (like happiness effects!). It should also be possible to build improvements or wonders which off-set, and even cancel, the negative impacts of Contraband trade. Also, if you trade in banned resources, then your reputation takes a hit amongst other civs-especially those who might also have banned said resources! The purpose of the UN, in this system is that you can pass a ‘resolution’ DEMANDING that a resource be banned-you might do this if an enemy Civ is gaining too much benefit from a resource, has a monopoly on that resource or just to increase the value of the resource for your own benefit (You have the resource, but you want to increase it’s trade value by turning it into contraband!) If the UN assembly gives you the vote, then the resource is automatically banned for ALL CIVS-though it can still be turned into Contraband through normal means! Equally, you can demand, via the UN, to have a ban on a resource lifted! This would greatly increase the importance of the UN, especially for the building player-as said player would have a greater influence over the vote, and more control over when a vote is taken!
(Posted by The_Aussie_Lurker)

Conclusion
The general meaning seem to be that the resources model should be extended and that Firaxis should implement some radical ideas.

[i]Respectfully compiled by - Nikolai
Special thanks to - Asmodean, DarkCloud

[Nikolai]

Reserved

And start discussing!

[Fosse]

Well, the idea of quantifying the current resources is left out of your initial post. It currently has a large conversation about it going on.

[url]http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104022[url]

Check the link for the discussion.


Strategic resources should provide X number of "units" of that resource per turn. If I have two oil fields in my land then I should be producing, for example, 20 units of oil each turn.

Any unit that requires a resource to build would need that resource available each turn of its production. This eliminates having oil on turn one via a trade, starting dozens of tanks, and losing the trade on turn two, leaving the tank production in place.

Also, some units and buildings could require a resource per turn upkeep. Tanks might need 1 oil per turn to keep running, and oil power plants would need 2.

This solves the problem of one instance of a resource being enough for any empire, big or small. Also, it opens up the game to a lot more trading possibilites. You could continue to buy oil even if you have it, because more is always better. Any resource you don't use on a given turn is added to a stockpile (so if you lose connection, you can operate on reserves for a while).

[Nikolai]

I haven't begun to really search Fosse, that's why I haven't written more. Lots to do IRL and such. The list over is made of what DC posted to me in the terrain thread. Thanks for the link.

[Optimizer]

It is "saltpeter", not "saltpepper".

And what is "venger"?

[Fosse]

Originally posted by Nikolai
The list over is made of what DC posted to me in the terrain thread. Thanks for the link.

I had simply figured it was all his fault anyway.

[Nikolai]

Originally posted by Optimizer
It is "saltpeter", not "saltpepper".

And what is "venger"?

I wondered on that bit... Found out I shouldn't dare to change, in case my English was a bit worse than I thought!

Anyway, will probably update this evening.

[ThePlagueRat]

I have a good feeling about this quantifying, here is my suggestion I mentioned in another thread:

I would like to see a system where you could offer to trade resources in specific amounts per turn, and in most cases your offer would be accepted, but the profit you would gain or price you would pay would depend on the relations between the two countries as well as the supply/demand factor. (and perhaps other factors) Of course, then the resource-tile would have a specific turn output, that would be stockpiled, used for production, or sold as you wish. - As it is in Victoria, but they use a common world market for resource trading...

[Fosse]

I would actually be fond of a "World Market." You could place a resource on the market on turn 1, then on turn 2 you'd have the other player's offers. Then you can select who among them gets it.
It would help to establish real "prices" in the mind of the player. In Civ 3, things cost what the AI tells you they cost, and you just have to shrug and accept it. If there were bids then things would cost what people are willing to pay. Kind of neat, I think.

This would be in addition to the system of calling one Civ up and hammering a price out right then and there.

[ThePlagueRat]

Originally posted by Fosse
If there were bids then things would cost what people are willing to pay. Kind of neat, I think.

Ok, that's more or less how it already works in MP games. I agree with what you say, and that should work in both SP and MP games. A World Market (WM) could solve that problem, but then relations between civs would seem to be irrelvant to trading. Then you would have to base the WM-possibilities on reputation and government perhaps. That's why resources should be quantified, so that your prices per.item will drop according to the different factors.

For instance:
Democracy trait: better prices on the WM.
Despotism trait: poor prices on the WM.

[rendelnep]

I 'm not too sure about this idea but could a resource give a movement bonus to roads?
I was sort of thinking about tarmac roads but don't know if they are any better that concrete roads.

[ThePlagueRat]

Yup! tarmac is better, but I doubt it will alter the vehicle's speed...

[khai]

I think that there should be more impact placed on resources. They should not only be required for building units.

My idea is that when you have lets say 5 horses in your possesion, then you should get a +1 to movment of mounted units. It could be explained that you have the best breed in the world , and they are stronger.

The same applies to iron --> get 5 of them and you can smelt the pure iron --> +1 to defense...

Then you could play the game like in a real world, where resources matter a lot. There's been many wars for resources.


What worried me in previous Civs is the lack of ocean usage. It only worked as a natural limit for the settlers.

I would like to see that nice oil on the ocean tile. And just imagine that you build a oil rig in your port city (or some ships that carries the parts of rig and then assemble it) and you claim that oil it should not only give you this resource but also some decend bonus to production or maybe even some to the trade.

Think of the strategy possibilities of such a structure. You must defend it, becouse it could be captured.

It would make the ocean more colourful (and I don't mean the black colour of an oil spillage ).


Last idea. Cities should be able to send food between eachother. One city in a fertile terrain has a surplus of 10 food --> it ships food to a city wich is in a desert and has food shortage. Of coz... you send 10 food and only 8 arrives becouse it got rotten during transportation. Special tech could prevent this, also maybe a freighter could minimalize it.

Think hard to make IT better.

[Zero]

synthesizing resource is great idea. Coal to oil, but what else?

factory production of dye and saltpeter.... that would ruin gameplay unless there was powerful consequences. Im in favor of realism but if anyone can produce strategic resource easily, then the whole idea of strategic resource is null.

resource should be stocked just like gold. With mining perhaps increasing amount extracted per turn. Units should have different resource expense. this should add strategy to which unit to produce etc. For example equipping your army with spear is significantly less draining on your iron resource compared to sword and etc.

[ThePlagueRat]

Hmm, a bit like that campaign in C3C... Age of Discovery.
Where the sugar plantation spawned a treasure every 5th. turn.
So a factory can spawn dye or saltpeter, but it have to be in limited amounts so the idea of strategic resource is kept alive..

Well, say you would make guns, and you had steel, but no saltpeter. You were going to recruit 8 dragoons from different cities in 1 turn, but could only recruit 3 because your output of saltpeter was 3 per turn from let's say 1 factory.

So you could switch mode on factories too perhaps?

3 modes...
normal(+ 50% shield),
produce( some resources per turn)
consumer goods( some luxuries per turn )

Would give more freedom to the player! And of course, resources should be quantified in the next game to allow for more interresting play... and many more different resources to allow for new trade possibilites. They could make it a real nice trading game if they did some work on this.

[CiverDan]

I put some ideas that probably belonged in this thread in the Trade Thread. Part of it dealt mainly with apossible reource depletion model. Have resources deplete over time as you build stuff, depletion rate is slowed or stopped with certain tech. Certain tech can find u new source also. Also, Please no more "losing my horse source" when the enemy takes the "source".

[Fatwreck]

the one hing that needs to be done is to remove the silly idea that ONE resource can cover your whole empires demands...

[ThePlagueRat]

Originally posted by Fatwreck
the one hing that needs to be done is to remove the silly idea that ONE resource can cover your whole empires demands...

Yep, actually that's what I meant with this quantifying idea I got.

[DarkSlayer]

If you want a colonization style resource managment then say so, but then the game will be colonization where you harwest different resources, and work the resources to produce new products. etc etc ...

I think the resource/trade in civ3 is kinda weird... but then, thats civ ... stick to the civ style, not colonization style...

Personaly I want a civ 4 engine where I can mod it to create a colonization 2 ... but that is dreaming.

The suggestions I find interesting is the option to put a resource on a world market for others to bid on... And some minor changes to how resources work...
... then you could establish WTO which will give you a better price but force you to accept the highest bid...

"need saltpeter to produce gunpowder units" etc ... some of those things need a bit adjustments

money/resources/trade is closely linked together, and should really be discussed in the same thread.
The colony consept has to be improved alot, as a way of gething resources, trade and a few more thing.
Trade as a consept has to be improved alot. Trade in civ3 is like not important at all to win the game.
Resources that only provide terrain bonuses like an extra shield/food is stuff I find useless.

[ThePlagueRat]

Originally posted by DarkSlayer

Personaly I want a civ 4 engine where I can mod it to create a colonization 2 ... but that is dreaming.

Yup! that's my dream too.
Then the game engine has got to support a system of quantified resources in which one or more resource types could be manufactured into another on a variable scale. Just as in Settlers, Victoria, Colonization, etc. How that is done in detail, should of course be moddable as you say!


e.g. The default setup need not be complicated:
To produce Artillery you don't need a Weaponsmith, but you must collect iron and saltpeter from either a trade route or from your own lands. Riflemen would then need a a lesser amount of the same for their Guns.


e.g. Or you can mod it to be more realistic (and complicated):
You make Artillery require steel and saltpeter and a Weaponsmith in one or more cities, also a Steel Mill to make steel out of iron an coal, and adjust the amounts needed for each unit. Modders can even make up their own resources.

Would that be nice? would suit everyone's need.
so IMO moddability is very important!

[mr Rura]

"Dye and Saltpeter could also be synthetically produced with a factory or a chemical factory".

Please notice that some units such as rifleman don't need saltpeter, because in the times rifleman exists, saltpeter exists in abundance. It's written in civilizopedia... Synthetic production of resources is possible rather in modern times, when rifleman is obsolete. I hope you understand.
_______________
I don't like the fact that there is only one size of resources. I think there should be at least two sizes: big and small.

I agree that resource should be counted in a sensible way. The fact that one resource is satisfying the whole civilization is a very stupid idea. The big resource would contain for instance 10 "units" of a resource, and the small - three or four. This amount can be doubled if there is a road on the tile.

Most resources are needed only to build a unit - iron, aluminum or so on. But for example oil isn't needed to build any unit - only to supply some units. So there should be two types of strategic resources: production and supply resources. Production resources are used only during building a unit and supply resources are needed only to maintain them. Both building and supplying units don't consumes the resources. It only tells how much we can build and how much we can supply. The amount of iron tells us how many tanks can we build at one time [in how many cities] and the amount of oil how many we can support.

Some resources can be both supply and production - coal [prodution of ships and supply for ironclad], perhaps saltpeter [because it can run out] or other.

Example: our civilization has got one big iron and two small oil tiles. All are with roads and mines. So we have got 20 iron and 16 oil. So 20 cities can produce tanks at once but only 16 existing tanks can be moved in one turn.

This system of resources is not only realistic, but also simple, so I think it's quite good idea. I don't know if it would be possible to stockpile resources, but probably it's not a good idea.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

First of all, I think that all three types of resources: Bonus/Luxury/Strategic should have appearance and disappearance ratios. Second of all, I think it would be great to have a concept of resource 'size'. This could simply be a number from 1 (the smallest) to 10 (the largest). The size of a resource effects its base appearance and disappearance ratio!
In addition, the disappearance ratio of most resources will be effected by the number of cities within your empire! The larger your empire, the greater the chance of a single resource vanishing! Each additional source of a single resource will, obviously, reduce its chance of disappearing. Other factors which should effect the disappearance ratio of a resource are:

a) # of cities over size 12 (or 8?)

b) The number of improvements/wonders in your empire which specifically require that resource (eg, each coal plant in your empire will increase the chance of your coal resource drying up!)

c) The number of civs you're trading the resource to!

d) The number of units you build using that resource.

If units in the field lose a resource which they would require a constant supply of (such as tanks and oil) then they will begin to lose 1hp per turn until you get it back to a fort or city!
If Improvements that require a constant source of a resource lose that resource (such as an ironworks losing coal and/or iron) will cease to function until a new source of the resource is found.

Such a system would not be THAT big a change from the civ3 resource system, but would have a HUGE effect on the playing style you adopt. For instance, not only will ICS's have to deal with the problem of inherent corruption, but they might have to look out for constant loss of vital resources. In addition, though, it will force players into a constant search for more sources of a resource-even if they THINK they have plenty!!

Lastly, certain improvements and techs should be able to REDUCE the disappearance ratio of resources!
Anyway, those are MY THOUGHTS on the matter-hope you like them !

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hi guys,

Another idea I had for resources was the concept of 'Banned Resources' and 'The Black Market'. If you ask me, though, many of the ideas I'm suggesting for resources could be incorporated into Civ3 without too much difficulty!

My idea was that, with the advent of Code of Laws-or a similar tech-you should be able to go to the trade advisor screen and click on a resource, even if you don’t have it yet, to indicate you want it to be banned. This means that you gain NO benefits from the resource, and can no longer trade it through diplomatic channels!! It should be possible, however, to build a small “wonder” called ‘The Black Market’-as an example. This Wonder has the effect of increasing happiness and corruption, whilst lowering culture and War Weariness-Civ wide! It would also have a higher than normal maintainence cost than other, similar types of Small wonders. The other effect of this wonder, though, is that you can turn “Banned” resources into “Contraband” resources-a mid-point between banned and un-banned. Once you’ve indicated you want a resource to be “Contraband”, you can then click on it, in the trade screen, and a pop-up box will ask if you want to trade this contraband a) Internally b) Externally c) Both or d) neither. If you select a, then your empire gets the normal benefits of that resource, plus a bonus happy face for it-but at the cost of increased corruption in any cities which have the resource in their radius! If you choose b) Then you go to the diplomacy screen, and choose which Civ(s) you want to trade the resource to. You get a set gpt for the trade based on several factors: 1) Distance between Civs; 2) # of said resource owned between both civs and 3) The ‘rarity’ of the resource (luxuries are more ‘rare’ than strategic resources, and strategic resources are based on appearance and disappearance ratios!). If the resource is also banned in the other civ, then the gpt value is doubled AND the trade has negative impacts on the other Civs culture and corruption-Civ Wide. That civ does get the ‘benefits’ of the resource, however (like happiness effects!). It should also be possible to build improvements or wonders which off-set, and even cancel, the negative impacts of Contraband trade. Also, if you trade in banned resources, then your reputation takes a hit amongst other civs-especially those who might also have banned said resources! The purpose of the UN, in this system is that you can pass a ‘resolution’ DEMANDING that a resource be banned-you might do this if an enemy Civ is gaining too much benefit from a resource, has a monopoly on that resource or just to increase the value of the resource for your own benefit (You have the resource, but you want to increase it’s trade value by turning it into contraband!) If the UN assembly gives you the vote, then the resource is automatically banned for ALL CIVS-though it can still be turned into Contraband through normal means! Equally, you can demand, via the UN, to have a ban on a resource lifted! This would greatly increase the importance of the UN, especially for the building player-as said player would have a greater influence over the vote, and more control over when a vote is taken!
Anyway, that’s my 2c worth-any other thoughts?

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[lajzar]

That doesn't make sense. Why would anyone ban iron? Or wheat?

As for the 'luxury' resources, I think the whole model needs overhauling.

I any case, I think you have the beneficiary of contraband wrong. Except for the Opium wars, the War on Drugs, and US Prohibition, I can't think of any examples of contraband being a significant factor. Of these, only the Opium War resulted in the government (ie player) receiving any benefit. Your model would make it entirely too easy for a government to benefit from what is historically very exceptional circumstances.

[cumi]

Hi,

anybody thought on that, that maybe wood (forest) could be also a strategic resource. That would be needed for the units in the beginning of the game, for the basic units, like archer, spearman, etc. If you cut down the forest, you loose the resource..

[lajzar]

Personally, one idea I want to see is a terrain requirement option for special units. Ships (the bigger wooden ones anyway) should require a forest to be in the city radius. Sure, you could make timber a special resource as per civ3, but that doesn't model shipbuilding historically. Equally, camel riders should require desert in the city radius. I can't think of other examples offhand, but this flag would work well in a fantasy mod.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hi Guys,

Look, I realise that my idea is FAR from perfect, but I DEFINITELY feel that we need some way of representing contraband and 'The Black Market' in Civ games! Also, there MIGHT be situations, albeit unlikely, where you might ban the trade of iron. Mostly it might be as a means of convincing your trade partners to ALSO ban the trade, thus perhaps denying an enemy his ONLY access to that resource! I'll admit, though, that banned resources would MOSTLY only apply to luxuries!
Just as an additional note, though, other governments have profited from so-called 'banned resources.
For instance, both the Warlords of Afghanistan and the former Tailban regime were (and are, in some cases) major producers of heroin. Also, many African nations STILL profit from the illegal trade in ivory, rhino and gorilla body parts-just to name a few!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[mr Rura]

Cumi - wood as resource? it's pointless... wood exists almost everywhere...

[joncha]

Originally posted by mr Rura
Cumi - wood as resource? it's pointless... wood exists almost everywhere...

Not so pointless, as Lajzar pointed out in terms of shipbuilding. Access to lumber has historically been very important, especially access to the right lumber.

There was a hint of this with the "Cedars of Lebanon" in the first C3C scenario, but I think it could use some more elaboration. I think the city-radius idea could work well for shipbuiding, but I wouldn't want to see it apply to all resources.

jon.