What resources do you think should be added to the game

[Coracle]

One other idea.

OPIUM

The British in the early 19th century were buying huge amounts of Chinese tea with silver. They didn't want to lose all that silver.

So they went to India whcih they controlled. The British had them produce OPIUM which they then, after a war, forced the Chinese to accept instead of silver. Millions of Chinese died after being addicted.

So, how about opium?? Or cocaine from Colombia and Afghanistan?

[Nakar Gabab]

If I may ask... what's the reason for adding so many resources to the game? Realism? THat's fine, I'm cool with that as an explanation, but... doesn't it turn into a real pain in the butt? Even with high appearance it'd seem to make the "resource lotto" more risky, and aside from bonus production to tiles, I don't really see the advantage.

Someone want to explain this? Just a hankering for as much realism as possible? Just for "fun?" To make it more challenging? To clutter up the map?

I mean, I agree it's a little silly that infantry require nothing but rubber to be built (in reality), but in the game it's just a rough abstraction. I'm not sure I'd like to go tracking down 3 resources just to make any given unit... and if they're common enough to be on every hill, why have them there at all?

[Willem]

Originally posted by Nakar Gabab

Someone want to explain this? Just a hankering for as much realism as possible? Just for "fun?" To make it more challenging? To clutter up the map?

For me it's partly a desire for realism, and partly for variety. These "fast" resources in particular appeal to me for both of those reasons. I found the default game to linear, you start building in 4000 BC., and step by step work your way up. But civilization didn't work that way, it grew in fits and spurts, which is what I've been tryng to recreate some what. Plus it makes it a bit more interesting for me game wise if I can't always get what I want.

[Willem]

Originally posted by dunk


Ok, I'll agree with you about the real-life implications of good timber. But think of the game. You would be relegating some civs to isolation simply because of no timber. That's my main point.

That all depends on how many resources there are. With the lastest increases in the last patch, you can have a strategic resource that's almost as plentiful as a bonus. I think I have a number of 600 for Timber, so there's very little chance that a civ won't get any at all. They'll just have to work at sometimes, which might delay their going out to sea long enough for me to get an advantage. Plus there's bound to be another civ with some extra to selll in the event it can't find it's own source.

Besides, how will we know what the game implications are if we adopt your attitude and never even try it at all?

[Moonsinger]

I like to see more luxury resource in the game. I don't mean more luxury of the same kind, I mean less luxury of the same kind but more varieties. Currently there are eight different luxuries; I don't mind to have 16 different luxuries. I just want to see all my citizens 100% happy; that's all.

[candidgamera]

Originally posted by Coracle
One other idea.

OPIUM

The British in the early 19th century were buying huge amounts of Chinese tea with silver. They didn't want to lose all that silver.

So they went to India whcih they controlled. The British had them produce OPIUM which they then, after a war, forced the Chinese to accept instead of silver. Millions of Chinese died after being addicted.

So, how about opium?? Or cocaine from Colombia and Afghanistan?

Like adverse strategic resources.