![[to_xp]Gekko](https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/74/74677.jpg?1475248346){kind=avatar}
[to_xp]Gekko
QCT junkie
ggalindo001 said:1. Horses. Along with Iron, probably the most critical resource to have because of the timing, etc. I struggled with this, having thought about what you said (having to have horses to build the center), but I thought of what happened historically. Most of Eurasia had horses, most of America, Africa and Australiasia did not. If you recall, the native americans, once horses were introduced, did not just become great horsemen, but also great natural breeders of the animals in North America. Where horses were impractical primarily due to terrain (South America for example), they did not flourish.
The historical fix would be to limit the use of horses to just plains and grasslands (ie., no jungle, very little forest usage, obviously no mountains). That would become a very difficult fix.
The next historical fix would be to allow the "breeding of horses". Once known, a civilization could start with a few and within a period of time, have a normal cadre of the animals. I thought about what brought this about historically, and it was the establishment of trade on the oceans; hence the delayed (much delayed) technological need before you can strategically beat the resource need.
I also thought about the concept of "once you have horses, you always have horses".....but I thought that could become difficult programatically and it also didn't account for the fact that some effort would be required to actually breed and maintain the animals without a natural source
5. I like your idea of raising little piggies, etc. Keep in mind, these three wonders are just that, expensive and strategic. But I could also see building the synthetic refinery in wartime so that your oil could not be pillaged. I thought of that strategically in my game but didn't go forward as I needed miliary units badly
actually, the more I think about it the more I think Biological Resources should NOT be able to be "produced" in a city. now if someone could write a code that allowed you to plant one and one only resource somewhere appropriate in your territory, THAT would be awesome.
I agree that geographical features should affect cavalry more.
I think mounted troops' combat should be lowered, and given a hefty bonus when fighting in grassland/plain tiles.
well. I guess this would make sense if considered as part of the Unit Allegiance mod... but only if unit allegiance happens. if two armies are going to fight to the death, I doubt the horses/elephants are going to survive
but the idea makes sense, I like it. and it makes me think of catapults. man, the way they are now in the game is so lame. used as suicide first-attackers IMHO catapults should never be able to sustain direct combat: allow them to bombard units and improvements/cities alike, and make them get captured just like workers if they have no troops to protect them. then they would be realistic and still useful against SoD.actually, there would be another way around SoD that involves something better than collateral damage. not being able to place infinite amounts of armies on the very same tile. it's as easy as that
I don't think so... science isn't so easy, you know
I see your point. so this is another welcome addition I guess
why swordsman? they are actually the same as other melee fighters!
I agree about ships though, bronze is not viable in that way... too expensive, and other drawbacks I still don't know I guess
I guess this is true too. they should need iron/steel and coal/oil.
Edit: I used the word "guess" way too many times, I guess.
sorry about that 
