No copper.. hmm...

[Brawndo]

It seems to me with limited uses of strategic resources, starting positions will no longer be completely without an important resource like Iron or Horses, they might just have LESS of it. For example, IRL most countries have at least some domestic oil reserves, but others have significantly more and can afford to trade them as exports.

This will prevent unnecessary restarts and will just mean that players will have to use their limited Iron/Horses/whatever to secure more of it.

 

[Landiron]

Who said anything about easily? They made a good case of why there are no axemen in the game anymore. With 1 UPT you don't need the fodder units. Given that there were only very few units that actually required copper, I don't see the huge distinction between copper and iron.

And welcome to CivFantics, Landiron.

Thx, but I've always been here, lurking in the dark

It bothers me that they choose to completely remove a resource as historical significant as copper from the game.
They simply skip a few thousand years of history and technological evolution in a series that always distinguished itself by the fact that you could lead your Civ from "the dawn of man into the space age" (<Quote from the official website).

civ4 extrapolated the assumption all civs would have access to tin and would smelt their bronze... Why can't civ5 run on the assumption that all civs have access to bronze and tin?

Of course it's fine to simplify things to some degree if its beneficial to the gameplay.

But completely disregarding the historical impact of copper and the bronze age
instead of adding some Units that would make use of a copper resource,

and in that way lengthen the transition from stoneage to iron age to give that timeframe more importance, seems like a questionable move to me.

To put it simple, while I dont mind it that they try to streamline Civilization a little, I've to criticize the way and the extent they're doing it.

 

[King Jason]

Well imo I don't think they did that... If the spearman require Iron I'd feel that way, but the fact that it doesn't, in my mind, gives the representation of a bronze-age unit. As it's a step up from the warrior (stone age) and remains a viable part of the military (anti-horse) for the duration of the ancient eras.

Just because we don't need to worry about acquire copper doesn't mean the bronze age isn't referenced or given importance. It's like you said, simplification to a degree... look at it this way; Warrior: Stone ~ Spear: Bronze ~ Sword: Iron

The progression is right there, and it's really no less than civ4 was... The only reason why copper was an effective resource in civ4 was because the axe more than sufficient compared to the swordsman... which meant wasting the time to research Iron Working wasn't necessary. You could field a perfectly function army without Iron.

In civ5, it makes iron viable in the ancient era. Something that wasn't the case in civ4. Which, imo, is equally as silly as a lack of clear bronze representation.

Further, that progression is there without the spear becoming obsolete with the advent of the sword since it will likely remain the premier anti-horse unit of the ancient era.


I understand you'd prefer a copper resource that has it's own list of copper-only units... but I think that would just clutter the progression of technology, especially since we need resourceless units too. Further, as in civ4, it would only make sense that those units that can be constructed with copper can be constructed with iron.. which essentially makes the resource moot.

 

[YoHo]

Well, the way I see it is that Bronze and thus copper is kind of the prerequisite for any ancient civilization and as such, it's safe to assume that all the Civs in the game would have access to it. It's not like Copper has always been a strategic resource throughout all civ games.

Just think like this, Copper is a prerequisite to be a Civ in the game.

 

[GigaNerd]

it's a coal-powered internet now.

You mean a Steam-powered Internet?

 

[AriochIV]

I'll miss you, Copper and Axemen. It sounds like it'll make scouts even more unimportant.

I'd think scouts are still going to be very important -- finding as much iron and horses as you can will be critical, as you can't just find one source and be content.

But also, recon is going to be more important, because units are faster, and you will have much less time to react when the enemy attacks. When you are on the attack, you have to worry about the disposition of the enemy army; you can't just blindly head for his city. Fast units with +Sight range promotions are going to be needed to keep tabs on where the enemy is and what they're doing.

 

[Carwyn]

Well... no copper = modding!

Who's really going to play this game until its been modded a bit? Other than to figure out what needs to be added, changed, messed with??

 

[pi-r8]

After thinking more about this, I'm glad copper (and by extension axemen) are gone. Axemen were always just too good. A melee unit which counters melee units? Its only counter is... itself? Great.

They tried to fix that in BTS by making chariots counter axes, but it was still an unwieldy counter which didn't really work too well for various reasons (like spearmen lol). I'll be much happier to see ancient era armies of something besides mass axemen. After all, what country ever used the axe as their standard weapon for all their grunts?

 

[King Jason]

After all, what country ever used the axe as their standard weapon for all their grunts?

The Horde?

 

[AriochIV]

The Horde?

No further questions. The prosecution rests, Your Honor.

 

[SevenSpirits]

Spearmen (which are powerful and useful in civ5) come at bronze working and don't require a strategic resource from the map. Surely we can run on the assumption that bronze is simply far too common and just about every ancient army was able to supply their troops with it.

Ironically, in history, copper was the rarer but better resource. The Iron Age was basically "Hey guys, it turns out this more common 'iron' stuff can be shaped too (with higher temperatures), so now we can have MORE WEAPONS. The only catch is that they are crappier and less sturdy than bronze ones until we invent steel." So the game mechanic where you can have any number of spears (copper units) and a limited number of more powerful iron-based swords is exactly backwards.

From a gameplay perspective, removing copper (and thus making more early units not require a resource) seems fine though.

 

[AriochIV]

I seem to recall hearing that it wasn't the copper that was rare, but rather the tin needed to make bronze.

Anyhow, the result is not backwards. Spear-bearing light infantry and archer auxiliaries were the common, inexpensive units on the ancient battlefields, and the heavy infantry (represented by Swordsmen) were the expensive, rare elite units. As long as we get to the right result, I'm willing to overlook how we got there.

 

[King Jason]

I seem to recall hearing that it wasn't the copper that was rare, but rather the tin needed to make bronze.

I'm gonna go with this... I have no recollection of copper being hard to find, but tin was a PITA.

At least from what I've read.

 

[SevenSpirits]

Good point, Arioch. I meant to say that bronze was rarer, not copper.

I checked Wikipedia and it says here that both copper and tin were rarer than iron, and there were shortages of both - possibly more of tin though. (Note: I'm not taking this info as 100% solid; if anyone has a better source than a single summary paragraph in Wikipedia and my hazy memory that bronze was harder to get than iron, I'd love to be pointed to it.)

 

[brianshapiro]

We should be able to mine orichalcum, and use it as a fuel source to power underground transportation networks.

 

[King Jason]

Hmm well interesting find, I might be wrong. Definitely not an expert on the subject or anything.

 

[Ronojoy1917]

I'd think scouts are still going to be very important -- finding as much iron and horses as you can will be critical, as you can't just find one source and be content.

But also, recon is going to be more important, because units are faster, and you will have much less time to react when the enemy attacks. When you are on the attack, you have to worry about the disposition of the enemy army; you can't just blindly head for his city. Fast units with +Sight range promotions are going to be needed to keep tabs on where the enemy is and what they're doing.

By scouts I meant the actual 'Scout' unit. In Civ4 they weren't rly worht getting if you didn't start out with Hunting already, but I still liked having another unit that could explore at the start of the game other than Warriors. With the Warrior unit so much stronger, I'd be surprised if Scouts were still in the game. I just liked them cause I enjoyed roleplaying, and thats less fun with just a bunch of warriors. But maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, and what you said about the importance of recon sounds very good.

Initially I didn't want to see copper go, but I might start warming up to the idea. Considering how resources like Iron and Horses are going to be limited, that means your army is going to have to be balanced out. Swords and Chariots will make up a few core elite units. While in the Ancient and Classical eras, Warriors and Spears will be the bulk of your forces, with archers in an important supporting role, especially with their ranged attack. It sounds good actually. I mean it wouldn't work if all units required a resource, especially that early in the game. It would be too easy to gobble up any nearby civs that weren't lucky with strategic resources. Or if you didn't have any nearby, you would be pretty a sitting duck for anyone who did have them. Its good then that Warriors, Spears, and Archers can be produced without acquiring a resource.

EDIT: I just noticed that this is Arioch. Thanks for the website man, its been rly informative and helpful

 

[AriochIV]

With the Warrior unit so much stronger, I'd be surprised if Scouts were still in the game. I just liked them cause I enjoyed roleplaying, and thats less fun with just a bunch of warriors. But maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, and what you said about the importance of recon sounds very good.

With a 2-move Warrior, I had the same thought, but Scouts are indeed in Civ V. Whether they are really useful or not remains to be seen, but on paper they look good. Movement of 3, and the potential to get promotions that extend sight range.

Initially I didn't want to see copper go, but I might start warming up to the idea. Considering how resources like Iron and Horses are going to be limited, that means your army is going to have to be balanced out. Swords and Chariots will make up a few core elite units. While in the Ancient and Classical eras, Warriors and Spears will be the bulk of your forces, with archers in an important supporting role, especially with their ranged attack. It sounds good actually. I mean it wouldn't work if all units required a resource, especially that early in the game. It would be too easy to gobble up any nearby civs that weren't lucky with strategic resources. Or if you didn't have any nearby, you would be pretty a sitting duck for anyone who did have them. Its good then that Warriors, Spears, and Archers can be produced without acquiring a resource.

I agree, I think the potential for really interesting combat in the ancient/classical era appears to be shaping up nicely.

Thanks for the website man, its been rly informative and helpful

You're quite welcome.

 

[Caeserportugal]

Scouts are indeed in Civ V. Whether they are really useful or not remains to be seen, but on paper they look good. Movement of 3, and the potential to get promotions that extend sight range.

Arioch are there really movement 3? In the images I have seen so far they only had 2 movement but you probably found some secret info

I agree, I think the potential for really interesting combat in the ancient/classical era appears to be shaping up nicely.

Yes Spears and warriors will now be more important than ever as well as archers the good thing is that muskets and infantry won't require resources either

 

[Xzylvador]

Are we sure about that movement 3 for scouts?
I may be remembering wrong, but I *think* that on one of Azazell's now-banned-by-2k screenshots, there was a civilopedia entry with scouts having 2 movement, but ignoring "rough terrain"; which I assume means no slow movement because of mountains, forests, hills etc...