Asymmetric Luxuries

Darac

Warlord
Joined
Aug 10, 2007
Messages
173
I've noticed that luxury resources all seems the same. They all provide 4 ammenities. Wouldn't it be cooler if they all provide a different number of ammenities and had a varying number of copies per tile?

That way we could have luxuries that provide many copies for trading, but aren't worth as much as they only provide a single amenity or a luxury that is worth a bundle of amenities and a huge amount in a single trade, etc.

I just find that if I can't trade for a single luxury from a leader then i know they won't trade me any at all, where as I might be able to persuade them to trade a 1 or 2 amenity luxury instead of a 4 amenity one. I also find that I don't really care about which luxuries I start with, just that I have a luxury or not is the only thing that really makes a difference at the moment.
 
Civ's economy has always been pretty shallow. Some secondary resource usage would be good in the late game to keep bonus resources relevant.

My personal gripe is in how rivers are only presented as obstacles, rather than the great facilitator of transport they actually were (provided you wanted to travel along them!). An adjacency bonus for Commercial Hubs is a pretty weak representation of this.
 
Civ's economy has always been pretty shallow. Some secondary resource usage would be good in the late game to keep bonus resources relevant.

My personal gripe is in how rivers are only presented as obstacles, rather than the great facilitator of transport they actually were (provided you wanted to travel along them!). An adjacency bonus for Commercial Hubs is a pretty weak representation of this.
reduced movement cost when moving along a river?
 
I think it would be cool to be able to manufacture our own luxuries from base resources or luxuries. We'd need more basic resources though. For starters it would be cool if we could make alcohols from wheat, sugar, or rice, or cheese from cattle resources.

Luxury tiers would be a great idea to combine with this. Manufactured luxuries (like the ones you can get from a Great Merchant) should be worth more amenities than those you can mine or plant, for instance.
 
I don't believe so, but rivers counted for connecting cities in terms of resource distribution. It also had the same flat +gold bonus to adjacent tiles we saw in pre-BNW Civ V.

That was it. I know rivers gave more than just +gold in the game.
 
Luxury tiers would be a great idea to combine with this. Manufactured luxuries (like the ones you can get from a Great Merchant) should be worth more amenities than those you can mine or plant, for instance.
Would be cool if we could get some buildings or district buildings to help out. Like if I could make my factory produce a certain type of resource. Maybe a luxury or maybe a strategic resource that needs to be manufactured.
 
That was it. I know rivers gave more than just +gold in the game.

Yeah rivers were hugely useful in Civ IV. They provided +1 gold to adjacent tiles and connected cities to trade routes like roads but no movement bonus, but the extra few gold per turn from an early trade route was fantastic. They also provided valuable defence if you placed your city right, effectively acting like walls. Amphibious promotions for units came very late in Civ IV so this was far more useful than it is in the Civ 6. There was also the watermill that could not be built unless your city was on a river i believe. And finally, in the map generator they turned any neighbouring desert tiles into floodplains and floodplains were way more powerful than they are in Civ 5/6 which were awesome!

This was just one aspect of Civ IV map generation, resources and tile yields that produced much more interesting and asymmetric games.

Would be cool if we could get some buildings or district buildings to help out. Like if I could make my factory produce a certain type of resource. Maybe a luxury or maybe a strategic resource that needs to be manufactured.

Strategic resources need some tweaks as well I think. I really miss bronze being a strategic resource and the difference in army and strategy that resulted from having either bronze, iron or neither of them (in which case you were screwed). But having two resources made civs without iron a little less screwed as they could usually get access to bronze. But that access still cost the same investment to get up and running as Iron. In Civ V you could just rush to pikeman and counter any swords people tried to produce without needing resources at all. I haven't played enough Civ 6 to know how strategic resources play out yet.

I also find that with city states providing strategic resources it's very hard to cut strategic supply off from enemies. I remember in Civ IV I would constantly look for roads to pillage or fortify on to cut supply from Iron mines and horses.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom