Hm, fruits.
To represent "arid fruits", Dates/Figs sound like a good idea, unless that kind of stuff is supposed to grow in oases anyway. Another idea is the Coconut - before industrialization, Coconut Trees were a veritable resource not only for their fruits, but because nearly every aspect of the plant was possible to use for some benefit: Food, Wood, Fibers, Leaves, Alcohol...
About "northern fruits", as I would call apples/pears/plums/cherries, I'm less enthusiastic. Distributing an "apple" resource in the temperate northern hemisphere means, basically, that every civ always has access to a fruity health resource. In light of the resource distribution I see how this leads to an overabundance of resources.
So, let's say we could have these four fruit types in the game: Bananas, Palm tree, Citrus, Apples. [Only colonial empires would have more than two of those, I think?]
First, the tile yields: Banana (+1F) Plantations (+3F) yield lots of food, which would be unchanged. Citrus (+1C) Orchards (+2C), I would think should yield similar results as Wine Orchards, no additional food. Cocos (+1F) Plantations (+1P +1C) would provide a bonus in all three aspects. Apple (+1C) Orchards (+1F) would not be spectacular, and it would be fully reasonable to build a city right on top. Or Farms, in the vassalage period.
Second, the empire-wide distributed health: Could we pool their basic health benefit as "fruits", so that theoretically having 1 instance of each resource would count as "4 fruits" for the player cities to distribute among them? If that's not feasible, better not implement Cocos and Apples, I think. But if it is possible to lump all fruits together for the distribution, the same could also be done with "grains" (Rice, Wheat, Corn, Millet).
Third, the building-specific benefits. Only Banana and Citrus would be suitable for a +1 health effect each, from the Pharmacy, I think. About Cocos and Apples, maybe re-introduce the Grocer? +1 currency for having the resource, and add some other resources to the Grocer as well? Olives, Sugar - dunno? With all the new resources coming, I think that nearly all building effects would need to be re-thought. Maybe even introducing production chains?
What I found when I added olives in the place of dates on the Africa map was the instances almost always coincided with an oasis. So perhaps arid fruits aren't much of a priority as they are already represented by oases in many cases. So coconuts are probably better. I like the 1+ production.
As for Northern fruits I'm kind of inclined to agree that we could end up adding too many food resources all over the map, though your suggested yields seem okay. They are not real better than -but alternative to- just having a farm on that tile. It is also a trade-able commodity I suppose so if your priority is food or commerce maybe you go for the farm or the cottage instead but if you want to trade then you go for the apple.
There are multiple ways to go about this. I am not opposed to adding another health resource if justified. But another alternative would be graphical variants of the same resource, by renaming Banana to something more generic like Fruit. Right now graphical variants for resources do not exist, but in principle that should easily be possible. I want to give this a try sometime.
I haven't tried this yet, so not sure how exactly it is going to work.
But the idea is to start at CvBonusInfo::getArtInfo(), which currently returns the art defines for the resource which then goes on to be used by the engine. Right now there is a one to one relationship here. However, this doesn't have to be the game, since feature types already have feature varieties that behave the same way mechanically but are displayed differently on the map. My approach would be to emulate how feature varieties work to implement resource varieties.
A while ago, I did some experimenting with a fortress improvement for islands. (https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/alternative-map-for-doc.619845/page-56#post-15146049) I can make the artstyle of the island fort dependent on the artstyle of the controlling civ, as the land fort already does that. But I don't know how to match the underlying island with the feature variant of the island feature. (My first idea was that I could change the model in LPlotSystem depending on the feature variant, similarly how it can change depending on the civArtStyle. But this seems not possible.) But I think this can be solved in a similar way as bonus variants.
Turns out that I was right in my fears about the compatibility of my old map save and the updated map branch. Either way, I remade my proposals in the last week and now will present my suggestions for Bolivia. Similar to the proposals for Argentina/Chile, I based my suggestions over the discussions already made (especially TJDowling) in this thread.
The old map:
Spoiler:
Bolivia has a long history and was home of some pre-Columbian civilizations, such as the Tiwanaku Kingdom in Titicaca lake. By early 11th century, however, the Tiwanaku civilization disappeared, mostly likely under effect of climate change and/or foreign invasion. In the following centuries, the area remained sparsely populated until the arrival of the Aymaras, who founded the Colla Kingdom, also based in the Titicaca (although on present-day Peru), the dominant power in the region until its conquest by the Inca Empire in mid-15th century. After the Spanish conquest, Bolivia, then known as Charcas, became the main center of silver mining in the viceroyalty of Peru, especially around the “silver mountain” in Potosí, producing more than half of the world’s silver mined in late 16th and early 17th centuries. As such, Bolivia became one of the most densely populated Spanish colonies and by late 18th century was transferred to the newly created viceroyalty of Río de la Plata under the name Alto Peru (High Peru). By that time, some indigenous and independentist revolts occurred, however Bolivia was firmly controlled by royalist forces until their defeat in 1825 by an army under Simón Bolívar (which was honoured by the new country’s chosen name). In the following decades, Bolivia faced chronic political turmoil, resulting in territorial loss of large contested areas. There were a few attempts (some of them successful) to make a union between Peru and Bolivia, which was strongly opposed by Chile and Argentina. In the War of the Pacific, Bolivia lost all coastal territory to Chile and became a landlocked country. The search for a sea access became one of the main foreign policy objectives of the country, especially in relation to the larger neighbours of Peru, Argentina and Brazil. The search for a large river port and the possession of the supposedly rich oil territory of Gran Chaco led to the disastrous Chaco War against Paraguay in the 1930s. After several military governments, Bolivia passed by a democratization process in late 20th century. There is nowadays some concerns of the current state of her democracy, however Bolivia achieved substantial economic growth and reduction of social inequality in the last years.
Some notes about the map: Bolivia, as already pointed in this thread, is compressed and thus somewhat deformed. The main question here is the Altiplano, which is overly represented to the rest of Bolivian territory even in the original map. This is justified by the relative importance of this area, which is the most historically/economic relevant and densely populated area. Another issue is the location of the Bolivian cities, which would fall likely on mountain titles and are not placed correctly in correspondence to the latitudes of Brazilian cities in Central-West region (which is also compressed mostly as result of the relative enlargement of the more populated and historically important Atlantic coastal region). Anyway, I made two suggestions, one with a two-title Altiplano (like in the original map and my personal preference) and another with a three-title Altiplano (at cost of turning Arica title in mountain and blocking Inca access to Chile), but I think there is still room for much improvement.
Spoiler:
Two-title Altiplano:
Spoiler:
Three-title Altiplano:
Spoiler:
Main changes:
1) made the Altiplano more drier, to represent more properly the Puna ecoregion.
2) added the salt flat to represent the Salar de Uyuni, one of the largest in the world. I also decided to not include Lake Poopó (which was represented in TJDowling proposal) because I find it too small and shallow to be represented.
3) slightly changed the course of Mamoré-Grande and Guaporé rivers, added the Beni and Madre de Dios rivers in north Bolivia, all that belong to the Amazon basin, and also extended the Pilcomayo river in the south, which belongs to the Platine basin.
4) changed some titles to plains in Eastern Bolivia (the cerrado) and the Llanos de Moxos. I deliberatly left much of the area with jungles to make the area less appealing to settle (the region is, until today, sparsely populated), but we could also include some marshes, as much of the area floods seasonaly.
5) by ~1550 CE, the mountain title of Potosí/Sucre becomes hills, something already present in-game, creating a mountain pass between the Altiplano and lowland Bolivia.
Resources:
Spoiler:
Pre-Colonial:
Sheep (1S of La Paz): represents the llama herding since pre-Colonial era. Although the llama is a camelid, I think that is best to leave them represented as sheep as it is already over camel to avoid unhistorical (though a very cool concept) Inca llama cavalry.
2 Silver (1E of Potosí/Sucre and on the Santa Cruz de la Sierra title): represents the scale of silver mining in Bolivia, which was the main economic activity in colonial times. By late 18th century the silver mining was in decline, which persisted over the next centuries. Thus, we could remove one silver or perhaps we could change it into another resource (possibly cooper) in the post-independence to represent the tin mining, which had huge importance in Bolivian economy in 20th century.
Post-independence:
Iron (1E of Santa Cruz de la Sierra): represents El Mutún iron ore reserves, one of the largest in the world. Although the mining there is not yet properly developed, it could be an interesting iron resource for the post-independence Peruvian civilization (assuming that Peru would became a proper civ and not a respawn of Inca).
Oil (1N of Santa Cruz de la Sierra): Bolivia has oil and large natural gas reserves in Santa Cruz department, which are represented with the oil resource.
Sheep (1S of La Paz): represents the llama herding since pre-Colonial era. Although the llama is a camelid, I think that is best to leave them represented as sheep as it is already over camel to avoid unhistorical (though a very cool concept) Inca llama cavalry.
Just realized I've been posting suggestions in the wrong thread, apologies.
I've a couple of suggestions for Southeast Asia.
SpoilerBurma :
I verified all the resources here with the exception of amber. My only addition was gems in the highlighted square. Burma produces some of the finest sapphires, rubies and jade in the world. I was going to add gold for the Shwedagon Paya but I want to avoid making the region too rich. Historically Burma has been rich in natural resources but slow in development. I think this is well characterized by only having one resource for each city (rice and fish given the clam is taken by Bankok).
SpoilerThe rest :
Only tile change was moving the highlighted lake upwards one tile. Phonom Penh sits west of the Mekong, south of Bangkok and north of Saigon. Lake Tonie Sap sits a bit northwest of the city almost level with Bangkok hence why I made the change. Beyond that I switched the rainforest in Vietnam to jungle to encourage city placement. Saigon, Da Nang/Hue, and Hanoi should be the three Vietnamese cities while Bangkok and Phonom Penh are essential as civ capitals.
Resources:
Southeast Asia is a very population-dense region so I prioritized ensuring each city has options for food resources.
Bangkok has been left the same, I think perhaps cotton should be added in 1900 to signify the textile industry--perhaps this should be the case for Dhaka as well.
I moved the stone for Phnom Penh and added rice in the Mekong delta as its a rich producer today. Finally, rubber has been added 1s because Cambodia is a significant rubber producer.
For Vietnam, I verified the rare earths, dye, pigs and seafood. I added iron 1se from Da Nang as Vietnam is rich in it. Is there a purposeful reason for SE Asia lacking copper or iron? I don't know about Siam or Cambodia but Vietnam produced iron weapons and this placement also encourages settling the important historical city of Hue/Da Nang. 2s1w of Hanoi I've added opium. Laos' highlands are "riddled" with opium. Finally, rice 1e of Hanoi because it is rich in the Red river valley. Given the banana is likely to end up worked by Hanoi, both may be overkill.
Unrelated to map but I'm curious what the general philosophy on SE Asia civs is. I'm of the mind that Siam represents Thailand and Burma while Khmer serves as Cambodia/Laos/Vietnam. The new map size and three cities in Vietnam may cause some to clamor for a Viet civ but I think having and ind Hanoi and Hue that may be conquered by China or Khmer is preferable. I would like to see another leader for Khmer and perhaps a scripted re spawn. Maybe Ho Chi Minh in 1950 flipping Phnom Penh, Hanoi and Da Nang? Given how late this is I figure it should be like the China re spawn in the 1700s, scripted but not playable.
In pre-Colonial times I think that the Inca UP solves the problem, however you are probably right considering the post-Inca civilizations that may control the area. Perhaps we could add some floodplains around the river titles and/or a food resource north of the Andes within the city radius. Could either be potatos or corn, as both were cultivated by all indigenous civilizations in the area.
In Bolivia, would it be realistic to move both the mountain on the Potosí tile and the mountain right south it one tile East, move at least the northern rainforest one tile east (maybe also the southern rainforest tile), and have that within Bolivia's cultural control? I'm not super familiar with the geography there, so I don't know if it's stretching things too much, but it would make the altiplano more viable and allow some food resource (potatoes or corn, as you say) there. About the food production issue, indeed, I was thinking of colonial Spain and any post-colonial civ owning it.
In South East Asia, I think Luang Prabang should be a canonical spot, that would be on the current opium tile (the tile just north would be more accurate, but it would be in the city ring of Hanoi). I'd move the pig north just to secure it for Hanoi, and I'd move the opium north (turn that mountain to a hill) so that it's actually in the Lao highlands. Then the spot is available for Luang Prabang. I'd also like to see Chiang Mai there at least some of the time, the problem is that it overlaps with either Yangoon or with Luang Prabang. I guess, of the two, people would rather keep Yangoon and have it overlap with Chiang Mai? Then the spot would be north of the sugar, so that tile should have no jungle/rainforest cover to allow settling it. The Tai and Lao people are very, very closely related so, while they have mostly always been independent states, having Thailand settle a second city on Chiang Mai or on Luang Prabang would be fine.
For Cambodia's Tonle Sap lake, take into account that while Phnom Penh is indeed south of it, the ancient Khmer capital of Siem Reap is northwest of the lake. I think that the ideal positioning is to have Siem Reap where you currently have the lake, to move the lake south, and to have Phnom Penh's position be one south of the lake where you have the rubber (it's too far south, but I think it's better and it does not overlap with Saigon). Alternatively, consider removing the lake altogether, and then you can have both cities right where they should be. They shouldn't coexist in any case, so it's fine. A lake feature (similar to the Oasis feature) would be nice for cases like this where there's a big lake but not big enough to justify a whole tile to it, or where the tile is needed for a city.
Yeah, I think sheep could be made into sheep, goat and llama variants. Llama fits sheep well because they are both for food and fur. That said llamas are also a pack animal but not nearly as effective a pack animal as camels and can't be used in warfare AFAIK. I'm attempting to modify the camel model into llama model but I've honestly no idea how to achieve it (especially with the animation). Also, it occurs to me that I didn't check if a llama model already exists.
About the SEA proposal, would the Emerald Buddha Temple be enough reason to place jade in Bangkok? I think it's not good not to place the resources that speed up wonder production in their respective countries of origin. Same with the Shwedagon Paya, so idk what to do with the gold.
Yeah, I think sheep could be made into sheep, goat and llama variants. Llama fits sheep well because they are both for food and fur. That said llamas are also a pack animal but not nearly as effective a pack animal as camels and can't be used in warfare AFAIK. I'm attempting to modify the camel model into llama model but I've honestly no idea how to achieve it (especially with the animation). Also, it occurs to me that I didn't check if a llama model already exists.
In Bolivia, would it be realistic to move both the mountain on the Potosí tile and the mountain right south it one tile East, move at least the northern rainforest one tile east (maybe also the southern rainforest tile), and have that within Bolivia's cultural control? I'm not super familiar with the geography there, so I don't know if it's stretching things too much, but it would make the altiplano more viable and allow some food resource (potatoes or corn, as you say) there. About the food production issue, indeed, I was thinking of colonial Spain and any post-colonial civ owning it.
I think that these changes are interesting, but it could stretch too much the area, compressing even more the Bolivian lowlands and the Gran Chaco in Paraguay. However, let's experiment to see.
Bellow we can see the topographic map of Bolivia and the proper Altiplano area:
Spoiler:
With the proposed changes, the area would look like this:
Spoiler:
I personally found out that the proposed changes look quite good, though they compress even more the lowlands Bolivia and turn part of the real-world flat Gran Chaco into hills.
The main problem here would be the path between Potosí/Sucre and Santa Cruz that allow the passage of Incan units to eastern South America. We would have to turn the Santa Cruz title into another mountain (with a programmed change to hills in ~ 1550 CE) and find another title for the silver that would likely be in the place of the included potatoes (unless we decide to represent the historically huge silver mines here with only one resource). Thus, in the end I feel that these changes would increase the representation of the Bolivian highlands but it would not really solve the lack of food in the Altiplano in post-Columbian era. Perhaps we could mantain this new Altiplano design and still add a corn/potatoes north of the Andes within La Paz radius.
I think it looks good actually, and indeed I think the Altiplano is more important to represent. I agree that the Santa Cruz tile should start as mountains and become hills as you suggest. The tile northeast of La Paz could have the same (become plains hills) so you can place the 2nd silver or food resource there. Santa Cruz is currently a huge agricultural production, no? then food next to it would also make sense (perhaps beef or corn).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
