1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] Do you like that all Strategic resource deposits give them same amount?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Sostratus, Jul 22, 2019.

?

Do you prefer the strategic resource extraction of civ5 or civ6?

  1. Civ 6. Fixed 2(material) or 3(fuel) for all deposits.

    16 vote(s)
    25.0%
  2. Civ 5. A mix of small deposits (2) and large ones (6-8.)

    48 vote(s)
    75.0%
  1. Sostratus

    Sostratus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    1,130
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    I was playing an England game to hunt down that achievement for a city on all continents, and through some opportunistic colonialism friendly Royal Navy tourism acquired this city from Eleanor:
    Spoiler :

    upload_2019-7-22_0-56-56.png

    5, count 'em - Five- oil deposits in this airfield outpost.
    This got me extremely excited since with the card + Corp. Libertarianism, Montpellier is pumping 25 units of oil.
    Then I remembered how civ5 had the mix of big and small deposits. I think most resources were 2 or 8 per deposit, with oil being 2 or 6; and uranium was less, iirc 2 or 4. But this meant some oil fields or what have you were extremely valuable and thus top priority. The right city could support an entire army of tanks or bombers.
    The constraints of civ6's fuel system really make me yearn for having these bigger deposits around. I know we get bang for our buck with corps/armies, but I always feel so constrained with oil/aluminum I barely feel like I have choices.

    Which do you prefer? Why?
     
    Tiger Genocide likes this.
  2. ezzlar

    ezzlar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,568
    A mix! This would enable more of scattered 1 unit deposits that would at least enable a few critical units.
     
  3. MrRadar

    MrRadar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    836
    Definitely a mix.
    And also coal liquefaction technology (leaf) and a respective building/city project.
     
    Elhoim likes this.
  4. ezzlar

    ezzlar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,568
    That´s a good idea. More resource generation could be run as projects. Maybe "Blacksmithing" in the encampment generating 5-15 iron. This could also be done for niter and oil.
     
  5. RealHuhn

    RealHuhn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,056
    Location:
    Germany
    I highly prefer CIV6. I really feel the need to settle new cities after I reveal oil/uranium/aluminium depending on victory conditions. A lucky +6 resource tile or even worse a city project would completely eliminate that feeling of urgency.
     
  6. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    1,279
    Why not just increase the resources setting to abundant? Forgot the exact wording but it's in the advanced settings when you set up a game.
     
  7. kaspergm

    kaspergm Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,415
    I also liked the old system where large deposits were rarer, but you almost always had a small deposit close to home, which at least would let you run a few units for basic coverage. I find way too often in Civ6 I start with 0 Iron within a hundred miles from my starting location, which means first half of the game is going to be pretty stall.
     
  8. MrRadar

    MrRadar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    836
    By involving city projects I did not mean generating resources out of thin air, but rather converting coal into oil at a ratio of 2:1 or 3:1. Chemistry only, no alchemy :)
     
    nauberry likes this.
  9. nauberry

    nauberry Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    24
    Gender:
    Male
    This would be really interesting to add. What could be similar projects for other resources? Maybe you could have a project that converts power into aluminum in the Form of recycling?
     
  10. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    1,279
    The holy grail of Civ alchemy: turning gold into "anything" else. :p
     
    King Rad and Elhoim like this.
  11. acluewithout

    acluewithout Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    2,438
    Yes to variable deposits.

    Yes to additional oil deposits being revealed later in the game via later techs, rather than all the oil appearing at once.

    And yes to Armories or some other building providing some Niter (just as a nod to being able to make niter IRL).
     
  12. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,965
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Variable production, additional sources (and/or greater production per source) with tech advancements (not only oil), create niter at certain tech (maybe not in armory, perhaps in a factory? I'd love to see specialized factories).
     
  13. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,952
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Shuckee Gee, folks, I've been arguing for "Dynamic Resources" ever since Civ VI came out.
    Specifically, divide all Deposits into Normal and Industrial.
    Normal is anything that is valuable in such small quantities that it can be transported by any means: pack animals, carts, canoes, etc. That would include virtually all the original Amenity Resources, and the 'early' Strategic Resources like Horses (self-moving) or Iron. That's because equipping a Swordsman takes less than 60 pounds of iron, which can be transported easily.
    Industrial are the resources or quantities of resources that need to be transported in Tons. Therefore, they cannot be traded or moved by anything other than boats/ships (Ancient Era Minoan ships have been reconstructed, and they can haul up to 30 tons), modern internal-combustion trucks or railroads. These include Food, because less than tons of quantity simply don't make any difference to a city of 1000 to 1,000,000 people (even a city of 1000 people consumes over a ton of food per day: pack trains simply won't deliver enough from any distance) from the beginning of the game, and, in the Industrial Era, almost everything: the quantity of iron required for a single kilometer of railroad is more than was required to equip an entire Roman Legion, and building one ironclad (5000 tons) would use as much Iron as equipping the entire Roman Army IRL (and has anybody in the game ever built 50 Legions?)

    Ideally, most of the early Deposits of resources would not reveal how big they were - the technology just isn't there to 'dig deep' and recover everything. In the Medieval Era, early Industrial Era, and Atomic Era technologies like wooden cart tracks and timber shoring, steam pumps, and massive earth-moving machinery would each allow an 'expansion' of Known Deposits.
    Therefore, each might require you to go hunting for new sources, or invest to exploit existing resources better.

    Second Point: most of the Amenity Resources and many of the Strategic Resources should be replaced, or at least Replaceable, by manufactured or 'artificial' resources later in the game.
    Niter is a good example. There were very few natural deposits of 'Niter' (Potassium Nitrate) anywhere, but the stuff can be 'manufactured' easily but messily (and odiferously) in Nitraries from the Renaissance Era on, and then by the Haber Process from the Modern Era on in whatever quantity desired.
    Likewise, 'coal tar' (aniline) dyes are Industrial Era replacements for 'natural' dyes, plastics starting with celluloid and bakelite can replace Ivory in many 'Amenity' constructions. And so on. Point being that most of our modern 'conveniences' or Amenities are manufactured goods, and by reflecting that in the game, it would increase the dynamism as you have to allocate Industrial Resources/Production to their manufacture instead of simply continuing to exploit the same patch of Sugar or Dyes you've been cultivating since 4000 BCE.

    And, finally, in many cases the manufactured 'luxuries/amenities' are Major Trade items and Gold producers for a Civ: just look at the international traffic in personal automobiles or personal electronics in the Atomic/Information Eras, and the amount of Gold those two sets of consumer goods alone have realized for the major producing countries: USA, Japan, Germany, China - the production of consumer Amenities is almost the definition of Industrial Powerhouse in the late 20th century, and adding that possibility to the game would be a Good Thing IMHO.
    For one thing, I think it would be absolutely impossible to have a legitimate Economic Victory and economic victory conditions without including dominating the markets in such consumer goods.
     
    AsH2, Jkchart, King Rad and 3 others like this.
  14. Sostratus

    Sostratus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    1,130
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    Well, i suppose i should have titled the thread to this, but: I don't think the quantity of fuel resources in the game on standard settings is high enough.
    But, also, increasing the number of resource tiles decreases the amount of space for everything else. It's already kind of un-fun when a great location is dampened by the reveal of an inconvenient niter or something. My biggest source of oil is usually districts since it often appears under my existing infrastructure.

    Though we should all recall that civ5 also had the recycling plant, which you could build 5 of; this guaranteed you 15 aluminum, the resource needed for science victory as well as the most modern units. (The jump wasn't as big, and basically tank/bomber/bship needed oil, modern armor/missile cruiser/stealth bomber needed aluminum.) We don't have that now, nor do we have any sort of "world market" to buy some. So the pressure is extra high.

    I also think there is a lot of space for making the early game material resources relevant in the late game, via giving fuel units material costs of iron or niter, or adding economic uses like buildings which consume a unit of them per turn in exchange for providing benefits. Since we are stuck with them forever, they should be semi-useful forever.
     
    Tiger Genocide and acluewithout like this.
  15. King of Prussia

    King of Prussia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    193
    Honestly at this point, i am for going in the opposite direction. have strategic resources provide some nation wide buff(would make some early game resources matter in the late game), including troops, and remove the requirement to have resources to build units. Distribution is already bad enough, let alone the quantity. Adding maintenance in the late game makes it even worse. upping the amount you get from a single resource would only partially address the issue.

    i like variety from game to game. I like unexpected twists. I cant say i really enjoy the lottery that is strategic resources. I can play around it, the AI can't. I also find it annoying seeing early game units running around in vast numbers around the world due to the lack of resources to ever upgrade or maintain(like oil) them.
     
  16. kaspergm

    kaspergm Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,415
    Wood into Coal.
    Ore into Iron (I guess that's what Iron deposits are, but let's assume those are particularly rich ores).
    Cows into Niter? (In a Nitrary ...)

    Of course, neither of these are (cumulable) resources at the moment.
     
    nauberry likes this.
  17. Aurelesk

    Aurelesk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    106
    Gender:
    Male
    I do prefer the Civilization VI system: a large deposit in CivV can be translated to multiple deposit in a small area, like you shown on your picture. That mean: better city yield overall, and more satisfaction to deny a large amount of strategic ressource for others players.

    The thing is: suddenly Oil become the mandatory for most units. I would prefer a system that would separate the maintenance cost (Coal, Oil or Uranium) from the training cost (Horse, Iron...).

    For example, a Ironclad will need Steel as training cost (5 Iron + 5 Coal), and Coal as maintenance cost. The thing is, 1 Coal per Ironclad per turn is way to much: a way to reduce maintenance cost would be interesting. For example, every units that didn't move this turn will not consume any strategic ressource as maintenance cost. Furthermore, maybe add to "Defense of the Motherland" policy something like this "Every units that start and finish their turn inside your border don't have any maintenance cost (strategic and gold)".

    By doing this, you could build units without the strategic maintenance cost, and build a standing defensive army just in case, without running dry of strategic ressource before the fight even start.

    Infantry will be the unit that come in mind for this: supress the Oil maintenance cost of it, but allow to build it with some strategic ressource (but which one? Niter, again?).

    I would like to have some way to have strategic ressource not available through policy cards, but with a downside. For example:
    • +3 Iron per turn BUT Mine -1 Production.
    • +3 Horse per turn BUT Pasture -1 Food.
    • +3 Niter per turn BUT Farm -1 Food.
    • +3 Coal per turn BUT Lumbermill -1 Production.
    • +3 Oil per turn BUT -10% Science
    • +3 Aluminium per turn BUT -10% Culture
    • +3 Uranium per turn BUT -10 Loyalty per city
     
    Meluhhan and Staal like this.
  18. Sostratus

    Sostratus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    1,130
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    I think the way civ5 did things was very close to perfect. You have regular army units that don't do anything too special, that are resource-less; only the more powerful units require resources. The "melee" line never needed resources, nor did artillery, destroyers or subs. So resources were only used for:
    Tank type units (strongest and fast land units)
    Battleship type units (quite dominant at sea!)
    Air units (very strong units)
    Modern era units needed oil, info units needed aluminum.

    The beauty of this scheme is that is you lack a resource you won't get completely hosed, but having resources allows for some powerful advantages in war. A group of modern armor will punch through other land units, but mechanized infantry and bazookas can put up a meaningful defense. Although there's no problem in civ5 a squadron of stealth bombers couldn't solve...
    I think we agree in principle. I just feel that iron could be used to build stuff like ironclads, battleships, and tank units. Keeps the need for "steel" useful.
    I also think that they may in the future want to consider fuel being used in units of 0.5. The current solution to have corps/armies also use 1 unit just pushes everything to formations. It over emphasizes a pair of civics that are already extremely strong, and it feels gamey. Because if an army used 2 or 3 oil, it would be way too costly. If they used 0.5/1.0/1.5, you could scale up deposits a tad and i think it would achieve a decent feel.
    Resorting to a card to halve usage of a resource would just skew the warmonger's advantage too much: halving your oil use when you have none doesn't do anything meaningful.

    ~~~~~~~~~~
    I also think the extremely low levels of fuel for the entire game makes the global warming side fall flat. I never have enough oil to fuel and army and power plants, so I always burn coal for power. But if I need coal for power I can't make much use of battleships or ironclads. A coal mine can give you 12-16 power if you use the card. That's enough to run 5-6 buildings, or one big city, maybe two medium cities. Does FXS realize how expensive this is? You need renewable not to to save the polar bears from ice melt, but to keep your lights on. It's wild. I really really love the link between military resources and economic expansion, though, I want that to stay forever. Uranium does okay as long as you don't want GDRs (which IMO are also OP, even accounting for their role as a super unit.)

    Global warming is only an issue precisely because there's no coal shortage in the world- mines close because they can't sell enough! If we had civ6 levels of coal shortage, we'd have solar panels and wind turbines on every corner, let me tell you!
     
  19. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,952
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    This is one reason why I'd prefer to have Variable Quantities in a single Deposit, which saves 'space' on the map. Since you might not be able to tell the size of the Deposit until later in the game, that also keeps you from getting complacent and possibly forces a hunt for 'bigger deposits' later in the game, keeping the Resource Game dynamic instead of static.

    There are a number of possible sources for Resources other than the original, basic deposit or patch on the ground. Under Recycling, a large percentage of modern steel/iron resources are actually scrap metal being remelted and reused. Comparatively, recycled aluminum cans are a small percentage of 'resources'. Other metals/ores available through extensive recycling include Silver and Mercury that are in the game, and Gold that should be.
    Coal/charcoal, as another poster mentioned, can be used for Coal, Coal can be used to make Oil (a Modern Era technology), and Oil can be used to make rubber, or 'Buna' (another Modern Era technology), and the useful form of Uranium, the 'enriched' uranium, can be 'manufactured' in Nuclear Power Plants (although doing that could have Diplomatic Consequences)

    The original Strategic Resources, Iron and Horses, could easily stay useful to End of Game:
    Iron is still the basis for urban construction, either as steel skeletons for high-rise/skyscraper structures or as rebar for reinforced concrete. Reduce Production times/costs for Neighborhoods, Harbors, Commercial Hub districts and almost all buildings after the Industrial Era if you 'consume' Iron to build them.
    Horses are both recreational and, in horse-racing, lucrative Amenity/Tourism goods.

    More basically, the Categories into which all the resources have been jammed need to 'loosen up' or, better yet IMHO, be removed entirely. The use of a resource should be based on Technology and therefore should change based on the use your Civ can make of it.
    So, for example, Copper may be a Resource that increases Production in the Ancient Era (copper and bronze tools and blades), that is a Strategic-type resource in the Classical Era (bronze weapons and armor) and is a requirement for making anything with electrical wiring by the late Industrial Era and later.
    Iron may be purely Strategic in use from Classical to Renaissance Eras, but in the Industrial Era and onwards Wrought Iron and Steel become construction materials for Everything from bridges to ships to Buildings to Districts both directly and indirectly: access to steel ships, for instance, will increase the returns from your sea Trade Routes and even the useful length of those routes. You may not 'require' steel directly to build a Destroyer or Submarine Unit, but you cannot build the dry-docks and construction cranes used to build the Shipyards and other infrastructure that does build those ships without Steel/Iron.

    In short, we can do a lot more with Resources in the game and making resources more variously useful and necessary but adding the 'substitutes' for them, it would make a much more in-depth and interesting game.
     
    AsH2, Meluhhan, Jkchart and 4 others like this.
  20. steveg700

    steveg700 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Messages:
    2,947
    I see this as fairly straightforward. Of course there should variable deposits. There should be all kinds of "jackpot" locations on the map where you would want to rush a settler and/or army.

    The map in Civ games should be the hero. But in Civ VI it's increasingly irrelevant as map features become more homogeneous in the misguided pursuit of balance. A balanced map is a map where nothing's worth fighting for or racing to grab.

    Rather than setting up some players to have none of a strategic resource, it should be relatively easy for every player to get a trickle. A taste that makes him impatient for more. And then there should be mother loads, none of which are situated near a player's starting location.

    And why not take the same approach with other resources? Amenities are fairly pointless, slapping a city with trifling penalties. Why not allow luxuries to be amassed and expended for some effect, a la Endless Legend/Space?
     

Share This Page