Do you want MOAR/Better bonus resources?

[insaneweasel]

In civ 4, there were more bonus resources AND they provided significantly better tile yields than other types of resources. In 5, there are far fewer types and they only provide a measly 1 (or 2 with the proper building) food/hammer bonus over non-resource tiles.

I think that there would be, at the very least, no harm in increasing the types of resources. Add goats, pigs, potatoes, rice, crabs and other things. There would be no harm.

I also think they should improve the yields.

Your thoughts?

 

[moysturfurmer]

one grain type per continent tile-set boom

 

[Camikaze]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions.

 

[Optional]

I don't think more is better, there already is quite a psychedelic palette of resources in the game.
Some boosts could perhaps be a bit more significant, yes.

But then I would like more poorer terrain as well. I don't like the deserts that you can farm.

 

[Deggial]

In civ 4 ... bonus resources ... provided significantly better tile yields than other types of resources. In 5, ... they only provide a measly 1 (or 2 with the proper building) food/hammer bonus over non-resource tiles.
...
I also think they should improve the yields.

There are rumors, that lower yields (in comparison to Civ4) are because of 1upt. (I think, Sulla has brought this up.)

I feel confident, that this is wrong! Low tile yields (and less effective world wonders) are a consequence of the attempt to make multiplayer balanced.
Can you imagine the outcry, if a human competitor has (by mere luck) far better city surroundings? The whining about "unfair" situations, which make playing abilities meaningless will not end.
(Same with world wonders. If there are fun, but "game winning wonders", everybody will quit the game, if he doesn't get this wonder.)

Like it or not, multiplayer (and CiV is he first civ designed for MP right from the beginning - even if it doesn't work right now, which is quite ironic) created tremendous design problems for SP!

 

[Camikaze]

Whatever the cause, I don't really think low tile yields are a bad thing, either. It's not just in multiplayer that it's unbalancing if someone has a far better starting location. Advantages of such a magnitude should not be down to pure luck. Lower tile yields for resources means you don't get wild variation, meaning your more likely to achieve balance.

 

[insaneweasel]

Whatever the cause, I don't really think low tile yields are a bad thing, either. It's not just in multiplayer that it's unbalancing if someone has a far better starting location. Advantages of such a magnitude should not be down to pure luck. Lower tile yields for resources means you don't get wild variation, meaning your more likely to achieve balance.

Except it makes bonus resources pretty boring. If the resources were spread evenly across a map, with a little clumping, it would vastly improve early city development, and
thus make the game more fun.

Civ 4 proved that this was possible - gold, silver and gems would give 5-7 gold,
corn would provide 5-6 food and iron 5-6 hammers. Better non-strategics would most likely make the game more fun.

However, since that isn't likely to happen, I still think it would be nice to add more bonus resources just for eye candy purposes. Potatoes and rice would be the same as wheat, but they would add some nice variety that would not unbalance anything.

 

[Camikaze]

Different bonus resources simply for flavour could go quite nicely with the different tile sets.

Civ4 did prove that it's possible to have higher tile yields, but that also went with higher production rates and such. Civ5 has lower 'numbers' in that regard, so it's not really possible for it to just happen with the same effect.