GunPowder ressource like in Civ3 ?

[Danicela]

In Civ3, when you did the Gun Powder technology, the Gun Powder ressource (salpetre?) was revealed on the map.

You needed this ressource to make all the things with advanced weapons : Riflemen, Cavalry, big guns ...

But disappointment in Civ4 : This ressource doesn't longer exist and you can make gun powder units without any ressource ! Like you make basic Warriors ! You don't need anything to make them !

Why ?

I first thought to balance problems ...
But i really think that Civ3's gun powder ressource should come back in Civ4 and that "Riflemen, Cavalry, big guns ..." need it to be built.
Many strategic ressources is always good and fun

 

[warpstorm]

Why? Because the resources to make gunpowder are real common. IRL, resources weren't a big issue and everyone could get their grubby mitts on a rifle and gunpowder if they wanted it.

 

[atreas]

What do you mean, that they are more common than (for example) stone? Just think that the Pyramids were built in one of the very few places in Earth that doesn't have easy access to stone.

 

[warpstorm]

Charcoal, sulphur, and saltpeter. Charcoal can be gotten anywhere there is wood.

Saltpeter (the resource used in Civ3) can be gotten from **** if needed.

Historically, nitre-beds were prepared by mixing manure with either mortar or wood ashes, common earth and organic material such as straw to give porosity to a compost pile typically 1.5 metres high by 2 metres wide by 5 metres long. The heap was usually under a cover from the rain, kept moist with urine, turned often to accelerate the decomposition and leached with water after approximately one year. The liquid containing various nitrates was then converted with wood ashes to potassium nitrates, crystallized and refined for use in gunpowder.

In England, the privilege of manufacturing explosives had been in the hands of the family of John Evelyn, the celebrated diarist, as a crown monopoly since before 1588.

Today, most potassium nitrate comes from the vast deposits of sodium nitrate (NaNO3, nitratine) in the Chilean deserts. The sodium nitrate is purified and then reacted in solution with potassium chloride (KCl, sylvite), from which the less-soluble potassium nitrate is precipitated out.

Sulphur was common enough even in ancient days that it had a special name, brimstone.

 

[sligo]

When playing an islands game, where I had neither iron nor copper, I made a beeline for gunpowder just so I could build defensive units. My archers and horse archers were no match for a neighboring civ that had iron.

Unfortunately, this lack of resourse set me too far behind and though I could keep the invaders off my island, I quickly fell behind in the points race and went from first place to last place - especially when 5 of 6 civs had all declared war on me!

 

[Danicela]

Why? Because the resources to make gunpowder are real common. IRL, resources weren't a big issue and everyone could get their grubby mitts on a rifle and gunpowder if they wanted it.

In Civ3, you had this ressource, why don't you have it in Civ4 ?

It can be very interesting and fun because it gives you more strategic issues.

You'll need to take this ressource to make gunpowder units, like you'll need to take iron to make swordmen, and horses to make knights ...

 

[covok48]

Like what was said before, the resources to make gunpowder were fairly common and thus anyone could form gunpowder units with the right technology.

Second is gameplay balance issues. You might think "strategic issues" make the game fun as long as you're the one who has saltpeper, but if you don't, you're at a clear disadvantage and likely won't last the game. All because of that silly powdered substance that means the difference between pikeman and riflemen. In other words it made the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Granted, if you don't have adequate resources, you won't win. But this change allows you civ not to get crushed because you didn't city spam as fast as the other player. I can't tell you how many times I was head over heels in technology (ie able to build all modern units) only to get wiped out a few turns later by the civ who just learned gunpowder.

 

[Danicela]

Like what was said before, the resources to make gunpowder were fairly common and thus anyone could form gunpowder units with the right technology.

What about Civ3 ?

Second is gameplay balance issues. You might think "strategic issues" make the game fun as long as you're the one who has saltpeper, but if you don't, you're at a clear disadvantage and likely won't last the game. All because of that silly powdered substance that means the difference between pikeman and riflemen. In other words it made the rich richer and the poor poorer.

What about Copper ? Iron ? Horses? etc.
You have to fight for these ressources.
As for all the ressources, if you lose the control of these ressources, you are disadvantaged, so making gunpowder ressource will be the same, except that the history time has changed (=> rebirth.)
Fighting for ressources is a part of the game, and a way to decide fastly who is the most advantaged, to finish faster the game.
There are many ressources in the first history time : Copper Iron Horses
And in the last one : The thing to make tanks, Oil, Uranium ...
But in the middle game, there is nothing, so let at least gunpowder to make at least a middle game ressource.

 

[Evie]

The whole point, I think, is to make sure not ALL units require resources. That way even if you have no resources, you *gasp* are not dead yet.

Which is a very good idea, as far as I'm concerned. Getting screwed out of the game just so that "everything can have a resource" would be one of the most annoying game.

 

[ULTIMATEGP]

Yeah but gunpowder last too long to be a rescource you have to keep. Gunpodwer last from the Rennissance all the way to the end of the game. If you don't get it at the start. You might as well quit.

 

[naf4ever]

Gunpowder is based on sulphur which is extremely common. Also one mod has tried this with not much luck. Thier sulphur resource ends up being so rare that few civs are able to make gunpowder units.

 

[Danicela]

The whole point, I think, is to make sure not ALL units require resources. That way even if you have no resources, you *gasp* are not dead yet.

In reality, everything need something.
Having gunpowder units (not all units) need ressource can be fun.
Finishing the game faster by ressource lack can be interesting too.

Which is a very good idea, as far as I'm concerned. Getting screwed out of the game just so that "everything can have a resource" would be one of the most annoying game.

I didn't say "everything", just first gunpowder units, like in Civ3 it was cool.
I would prefer a game with gunpowder ressource.
For strategic, realistic, and fun reasons.

Yeah but gunpowder last too long to be a rescource you have to keep.

Like Iron and others.
It won't last more than Iron.
If we set gunpowder only to FIRST gunpowder units.

Gunpodwer last from the Rennissance all the way to the end of the game.

No ... we can stop it in the 20th century time, we don't need basic gunpowder after. (like Iron ...)

If you don't get it at the start. You might as well quit.

It won't be more important than Iron ...
It won't be a so big problem.
You can survive without.

Gunpowder is based on sulphur which is extremely common.

What about Civ3?
Sulphur isn't more common than Iron, Copper, Horses ...
It is the same.

Thier sulphur resource ends up being so rare that few civs are able to make gunpowder units.

Huh ?
Sulphur shouldn't be more rare than the other strategic ressources.
I don't understand your problems because the current ressources are in the exactly same case.

Having a limit is also good : It puts more easily an end to a game, the one who has the biggest territory has more chance to have gunpowder, that's better to put a limit in the game on this ressource.

 

[Nefelia]

In Civ3, you had this ressource, why don't you have it in Civ4 ?

It can be very interesting and fun because it gives you more strategic issues.

Just because it was around in Civ 3 is no reason to automatically have it for Civ 4.

As for Iron, Copper, and Horses, they are balanced pretty well. I have never had a game where I had lacked all three resources, and having just one of these resources is enough to give you parity with your opponents.

If I don't have copper, I research Iron Working to find Iron. If I still don't have Iron, I research Harseback Riding to load myself up with Horse archers. I'd much rather have Axemen and Swordsmen, but I'll settle for Horse Archers.

In your suggestion, you are offering an all-or-nothing for Musketmen, Riflemen, Grenadiers, and Cavalry, all of which are early gunpowder units. At that point of the game, Civs with Saltpeter (or whatever) would roll over those without it.

Of course, you could limit the impact of Saltpeter to Musketmen only. That would be fairly balanced, and would just give a slight advantage to Civs with Saltpeter for a very short period of time. Civs without Saltpeter would simply have to rush to one of the more advanced gunpowder units (Cavalry, Riflemen, Grenadier).

 

[ULTIMATEGP]

Anyway all the units from the Renissance to the end except for explorer setteler and worker are classified as gunpowder units.

 

[Danicela]

Just because it was around in Civ 3 is no reason to automatically have it for Civ 4.

Often, when you make a new title of a serie, you have to keep the good and positive points of the past games...

The salpetre was a good idea, and it disappeared, this is bad.

I give the Civ3 argument, to show that the argument that says "The gunpowder is easy to make because the ressources are very common" is bad, because Civ3 showed that it was false.

As for Iron, Copper, and Horses, they are balanced pretty well. I have never had a game where I had lacked all three resources, and having just one of these resources is enough to give you parity with your opponents.

It would be the same for salpetra.

If I don't have copper, I research Iron Working to find Iron. If I still don't have Iron, I research Harseback Riding to load myself up with Horse archers. I'd much rather have Axemen and Swordsmen, but I'll settle for Horse Archers.

In your suggestion, you are offering an all-or-nothing for Musketmen, Riflemen, Grenadiers, and Cavalry, all of which are early gunpowder units. At that point of the game, Civs with Saltpeter (or whatever) would roll over those without it.

It would be the same for gunpowder, i think there is something that is parallele to gunpowder units, something that doesn't need this ressource and that have an equivalent power like for the Horse Archer exemple.
And even if there isn't, it doesn't matter anything.
You MUST have gunpowder to survive.

Gunpowder units aren't 'early'.
If you take a standard begin to the game (=> antiquity),
The gunpowder units are a late late late part of the game.

Of course, you could limit the impact of Saltpeter to Musketmen only. That would be fairly balanced, and would just give a slight advantage to Civs with Saltpeter for a very short period of time.

No ...
To keep realistic things, you must make that all gunpowder units need gunpowder ressource, not only one.
A slight advantage for a very short period of time is useless, the balancement will still survive if you put all gunpowder units to need gunpowder ressource.
You won't lack this ressource except if you are a weak, and if you are weak, the Renaissance is a late part of the game which is a good era to eradicate the weak players.

Civs without Saltpeter would simply have to rush to one of the more advanced gunpowder units (Cavalry, Riflemen, Grenadier).

These units need Gunpowder ressource ...
Rushing to another units would make gunpowder ressource useless.
No, we must put all the gunpowder units as dependent to gunpowder ressource.

Anyway all the units from the Renissance to the end except for explorer setteler and worker are classified as gunpowder units.

Spies too ?
..
No, the advanced weapons don't need salpetra, sulphur, or other gunpowder...
We can consider that the technology is enough high to make gunpowder ressource useless when we reach tanks and other big weapons. (exactly like for Iron that even if used to make tanks, you don't need it to make them in the game, because the technology is high)
Make that first gunpowder units need gunpowder ressource, but not the advanced marines and 20th century's infantry, gunpowder musn't be a so important ressource which is needed for the whole game, but just for a long period, like for horses and iron.

 

[dguichar]

I still haven't played Civ 4, but i agree with you, Danicela... There's a missing high-value resources for middle-game as you've pointed out that there's a lot of resources for opening a finishing.

I'm chilean myself... and the life of salpeter wealth was too short, about fifty years. Well, maybe that's almost one-fourth of chilean independent history... from middle ninetieth century to early twentieth century, when germans developed sintetic salpeter.

Saltpeter value in such time was not only about gunpowder-making, also about crop fields fertilizers.

Sintetic salpeter proved be somewhat toxic by the end of eighties... but there where many other subtitutes for saltpeter as fertilizer that had been developed.

Maybe saltpeter should give a growth advantage to the civilization that posses it, by increasing the fertility of its soils...

Keep civilized,

David

 

[Nefelia]

Often, when you make a new title of a serie, you have to keep the good and positive points of the past games...

The salpetre was a good idea, and it disappeared, this is bad.

The units, tech tree, andfighting system have changed enough that importing an idea straight from Civ III is ill advised.

To keep realistic things, you must make that all gunpowder units need gunpowder ressource, not only one.

So what exactly do you want? Civs with Saltpeter producing Riflemen and Cavalry while Civs without Saltpeter are forced to rely on Macemen and Longbowmen?

My example with Copper, Iron, and Horses was to show that one does not need all three resources to compete militarily. Even in the absence of all three, there are still alternatives (Archers, Longbowmen) that, while inferior, can at least serve to defend your cities and resources.

Once the age of gunpowder units arrive, there are no such alternatives. Introducing the idea of Saltpeter, as you have outlines, will simply kill the game.

 

[covok48]

Just like it killed Civ 3

 

[Danicela]

I still haven't played Civ 4, but i agree with you, Danicela... There's a missing high-value resources for middle-game as you've pointed out that there's a lot of resources for opening a finishing.

Yes, there are many beginning ressources : Copper, Iron, Horses...
Many end ressources : Tank thing, Oil, Uranium...
But nothing for middle game.

I'm chilean myself... and the life of salpeter wealth was too short, about fifty years. Well, maybe that's almost one-fourth of chilean independent history... from middle ninetieth century to early twentieth century, when germans developed sintetic salpeter.

Ok, but I mean that for the game, gunpowder/sulphur/salpeter ressource should be used and needed only in Renaissance, for the first gunpowder units, and not after for the high level infantries and marines and tanks.
The ressource won't be so obsolete because, even if you won't need it strategically to build specific units, it can give good bonuses to the square it is in, and other good ressource bonuses when you make a mine or something like that for gunpowder on it, and having another ressource for these bonuses is interesting. (Having Iron mines is always good, because it gives +2 prod, to the square.)

Saltpeter value in such time was not only about gunpowder-making, also about crop fields fertilizers.

This can explain what i said, like Iron, you'll need this ressource for the first gunpowder units, but not for high level units, but the ressource, like Iron, will be good to harvest because it gives bonuses, with his installation that is built on, to the square.

Sintetic salpeter proved be somewhat toxic by the end of eighties... but there where many other subtitutes for saltpeter as fertilizer that had been developed.

Huh, is there any inconvenients/disadvantages to the uranium ?
In reality, it is also very dangerous, i don't know if uranium is dangerous in the game.
If there isn't any means currently to give "toxic" sides to dangerous ressources like Uranium, i don't think there will be "toxic" sides for Salpetre too, but this is an interesting idea to add to the game.

Maybe saltpeter should give a growth advantage to the civilization that posses it, by increasing the fertility of its soils...

In addition to the ability to make the first gunpowder units, the strategic ressource Salpetra (like Iron, copper etc.) will give food/prod/gold bonus to the square, and the building that is built on will give a bigger bonus too, so when you'll put a citizen on the square to gather these ressources, a bonus will be received.

The units, tech tree, andfighting system have changed enough that importing an idea straight from Civ III is ill advised.

Yes, some things have changed, to make the game BETTER.
But how cutting out a good ressource, that was a part of the game, can be good?
The ressource system has been kept, but the salpetre was banned, there is no reasons because salpeter was good.

So what exactly do you want? Civs with Saltpeter producing Riflemen and Cavalry while Civs without Saltpeter are forced to rely on Macemen and Longbowmen?

There are not powerful units that haven't gunpowder weapons which have the same power in the same period ?
If there is not, i can bring this suggestion : Make an unit that is different, and a little less powerful, but that can fight gunpowder units but that don't need gunpowder because he doesn't fight with gunpowder weapons.
If not, i'll say yes, we have to put a limit in the game, if you are weak, and that your kingdom is tiny, bad, and weak, you'll lose, that is the jungle rule, the rule of the strongest, if you want to survive to go further in the game, you'll have to get Salpetre, Renaissance is a good limit to eradicate the weakest players, the game doesn't need to last 3 years, that is the same for Iron copper and horses, you have it, you survive, you don't have it, you lose.

My example with Copper, Iron, and Horses was to show that one does not need all three resources to compete militarily. Even in the absence of all three, there are still alternatives (Archers, Longbowmen) that, while inferior, can at least serve to defend your cities and resources.

Once the age of gunpowder units arrive, there are no such alternatives.

Maybe we'll have to make these alternatives to balance the game, if you want ... in making new units.

But maybe it should have not other alternatives, to make a selection, and kill the weakest players ?

will simply kill the game.

No ...
You exaggerate.
It won't kill the game, it will make the game better, with an interesting choice brought from Civ3 to make the game realistic and the gunpowder units need gunpowder ressource.
It will maybe kill the weakest players, yes.
But that is normal, for this late time of the game, some players have to go out of the game...

Just like it killed Civ 3

No ....
Gunpowder was a good point in Civ3, not a bad one.
Civ3 wasn't killed.
Civ4 has replaced the 3.
The bad things in Civ3 was the absent multiplayer in the stand alone, and the impossibility to save in the expansions' multiplayers.

 

[Nefelia]

There are not powerful units that haven't gunpowder weapons which have the same power in the same period ?
If there is not, i can bring this suggestion : Make an unit that is different, and a little less powerful, but that can fight gunpowder units but that don't need gunpowder because he doesn't fight with gunpowder weapons.

Thats the problem with your suggestion. You haven't thought it out and fleshed it out.

The strongest pre-gunpowder units are Longbowmen, Crossbowmen, Macemen, and Knights. The units you have suggested should be linked to Saltpeter are Musketmen, Grenadiers, Riflemen, and Cavalry.

While you grant that later gunpowder units (Machinegun, Infantry, Marine, Tank, etc) should not be dependent on Saltpeter, there is too much of a tech gap between pre-gunpowder units and late-gunpwder units. The lifespan of Riflemen, Grenadiers, and Cavalry is too long to make them dependent on Saltpeter. Without equivalent or slightly inferior units, Civs without Saltpeter would be at too much of a disadvantage.

If there is not, i can bring this suggestion : Make an unit that is different

Thats your job. You are the one who suggested the revival of gunpowder resources. You should have examined the present units and thought about the impact of your suggestion before posting it. If you think that this idea could work with the introduction of one or two new units, then go back to the drawing board and create 2 or so appropriate units.

Right now your suggestion has too many flaws for most to take seriously. The only one who really agrees with your gunpowder-resource suggestion hasn't even played Civ IV yet!