How would you like resources to be represented in CIV 7?

How would you like resources to be represented in Civ 7?

  • Crops and animals restricted to their initial location. Sources of ore depleted and prospected.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    24
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,629
Location
Texas
> Military, CIV units are fixed to one common by era for each class (melee infantry, light cavalry, etc) and one (or rarely two) UU replacing a common one for a whole civ.
More UU for each civ, more units by class on the same era, additional units linked to districts, governments, resources and religions, customizable equipment and armament, levy and professional units, etc. All these are possible to implement into a 4X game.
I agree with some of this specifically linking some UUs to governments, resources, religions, city states etc.
I don't necessarily care for every civ having two or more UUs. For some I think it be too difficult to find for example what do the Zulu have besides the Impi, unless we go into civilian units?

I also don't necessarily care for more units of the same class every era, besides slinger into archer in Ancient. It's bad enough upgrading every era such as Warrior to Swordsman, and then to Man-At Arms, especially playing with Gaul. :crazyeye:

> Factions, inner changing politics like dynasties and parties, linked to policies and ideologies, interacting with the affinity of each city (districts). Factions and population is the more shallow, irrelevant and unrealistic part of CIV when in real history was what most leaders dedicated the more. Meanwhile in CIV minigames about collect paintings and novels have more impact and detail.
I'd love it if we could change leaders every time you switch governments, but I think that's unlikely to happen. That being said I do hope that governments are even more impactful. For example if you choose to establish a Monarchy you can propose a Royal Marriage by marrying off a "noble" citizen to another civ you have an alliance with for enhanced diplomatic relationships.

> Cities, historical buildings were not limited to fixed grouping, eras, techs, terrain, etc. They were changing alot from the new techs, ideologies, economy, enviroment and population needs. Mods for CIV games even before districs have a lot of more things to attend on your cities.
I quite like the district and building in district ideas. I don't think that most districts of the same type should be the same. I hope that for future iterations each district gets some sort of alternate buildings to choose from. For example a Commercial Hub in one city might build a market for gold, but another will have a caravanserai for adding extra trade routes.

> Technology, the fixed paths of technologies, requirements and sequences is artificialy accommodated to an outdated vision of "western progress". Time ago was 100% possible for Firaxis to implement either alternative tech trees or a more flexible and variated common one, this is nothing difficult for a 4X game and would add a lot of flavor to civs, but we dont have even a single branch of techs exclusive for Native American, Central Asiatic, etc.
As much as I'd like this I'm not sure how this would work especially if we continue down the trend of achieving a singular goal of reaching certain milestones for a Scientific Victory. I do at leas think a culture "tree" is much easier to accomplish something similar.
 

Zaarin

Diplomatic Attaché to Londo Mollari
Joined
May 14, 2016
Messages
11,280
Location
Babylon 5
> Factions, inner changing politics like dynasties and parties, linked to policies and ideologies, interacting with the affinity of each city (districts). Factions and population is the more shallow, irrelevant and unrealistic part of CIV when in real history was what most leaders dedicated the more. Meanwhile in CIV minigames about collect paintings and novels have more impact and detail.
I'd be all for this, and Endless Space 2 is a good example of this idea at work in a 4X game.

> Cities, historical buildings were not limited to fixed grouping, eras, techs, terrain, etc. They were changing alot from the new techs, ideologies, economy, enviroment and population needs. Mods for CIV games even before districs have a lot of more things to attend on your cities.
I think districts were a step in the right direction, but I do think there has to be some caution here. I'm primarily a builder, and even I don't want to see Civ turn into a complete city builder.

> Technology, the fixed paths of technologies, requirements and sequences is artificialy accommodated to an outdated vision of "western progress". Time ago was 100% possible for Firaxis to implement either alternative tech trees or a more flexible and variated common one, this is nothing difficult for a 4X game and would add a lot of flavor to civs, but we dont have even a single branch of techs exclusive for Native American, Central Asiatic, etc.
This is a great idea, but I don't see a practicable way to implement it. Also, if the current model adheres to "Western Progress," this model has some suspicious traits of essentialism.

I'd love it if we could change leaders every time you switch governments, but I think that's unlikely to happen. That being said I do hope that governments are even more impactful. For example if you choose to establish a Monarchy you can propose a Royal Marriage by marrying off a "noble" citizen to another civ you have an alliance with for enhanced diplomatic relationships.
I don't want to see leaders change, but I do think implementing something like Endless Space 2's heroes as faction heads and nobles would be neat--like more fleshed out governors.
 

BuchiTaton

King
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
701
Having played board games since the 1960s (the original Avalon-Hill games a then Simulations Publications/Poltroon Press games) I will repeat what I've said elsewhere that making a computer game into a board game shows an utter lack of appreciation for what can be done with computer games. The complexity that would make a board game practically unplayable (take a look at the Europa series of WWII board games for a historical example of Gargantuan Complexity run wild) can be handled by the computer and made practically invisible to the gamer - IF you start out recognizing that the computer game has access to resources of information-handling that in a board game have to be dumped onto the gamer.
Still CIV series sells as a simple game when from MODs we know it could be much more.
People talk about the trend in the game industry about new games being easier and more casual, CIV6 with colorfull cartoon design, poor AI and the policy of "MOD it yourself" tell us that CIV dont really need to be much more that a digital board game.

When Copper is visible on the map, each Copper Resource worked after, say, Bronze Working Tech provides +1 Religion OR +1 Culture (+1 Religion only after you have a founded Religion - it adds pyrotechnics and fumigants to your ceremonies, but only after you have established ceremonies)
I use Bronze Working because the use of Tin-Copper alloy Bronze comes at about the same time as earliest indications of the use of Sulphur as a fumigant, and it presupposes the ability to 'cook' or smelt copper ores and pyrites to release Sulphur in small but useful quantities.
So Copper mines produce Sulfur when you have Bronze tech or is the resulting Religion/Culture yield representing it?
Anyway, in the first case produce from copper a second resource that only gives Religion/Culture just add a step for the same bonus. In the second scenario Copper had ritual value by itself since before Bronze working.

In the early Medieval (beginning of the 9th Century CE IRL) with Alchemy Tech Sulphur becomes visible on the map as a Deposit of gleaming and smoking yellow. The deposits will be located within the radius of action of Volcanoes, active or dormant, can be worked with Mines. IF worked before Gunpowder is discovered (which, if the game allows an Alternate Tech Tree instead of the Euro-centric Tech they've followed so far, would allow primitive Gunpowder at this same time as a Pyrotechnic additive to ranged weapons [fire arrows for crossbows and bows, catapults, etc] giving them a bonus attack factor) the Sulphur gives +2 Science and +1 Food (not really 'Food', but more population because the medicinal use of Sulphur lowers the death rate, increasing the population)
This is the regular CIV model.

With Gunpowder Tech (Late Medieval ina Euro-centric Tech Tree), Sulphur becomes a Resource for gunpowder Units - but since it can still be obtained without Deposits, you can accumulate 1 'point' of Sulphur to build units every turn for every 2 Copper Deposits worked, but the cost of the gunpowder unit is increased by 25%. The gamer doesn't have to calculate this - he/she just knows that it's taking Forever for his copper workings to get enough Sulphur to build one Bombard, while his neighbor with the bright yellow deposits around Mount Tahoma is cranking out Bombards and Arquebusiers like crazy.
Strategic resources are supposed to promote player actions to obtain it by trade, expansion or war, so INTERACTION with other players and the map.
Still if the objetive is to not limit the production of units just give natural Sulfur a huge discount to gunpowder units, not even the game need to calculate that.

In the Industrial Era, with Industrial Chemistry, new 'deposits' of Sulphur become visible as the salt dome deposits become available, but at about the same time smokeless powder is developed and the (Magazine) Rifleman and (Modern) Artillery units no longer require Sulphur. But, each point of Sulphur per turn now provides bonuses to Food production on Farms and Plantations (Fertilizers) and a bonus to Production in Factories (Sulphur in industrial processes of all kinds).
Obsolescence for new units is the regular system. Bonus for food works but is kind of redundant with its base yield and similitud to Niter role.

Now ERA DESIGN, Sulfur even if not 100% historical become in another reason expand/trade for resources in the colonial time of the European Colonial Empires and the Asiatic Gunpowder Dynasties. For later eras build Industrial districts that produce synthetic Sufur, Niter, Dyes and Rubber is a good way to represent how colonial resources were remplazed by the industrial version and actually see your cities growth to metropolis on the proper eras.
By late game sulfur is still usefull by their yield/bonus, but now the free tiles are needed to serch for oil, uranium, aluminum and titanium.
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
8,266
Location
Alberta, Canada
A lot of interesting discussion here, and it has helped me form my own opinions on how I wish resources could work, and what needs improving in the civ series w.r.t. resources and the map.

I don't like the idea of resources being exhausted, because ultimately this is a game, and I think that would get extremely frustrating. I don't think resources that you rely on disappearing ever "gets fun", unless you're playing something like an RTS, where base building and rapid resource extraction is part of the game loop for relatively short games, and resource exhaustion is a sort of "time limit" that a turtling player can use to force attrition. Likewise, I don't think having a monopoly, strategic, or trade advantage disappear because you have a resource that suddenly disappears, or becomes irrelevant, common, or trivial with a technology would be fun either.
 
Last edited:

aieeegrunt

Emperor
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Messages
1,180
The way resources are handled in Civ6 after the basic game is frankly unneccessary overcomplication, the way it worked in the base game was more than fine

One Brain Bug that has been in Civ for several games now is the idea of iron being a critical resource, which is dumb from both a gameplay and a role play perspective and hilariously bad history

Iron is pretty fracking abundant, and everyone moved to it as soon as they had the neccessary smithing knowledge

It was the ores to make bronze that were more rare, and led to a Bronze Age of haves and have nots.
 
Top Bottom