Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
I've updated the first post again.
New Buildings: Final Stage
- Thread starter Thalassicus
- Start date
1) suspension bridge was being discussed. I don't think if it is included it should require anything other than river city. (Same with hydro plant). I'm not convinced they should be but wouldn't object as long as nothing is taken out to put them in. If we want to make hydros and suspension exclusive do what solar and nuclear plants do (can't build one if the other is present). A resource requirement makes no sense to either.
2) skyscraper right now doesn't seem like it should have a huge requirement. One sounds fine and would be like the factory. I don't think it is realistic for a large requirement and it doesn't sound that powerful yet.
3) as a random off the wall thought is it possible to have a building require a resource and then 'give it back". That would at least require sequence of building it or limit how many go up at once in a wide empire.
4) a powerful oil based superhighway is interesting.
2) skyscraper right now doesn't seem like it should have a huge requirement. One sounds fine and would be like the factory. I don't think it is realistic for a large requirement and it doesn't sound that powerful yet.
3) as a random off the wall thought is it possible to have a building require a resource and then 'give it back". That would at least require sequence of building it or limit how many go up at once in a wide empire.
4) a powerful oil based superhighway is interesting.
We are talking about Industrial era & onwards, Newton ain't really a modern era scientist. Certainly we have examples in past where rise of religion resulted in scientific development like Islamic golden age. But that would have been reflected better with increase Great People birthrates.
Anyway what I am trying to say is that Firaxis made that option of purchasing great people with faith not because of historical accuracy, but to make ur long time investments worthwhile, which was my whole point in that example.
U do make some investments regarding strategic resources. Settling a city for a strategic resource which increases ur SP cost permanently is a big investment. Similarly fighting a war to gain these resources is also a big investment.
I am not sure about u but many times I fight over other civs just to grab some extra strategic resources to further my plans. Similarly I rush settle sometimes to get extra streategic resources. If that is not the way for u or the players here then we may need to make strategic resources less in number so u have to fight over them.
Making strategic resources obsolete is just like some luxury resources loosing their happiness boost in later eras.
I agree that horses & iron should loose their importance a bit in later eras but they should have their uses just like having extra faith is still handy later on.
Ahriman
Tyrant
They keep a tile yield enhancement and the special building effects for circus/blast furnace. That is sufficient IMO.
Oh yeah, that's fine as long as we make sure you can't get stumped and unable to build spaceship parts. I would honestly remove the requirement from them as well.
In general the following arguments apply to the buildings.
It could be appealing to have a use for iron or horses in the late game. It would be appealing to have a use for oil or coal in the early game by the same logic however.
If we have such a use for early game strategics in the late game, the use needs to be much more powerful than is being described if it's to be a multiple resource requirement. A single resource method ought to suffice instead. In a couple cases, I'm not sure that a resource requirement is justified at all (bridges or hydro plants).
The idea of special bridges does not appeal to me. I already have strong incentives to settle near rivers because of their power on tile improvements earlier in the game. The hydro plant's effect is more useful as such cities are (probably) less likely to have as many hills.
It is not necessary for game play reasons to extend the lifespan of these resources and it's not realistic for historical reasons. The faith-buy argument I think has some merit as failing realism grounds too, but really only in the last two eras of game play (and it does function as additional GP generation rate by providing a second and independent source of GP points). Iron effectively stops being used strategically in the late renaissance with muskets and then rifles, halfway through the game. And horses stop in the mid-industrial era. That's a much larger stretch of imagination to continue their utility globally rather than locally (in the form of tile bonuses and special effects) versus a religion's continued impact in the form of positively influencing science or engineering in the modern day. We could still abstractly think of modern religion, and thus "faith", as nationally shared ideologies or nationalist identities for example where I don't think thinking of iron as steel works because steel hasn't been as strategically important to any modern economy and horses already have their "fun" effect from circuses.
I think an argument is there to make faith-buys available at least slightly sooner (when you can get commerce or rationalism, medieval or renaissance?) such that they simply become too expensive in the atomic-information age from previous buys to be as useful and effectively end their utility in the "modern" era by becoming rarer relative to normal sources of GP generation which should be increasing as cities grow in the late game.
It could be appealing to have a use for iron or horses in the late game. It would be appealing to have a use for oil or coal in the early game by the same logic however.
If we have such a use for early game strategics in the late game, the use needs to be much more powerful than is being described if it's to be a multiple resource requirement. A single resource method ought to suffice instead. In a couple cases, I'm not sure that a resource requirement is justified at all (bridges or hydro plants).
The idea of special bridges does not appeal to me. I already have strong incentives to settle near rivers because of their power on tile improvements earlier in the game. The hydro plant's effect is more useful as such cities are (probably) less likely to have as many hills.
It is not necessary for game play reasons to extend the lifespan of these resources and it's not realistic for historical reasons. The faith-buy argument I think has some merit as failing realism grounds too, but really only in the last two eras of game play (and it does function as additional GP generation rate by providing a second and independent source of GP points). Iron effectively stops being used strategically in the late renaissance with muskets and then rifles, halfway through the game. And horses stop in the mid-industrial era. That's a much larger stretch of imagination to continue their utility globally rather than locally (in the form of tile bonuses and special effects) versus a religion's continued impact in the form of positively influencing science or engineering in the modern day. We could still abstractly think of modern religion, and thus "faith", as nationally shared ideologies or nationalist identities for example where I don't think thinking of iron as steel works because steel hasn't been as strategically important to any modern economy and horses already have their "fun" effect from circuses.
I think an argument is there to make faith-buys available at least slightly sooner (when you can get commerce or rationalism, medieval or renaissance?) such that they simply become too expensive in the atomic-information age from previous buys to be as useful and effectively end their utility in the "modern" era by becoming rarer relative to normal sources of GP generation which should be increasing as cities grow in the late game.
Ahriman
Tyrant
I don't think faith-buy GPs need to be made available sooner; before the late game we want people spending their faith on spreading religions and buying follower buildings/units/etc.
Otherwise I agree.
Otherwise I agree.
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
I did that with coal.
I did that with coal.
Sort of. Coal still isn't used as a strategic resource before factories arrive (or maybe ironclads), just as there's nothing for iron or horses to do in the late game.
Instead, you get more production and a better blast furnace, which is just what stables and blast furnaces do in the late game. I think that's a fair deal for the tile to be valuable longer, and especially to allow you to find it sooner for later development but it's not the same as being able to trade it or using it to build buildings or units in a depleting strategic way.
Or requiring multiple coals to have some powerful early game effect.
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
A different resource we could do this with is coal, though it's used almost exclusively to make electricity, while steel has a diverse range of uses.
I'm not sure that's appealing either. The limited amount of coal for industry is pretty steep already and none of these are really coal based suggestions. I think it's probably fine if we really want to use a resource limitation to just use one per building, with maybe oil in the picture (although a superhighway apparently isn't that appealing yet?), maybe aluminum (airport), and it sounds like probably iron (skyscraper).
Unless we're making these much more powerful, one per is fine, with the warehouse/hydro/bridge being just a modest upkeep cost and limited to coast or rivers.
Unless we're making these much more powerful, one per is fine, with the warehouse/hydro/bridge being just a modest upkeep cost and limited to coast or rivers.
As far as the buildings themselves.
A networking effect is appealing on airports (with a strategic limitation) and/or on warehouses. If it can be done. Modifying total trade route income is appealing if that's an option (that would benefit wider empires more in two ways though). Otherwise they're basically gold based improvements, adding a flat amount of gold, gold per pop, gold per resource. I'd prefer something wide-based for both. They're both like fax machines in real life.
Superhighway could be something like +1 gold per improvement/+2 per village?
Skyscraper sounds fine at 10% food (but that's not that powerful to be multiple iron I think. 10% plus the med lab growth speed might be, if it replaces the med lab).
A networking effect is appealing on airports (with a strategic limitation) and/or on warehouses. If it can be done. Modifying total trade route income is appealing if that's an option (that would benefit wider empires more in two ways though). Otherwise they're basically gold based improvements, adding a flat amount of gold, gold per pop, gold per resource. I'd prefer something wide-based for both. They're both like fax machines in real life.
Superhighway could be something like +1 gold per improvement/+2 per village?
Skyscraper sounds fine at 10% food (but that's not that powerful to be multiple iron I think. 10% plus the med lab growth speed might be, if it replaces the med lab).
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
What if we combine these ideas onto just 1 building, the Airport:
Airport
Uses Aluminum
+X
(migration)
+Y
(pleasure trips)
+Z
per (business trips)
I think airports are probably the building that deserve inclusion the most, and we can better ensure new stuff has unique effects if we focus on one building.
I find it ironic that we have paratroopers, but not airfields. There's an "airlift" true/false flag in the building files, but I doubt it works, or someone would have put out an airport mod years ago.
Airport
Uses Aluminum
+X
(migration)+Y
(pleasure trips)+Z
per (business trips)I think airports are probably the building that deserve inclusion the most, and we can better ensure new stuff has unique effects if we focus on one building.
I find it ironic that we have paratroopers, but not airfields. There's an "airlift" true/false flag in the building files, but I doubt it works, or someone would have put out an airport mod years ago.
Ahriman
Tyrant
My problem with this is; what gameplay need are we trying to fill here? It sounds like we're saying "hey, we could have an airport, now lets figure out what it is for".
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
What gameplay need did religion fill?
Civilization is about representing the real world in a game, and real-world concepts can inspire new gameplay effects, expanding the boundaries of the game. The purpose of the game is to have fun. Religion didn't really fill any pressing gameplay need, but it made the game more fun, and we can do the same with new buildings.
Civilization is about representing the real world in a game, and real-world concepts can inspire new gameplay effects, expanding the boundaries of the game. The purpose of the game is to have fun. Religion didn't really fill any pressing gameplay need, but it made the game more fun, and we can do the same with new buildings.
Tarquelne
Follower of Tytalus
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2001
- Messages
- 3,718
I don't see any particular gap they fill either. OTOH, if Airports use aluminum then they create swords or plowshares sort of trade-off.
mitsho
Deity
I can see the gameplay argument for a lot of things. But Airports? They are a staple of civ as temples are, or barracks...
As for the proposed effect, that would be a boost for Tall, the aluminium cost seems strange though with that effect, probably depends on the upkeep cost how much worth it is.
Would the population vanish again if I sell the building? Will I get another pop if I sell-and-then-build again?
As for the proposed effect, that would be a boost for Tall, the aluminium cost seems strange though with that effect, probably depends on the upkeep cost how much worth it is.
Would the population vanish again if I sell the building? Will I get another pop if I sell-and-then-build again?
![[to_xp]Gekko](https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/74/74677.jpg?1475248346){kind=avatar}
[to_xp]Gekko
QCT junkie
can't it just give some boost to air units so it's unique instead of filler?
I find it ironic that we have paratroopers, but not airfields. There's an "airlift" true/false flag in the building files, but I doubt it works, or someone would have put out an airport mod years ago.
Well,it wouldn't hurt testing it,considering that there is the possiblity this file was simply ignored by modders .
Ahriman
Tyrant
One thing that might be an interesting military effect would be to have a boost for your air units if they are fighting within X tiles of a city with an airport.
We already have far too many gold-for-pop buildings, I would vote against adding another. They are leading to incredibly high gold income, particularly for tall empires. The mint and Stock exchange are in dire need of a nerf.
But lets be careful here; MOAR isn't always better. I think the idea of adding things where there isn't a pressing gameplay need should be something we should be very careful about. That isn't to say it necessarily shouldn't be done, but we shouldn't just shrug it off.
We already have far too many gold-for-pop buildings, I would vote against adding another. They are leading to incredibly high gold income, particularly for tall empires. The mint and Stock exchange are in dire need of a nerf.
But lets be careful here; MOAR isn't always better. I think the idea of adding things where there isn't a pressing gameplay need should be something we should be very careful about. That isn't to say it necessarily shouldn't be done, but we shouldn't just shrug it off.
