resource limits done another way.

[wolfblue]

one thing i like about civ5 more than civ4 is the idea that resources are somewhat limited.

however i dont think that civ5 did it right in causing an absolute limit of how many units could be built using x resource.

I think a much better way would be that once you have access to the resource you can make use of it... however the more you have the cheaper units/buildings etc reliant on the resource become.

in other words it sets off something like supply and demand if you have 1 iron swordsmen are X cost but each additional iron resource lowers the cost of swordsmen by some percentage (say 5% just for the sake of argument)

other possibilities would be that each resource allows you to have 1 or 2 in production at a time but does not limit the total amount produced. thus if you have 1 resource you can slowly pump out swordsmen one at a time but if you want 2 cities building at the same time you have to find additional resources.

The reason i suggest this is that resources are usually limited by supply flow (how much can be provided on a time to time basis. not absolute amounts (at least not in the short term)

this would also make trade much more fluid. the cost of iron may go up as civilizations go to war for example. in fact a civ that has lots of iron can make a good buck providing iron to two warring civs (at the possible cost of diplomacy)

I simply think that both civ4 and civ5 have this wrong and this idea would be better in game.

course we all have good ideas right... what do you think?

 

[fdgsgds]

I like it. Maybe if Civ6 isn't dumbed-down like Civ5 was, these rules should be included, as they're a bit more detailed than either of the Civs.

 

[neptune2000]

I like the idea of having resources affect build speeds.

However I think the current system is somewhat elegant. Units are more valuable and "last longer", so there'a a hard cap on their number. The supply flow you mentioned is modeled in the number of units that you can maintain over time given the flow of resources. Your suggestions affect the production of units but not their maintenance. I could just trade for a bunch of horses or iron and quickly build a small army of units. Well once they're built I don't need to worry about keeping those horses/iron; I have my army.

I suppose there's the current combat penalty when you don't have a resource, but I don't know that if would be enough as is to balance it out. Perhaps the gpt maintenance could go up drastically if a resource wasn't available (black market aluminum?)

 

[dragonmetal]

Another way to handle resource limits is to make each non-renewable resource plot have a set amount of points (say 10,000 for a decent oil plot). You put an oil well improvement on that plot, and depending on tech, can take out so many points each turn until you exhaust the well. Each military unit requires so many points each turn. You can also put points into a reserve in case you lose oil plots in a war or wells dry up and suddenly you need more oil. If you run out of oil points then units such as battleships or tanks become immobile. Run out of iron points and you can no longer build units made of steel and so on.

With this system, I would add future techs like bio-fuels/bio-polymers and synthetic lubricants/fuels so that you can maintain a modern military/economy in game once the oil runs out. You could also add water injection tech to the modern era to squeeze a little more oil out of plots that have dried up. I've always wanted a resource depletion system like this in Civ.

 

[BelmontHalo]

I've never had a problem with resources in civ5 which is disappointing. I've only had to worry in the very beginning while looking for Iron. It's disappointing that they put this system in then made them next to useless. Having to fight or trade for resources was a fun part of 4.

I don't see how Iron can just become obsolete after the renaissance. It also doesn't make any sense that some units take no resources at all. I guess mechanized infantry operate on the power of little children's wishes.

I changed a lot of the unit costs myself but haven't been able to complete a late era game without crashing to test them out. I'm wondering if the computer is programmed to stop building once it runs out of a resource and start trying to find/trade for it.

I'd like to see them add some buildings that take resources and make them into other things like RoM had in Civ4, rather than tie more than a small bonus directly to the resource. Or buildings that provide bonuses or boost production of things if you have those resources. They also need to add more types. I can't believe there's no stone or copper at least. The other thing I liked about civ4 resources was that they did give you some kind of bonus just for having them. It's like they took a big step backwards there. Also I forget about 5, but I liked how in 4 you could cut off roads and trade routes to stop the flow of resources which would prevent them from building things there. I think in 5 they still get it with no roads at all as long as it's in their territory and improved.

 

[MikeJep]

How about making resources and production separate. << Civ should have had this a long time ago!

Material (resources) what is mined and worked from the land and production is produced by workers(in the city) and laborers in factories. The more of the strategic resource you own, the cheaper (in terms of materials and production) the units/ buildings/ wonders are.

 

[hardcore_gamer]

Unlimited units would make the map too clustered as you build more and more units so I don't like the idea.

I personally think resources are one of the few things that were actually pulled off fairly well right from the start in Civ 5. No longer will you see huge mega armies consisting of 80 tanks, 120 mech infantry units, 30 AA trucks, 30 fighters and 80 stealth bombers.

 

[Tokira]

In my opinion this sounds like a good idea. On the other hand the resources could also have some kind of productivity.

For example: If you have a 2 horse and 2 iron tile, they would produce 2 horses and 2 iron every turn and the produced resources would be stored. At some point the mines/horses could run out (and possibly a new source of the resource that had ran out would pop on the map?). That way the unit spam wouldn't be infinite, but also not as limited as it is now. At the moment the 2 iron tiles are just sad.. 2 iron units produced per owned source of resource isn't very good in my opinion :/

 

[tylor]

Resource model in CiV is one of few things I really liked. Besides other things, it limits unit spam.
I would like this model to be used more intensive. For example, to have different resource -consuming buildings (like factory), may be even for all resources - gem cutter's that consumes, rough jewels, smokehouse that consumes cows, etc.

 

[Babri]

Actually in early eras there are units which require the same resource & force the player to make some interesting decisions like creating swordmen or catapults, but after that there is no such competition of resources among different units & buildings. An easy way to solve this would be :-
- Constructing Stables & Forage require horses & iron respectively, make them more powerful to balance it out.
- Knights should require iron as well as horse, make their strength a bit higher.
- Modern Armour & Jet Fighters etc should require oil.
In this way strategic resources would become much more useful & nations could fight with each other to get them.

 

[alpaca]

Resource model in CiV is one of few things I really liked. Besides other things, it limits unit spam.
I would like this model to be used more intensive. For example, to have different resource -consuming buildings (like factory), may be even for all resources - gem cutter's that consumes, rough jewels, smokehouse that consumes cows, etc.

Uh no, it doesn't. If that was the intention, there wouldn't be units that require no resources. The intention was to limit the number of high-quality troops, and that failed (mostly) because 6 units is an army in this game

 

[Camikaze]

I don't really think it was intended to limit armies so much as make resources more important. And they are now more important. The limitation of units is present in the game to an extent, but the true improvement IMO lies in the fact that resources now have a much more tangible value.