Resources

[HKer]

In the CIV 4, once you get a iron mine which can provide unlimited resource (a very little chance the resources would be exhausted) to your civilization to produce unlimited units eg. swordman. The CIV 5 might be improved that eg. a iron mine can only supply limited resource to produce limited "iron-base" units, let say 5 units. If you want to produce more than 5 "iron-base" units, you need to get another iron mine. I think it is a very good improvement of the CIV 5. I have a suggestion that I think the resources capacity should not be set at the same level, they should be something like, "little", "normal", "large" and "huge". Let say, the little iron mine (resource) can only support to produce 2 iron-base units........and the huge mine(resource) can support 10 iron-base units. Sure, the huge and the little resources should not be occured in the game very often. I think it will add more stratrgics to the game.

 

[Tylerryan79]

I also like the limit, and i think its because of the one unit per tile.
Your idea of different sizes of resources for more output isnt a bad one. I think they may have it so that by each era youd be able to produce slightly more units from your one iron. But then again who knows what they will do?

 

[Shurdus]

In the CIV 4, once you get a iron mine which can provide unlimited resource (a very little chance the resources would be exhausted) to your civilization to produce unlimited units eg. swordman. The CIV 5 might be improved that eg. a iron mine can only supply limited resource to produce limited "iron-base" units, let say 5 units. If you want to produce more than 5 "iron-base" units, you need to get another iron mine. I think it is a very good improvement of the CIV 5. I have a suggestion that I think the resources capacity should not be set at the same level, they should be something like, "little", "normal", "large" and "huge". Let say, the little iron mine (resource) can only support to produce 2 iron-base units........and the huge mine(resource) can support 10 iron-base units. Sure, the huge and the little resources should not be occured in the game very often. I think it will add more stratrgics to the game.

While this is interesting I feel like it is a bit of a non-issue. The issue is not that iron mines do not produce enough iron for more than X units. Any iron deposit large enough to be noted on the map can most likely supply all the armies in the world with whatever they need, at least in the earlier era's.

I feel they chose to limit the amount of units for

• strategic depth;
• make iron units less dominant;
• reflect the fact that not only supplies need to be made, but they also need to be kept in good shape.

Considering all this it makes little sense that small iron deposits are less valuable since the mine being small would not prevent any nation from harvesting everything they can.

So yeah, nice original idea but I do not think it would work or that it is better than the current system.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

While this is interesting
Considering all this it makes little sense that small iron deposits are less valuable since the mine being small would not prevent any nation from harvesting everything they can.

That's true, but some iron/coal/whatever is easier to get to or of better quality than others. I could see some mines being more productive even if the resources aren't totally expolited. I also can see a technology or event turning Iron(5) mines into Iron(7) mines or whatever.

 

[Shurdus]

That's true, but some iron/coal/whatever is easier to get to or of better quality than others. I can see a technology or event turning Iron(5) mines into Iron(7) mines or whatever.

Good point. I had not considered that.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Good point. I had not considered that.

The more I think about the more it might be a neat idea. Instead of adding production, maybe rail access to a resource will add to the Units (?) a resource available from the mine.

 

[Ahriman]

Researching technologies could certainly increase the yields of resources, either directly or by allowing more advanced improvements on them that had higher resource yields.

But I see no need for varying resource yield by tile; its just needless complexity and confusion and it doesn't add anything. It just makes it harder to value the resource at a glance (is that a High iron or a Low Iron?). The yield of your iron mines could change over time (5->6->7) but its much simpler if all your iron resources at any given point in time are identical.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

You might have a point in that it makes things needlessly complicated. I don't know that it's be that hard to see how valuable a resource is though. How do you see how big a city is at a glance?

 

[snowlyon]

Researching technologies could certainly increase the yields of resources, either directly or by allowing more advanced improvements on them that had higher resource yields.

But I see no need for varying resource yield by tile; its just needless complexity and confusion and it doesn't add anything. It just makes it harder to value the resource at a glance (is that a High iron or a Low Iron?). The yield of your iron mines could change over time (5->6->7) but its much simpler if all your iron resources at any given point in time are identical.

agreed, especially for a 'vanilla' game. I could however see this done as a mod (if possible)~

 

[Jopo]

I think this might be a great addition to the game, no longer can you supply your entire armies from one iron/copper/coal mine, especially coal and oil which are energy resources should be limited. I think cities too should be made so, that a larger city consumes more coal or oil for its powerplant than a smaller city and yes, technology should definetely influence how much resources you get from a mine, say steam engine introduces steam driven water pumps to mines allowing better mining techniques and other techniques, like explosives or gunpowder should influence mine yields, after all modern mines yield many times more resources than ancient mines, correct?
I think though, that 5 units per resource might be a bit low, but that can always be modded later I guess, I´d say something like a 100 units per resource or so.

Historically the iron ore mines of northern Sweden supplied the iron ore for the entire German army during world war 2, that´s more than a 100 divisions easily from one source of iron, thousands of tanks and millions of rifles and guns, I´d say that´s MORE than 5 units

I think Rise of Mankind mod has it good with multiple "levels" of resources, you have RAW MATERIALS like IRON, COPPER AND COAL from which you can make resources of the "next level of production" like STEEL (Iron and COAL), no other resources were yet in the mod but there could be several, like LEATHER (COW or PIG), BRONZE (copper and tin) etc. from these goods you can make PRODUCTS like SWORDS (Iron or bronze or steel), Leather armour (leather) or Iron armour (Iron or steel or bronze, better metal would give better combat strength) or MACHINE PARTS or ALCOHOL (with wheat or rice or apples etc.) the list goes on... ...and from different products you can make REFINED GOODS like CARS (engines, steel, machine parts), Cell phones (plastic and electronics), computers (plastic and microchips etc.) etc. etc. and all products could be required by units or buildings or by the people.
I think it should be so that in modern times people EXPECT more, they need more resources to be happy, not just food anymore, but cell phones, computers, luxury goods etc. Instead of one happy face resource, a population point would need two or three happy face resources to be happy or just content.
Modern troops too would need more resources, like AMMUNITION (in RoM) and BULLET PROOF VESTS or MODERN ARMOUR and ASSAULT RIFLES or just WEAPONS or GUNS

Also RECYCLING could extend the amount of resources available, for example the Germans probably melted their wrecked and old tanks for steel and made them into new ones, so perhaps the resource system should be such that every turn the mine would produce enough iron for 10 units, you could build 10 units per turn based on iron (or 100, depending on where the resource level is set), the existing units would use recycled iron for maintenance, so they would not need any new iron, I mean does a legion need new swords EVERY TURN or why could they not just melt the old swords down and make new swords out of them, they already have the iron and recycled steel is as good as new?

 

[Ahriman]

that´s more than a 100 divisions easily from one source of iron

Who says its only 1 source of iron? Maybe there are 2 iron resources there, or more.
If you want an earth map where say the middle east has tons more oil, you don't need to have a "Very High" oil resource, you just place more oil resources there.

I think Rise of Mankind mod has it good with multiple "levels" of resources, you have RAW MATERIALS like IRON, COPPER AND COAL from which you can make resources of the "next level of production" like STEEL (Iron and COAL), no other resources were yet in the mod but there could be several, like LEATHER (COW or PIG), BRONZE (copper and tin) etc. from these goods you can make PRODUCTS like SWORDS (Iron or bronze or steel), Leather armour (leather) or Iron armour (Iron or steel or bronze, better metal would give better combat strength) or MACHINE PARTS or ALCOHOL (with wheat or rice or apples etc.) the list goes on... ...and from different products you can make REFINED GOODS like CARS (engines, steel, machine parts), Cell phones (plastic and electronics), computers (plastic and microchips etc.) etc. etc. and all products could be required by units or buildings or by the people.
Modern troops too would need more resources, like AMMUNITION (in RoM) and BULLET PROOF VESTS or MODERN ARMOUR and ASSAULT RIFLES or just WEAPONS or GUNS

Ugh.... far too complex for the main game. Civ is aimed at casual play, not this level of micromanagement. Sounds like no fun at all.
For a mod, sure.

I mean does a legion need new swords EVERY TURN or why could they not just melt the old swords down and make new swords out of them, they already have the iron and recycled steel is as good as new?

Trying to distinguish between resource cost from construction and maintenance serves no purpose. The system they're implementing - one iron gives enough to build and maintain (hypthoetically) 5 legions - avoids such a distinction but works just fine.

 

[Ddude97]

I think though, that 5 units per resource might be a bit low, but that can always be modded later I guess, I´d say something like a 100 units per resource or so.

Historically the iron ore mines of northern Sweden supplied the iron ore for the entire German army during world war 2, that´s more than a 100 divisions easily from one source of iron, thousands of tanks and millions of rifles and guns, I´d say that´s MORE than 5 units

Also RECYCLING could extend the amount of resources available, for example the Germans probably melted their wrecked and old tanks for steel and made them into new ones, so perhaps the resource system should be such that every turn the mine would produce enough iron for 10 units, you could build 10 units per turn based on iron (or 100, depending on where the resource level is set), the existing units would use recycled iron for maintenance, so they would not need any new iron, I mean does a legion need new swords EVERY TURN or why could they not just melt the old swords down and make new swords out of them, they already have the iron and recycled steel is as good as new?

Civ5 is decreasing the amount of units, not increasing/keeping the same.
I do agree to some extent with the recycling, but I think this is being implemeted in that, if the unit using the rescource dies, you can build another unit using the same rescource, or basically, you can up to X amount of units using that type of rescource, if you number of units is below max supported (X) for any reason, you can build more units using that rescource. Mind you I'm just gathering from other places, rumours that might have been confirmed or denied since I last read, so don't quote me.

 

[attackfighter]

Note that a single turn in civ is equivalent to 1-50 years, meaning the resources required for maintence would be equal to the initial cost of the unit (assuming the unit's equipment would need to be replaced/repaired atleast once over the span of those years).

This is in regards to the notion that a unit could have seperate 'build' and 'maintenance' costs - realistically they shouldn't.

I think it should be so that in modern times people EXPECT more, they need more resources to be happy

North Koreans are probably worse off than your average Bohemian burgher was, yet Bohemian burghers were more prone to rebellion

There are many people all over the world who're content to just have enough food to eat, and there're many more who've accepted even less. I think man's expectation for resource correlates with the availability of those resources

Also we've become more efficient at exploiting resources over the years; a single luxury resource in the middle ages could maybe produce to keep one citizen content, but in the modern era it'd be produced in much higher numbers and at a much better quality, therefore surpassing any 'rising expectations' and perhaps even producing enough to keep two citizens content.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I heartily approve of a system that ensures that 1 resource deposit is not sufficient for all your empire's needs. A lot of wars & trade is often not about acquiring a resource you don't have at all, but acquiring *enough* of a resource to meet all your needs. For example, the US has sufficient oil within its territory to be represented on a Civ map, yet how much of modern politics is driven by the need of the US to acquire sufficient oil to meet its needs? In a Civ3 or Civ4 game this simply wouldn't occur.
That said I'm 50:50 on the variable sized resource suggestion. I mean, to extend the oil analogy, the US oil deposits are small, wheras I'd say the oil deposits of the Middle East are significantly larger-something I don't think could be adequately represented by simply having multiple deposits in the Middle East. Still, I can see where Ahriman is coming from in regards to ease of play. If there was a way that different sized deposits could be done in a way that was easy for a player to see just from looking at the screen, then I'd be for it. Otherwise, I'd have to go for the gameplay trumps realism argument !

Aussie.

 

[Ahriman]

the US oil deposits are small, wheras I'd say the oil deposits of the Middle East are significantly larger-something I don't think could be adequately represented by simply having multiple deposits in the Middle East.

Can I ask why not?

2 oil deposits in Texas, 2 in Iraq, 3 in Saudi Arabia, 1 in Qatar/UAE, 2 in Iran, 1 in Nigeria and one offshore, 1 in Venezuela, 1 in Canada, 1 in Romania, 1 in North Sea, 2 in Caucasus, 1 in Indonesia etc.

Scaled by map size of course.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Well I am going based on most of the Earth Maps I've seen, & played on, in Civ4, but I guess it *might* be do-able on the biggest maps. Might have to go back to an Earth Map & check it out!

Still, beyond the little we know, it will be very interesting how they deal with resources in Civ5!

Aussie.

 

[Che Guava]

I've always been intrigued by the idea of 'manufactured goods' resources in civ: turning raw materials into something you could trade on the market, something like they had in colonization, IIRC. If you have two sugar resources, you could build a distillery and convert one of those into the much more lucrative "rum' resource to keep your populace liquored and happy. In modern times you could produce 'automobiles' with a factory (or corporation?) and iron, but could support one less iron-based unit. I suppose the difficulty would be in 'toggling' that resource option during war-time, but I think it would definitely add more flavour to colonialism and industrial trade.

 

[Pazyryk]

Nice to see a non-Steam topic.

I do like the change too. One good thing is that bronze, iron, oil, etc., should no longer be all-or-nothing. In civ4, you either have unlimited axemen or none at all. Here, maybe your civ can support 5 and your neighbors can support 10 and another can support 15. The variable resources is a great idea because you could distribute this out a little more smoothly. So maybe most civs would have 2 or 3 of a resource type (allowing at least a couple of each unit type) while a few civs would have an excess of that resource (enough to trade away).

I also wonder if the trade system will allow partial trades of a resource. Even if an iron mine always produces exactly 5 irons (enough for 5 swordsmen), maybe you will be able to trade just one of those irons for a single horse (so allowing your neighbor to build one swordsman so that you can build one horseman). I also hope the luxury resources work in similar way. One silk plantation gives 5 silks, which can give happiness to five cities or could be individually traded away.

 

[Ahriman]

Even if an iron mine always produces exactly 5 irons (enough for 5 swordsmen), maybe you will be able to trade just one of those irons for a single horse (so allowing your neighbor to build one swordsman so that you can build one horseman).

I would be amazed if it didn't work this way.

I also hope the luxury resources work in similar way.

Already announced; They don't.

Which is for the best, because of how luxury goods work. There's no good way to allocate them across cities in finite amounts that isn't either MM-intensive or non-optimal.

This has been discussed before. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=357742

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I would be amazed if it didn't work this way.


Already announced; They don't.

Which is for the best, because of how luxury goods work. There's no good way to allocate them across cities in finite amounts that isn't either MM-intensive or non-optimal.

This has been discussed before. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=357742

Actually Ahriman, I'd say its far from confirmed. No-one from Firaxis has actually said "no, luxury & health resources are still infinite. You just had a single writer of a single article making the claim, without any real foundation.
As I've said elsewhere, as far as "finite" luxuries goes, I do want it in-but only in that having more than 1 source (or X sources per Y cities) grants you additional bonuses, rather than inflicting penalties. Otherwise the trade in luxuries & health resources is going to be seriously lacking!

Aussie.