1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Sea resources are incredibly under-tuned

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by homan1983, Oct 3, 2016.

  1. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    And if you can't? Sea tiles need to be more useful than nothing, but less useful than land tiles, that's how it is. For how much - it's the question of balance fine-tuning.

    If you have a city 5 tils away from the cost, you could build second city closer to the first one with tile overlap or on the coast with free coastal cities. It's really interesting choice, because if you don't consider growing those cities too much, overlap could be better, but if you want to get maximum out of them, grabbing free sea tiles will give you more.

    I'm not saying that's currently balanced - I didn't play the game. But most of the other posters here didn't as well.

    If free tiles have the same potential as those you compete for, they are always better. That's simple.
     
  2. bumpyglint

    bumpyglint Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    60
    That's no sense, you compete for all the tiles in the world togheter, they are not "free". And obviously I'm not saying that a sea city surrounded by nothing should be better than a land city with tons of resource. But a sea city with a lot of resources should be equal to a land city with a lot of resources, that's simple. It's not "free", you still try to catch that resources, so I don't get your problem with this.
     
  3. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    They are free, because you can't settle ocean, so large pools of water have no cities on them.
     
  4. bumpyglint

    bumpyglint Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    60
    I repeat, I'm talking about the valuable ocean's tiles. I know that you will always got a possibility to settle a ****** city surrounded by the almost nothing (both in coastal or land), and I can agree that a coastal city surrounded by nothing should be bad (same for a land city surrounded by nothing), but I don't get why we are talking about this. If the sea's tiles got the same potencial of land's tiles we would not even talk about "free tiles" because everybody would settle land and sea in equal measure (or at least based on his necessity and not on the "sea=****" actual concept), so you would see the same "wasted" space in sea and land (not counting the unreachable tiles obviously). I'm saying that the actual "good coastal city" are not good as the "good land city" and this is simply no sense, they should at least be equal (I repeat, at least good coastal city should, not the coastal city surrounded by nothing).
     
  5. bumpyglint

    bumpyglint Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    60
    In the actual version everybody will always colonize land tiles first lefting sea tiles at the end, this is no sense, in the human history eveybody who could get a good coastal city did it and has been rewarded a lot.
     
  6. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Ok, to illustrate, see 2 map setups for the coast:
    Spoiler :

    If sea tiles are equal to land ones or at least not much worse, the second setup is always better, because you just have more land (marked with "+"). It's no-brainer choice to settle on coast. If sea tiles are significantly worse than land ones, it's quite complex strategic choice as in first setup the third city could potentially get more land (from the first 2 cities), while in second setup your overall workable land is bigger.

    That's what I'm talking about.
     

    Attached Files:

    • temp.png
      temp.png
      File size:
      178.6 KB
      Views:
      219
    Calcifer likes this.
  7. EgonSpengler

    EgonSpengler Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    Messages:
    6,689
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, that's definitely true. Another aspect of Civ that makes realism more difficult is the need for every city to feed itself. I think this works fine in the early game and only becomes truly bizarre in late eras. Civ V tried to patch the hole with things that make Food more of an abstraction, like Hospitals and Civil Society (under the Freedom ideology).
     
  8. Babarigo

    Babarigo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2013
    Messages:
    72
    The only reason you would build a city on the coast is because you can build districts such as the harbour or the commercial district that will give trade routes. If the coastal city you build can't neither have districts nor luxuries then it's wasting a settler. Even then, getting at least one district per city is very common, even the AI manages it so yes you will almost always something better than the water. Anyway, just look some gameplay videos, nobody works those tiles because they are worthless.

    The water tiles are not worth working in any case and even if you wanted you wouldn't get enough food to work the tiles you get from the second setup. Actually the first one is better because it is easier to have the district adjacency bonus with closer cities and for the regional effects. For me your exemple will be true if you could manage to have better yields from water since you'll have to chose between the production and the amenities from industrial and entertainment districts from building the city closer to your two other cities or having more decent tiles to work but losing the production and the amenities.
     
  9. EgonSpengler

    EgonSpengler Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    Messages:
    6,689
    Gender:
    Male
    It depends what you mean by "good" coastal city. For the first few thousand years, you're basically only talking about the Mediterranean, and even then, it wasn't the sea resources that made those nations powerful, it was trade. Once a few nations figured out how to sail the big oceans, those Mediterranean empires were relegated to Div-II very quickly. If human history has been a giant game of Civ, it was almost suicidal to settle a foundational city on the coast until maybe the late 17th Century.
     
  10. Denkt

    Denkt Left permamently

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    3,654
    The end goal may be to pack as many cities as possible in a given location as each city can only have a limited number of districts because each district can only be built once per city and stuff like factories get more powerful the more cities it can reach.

    If you settle near coast you will likely be able to get more cities.
     
  11. ExemplarVoss

    ExemplarVoss Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2016
    Messages:
    349
    But worse ones, with fewer luxuries and strategic resources, or other worthwhile benefits. They'd basically do nothing but increase district costs in good cities.
     
  12. Denkt

    Denkt Left permamently

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    3,654
    Districts cost is mainly dependent on turn time from what I have seen.

    Later on entertainment district give regional effect which do stack with each other and so do industrial zones.
     
  13. Calcifer

    Calcifer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2016
    Messages:
    61
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Italy
    I agree sea resources should be at least as powerful as inland tiles, for example a fish tile with fihing boats should provide roughly the same yields as a grassland tile with a farm. I don't agree on plain sea tiles being as useful as inland tiles. A city should aim to grab as much land as possible, while sea access (either with a harbor or a coastal city center) should be useful only for transportation and sea resources. I don't see why a coastal city with 20 sea tiles and 16 land tiles should be as valuable as a city with 6 sea tiles and 30 land tiles, that is a nonsense.

    It looks like your numbers are referred to a square grid. In a hex grid, a trade route with a range of r tiles gives access to a number of tiles that is n=3*r*(r+1).
    So if the range is 25 tiles, you can access 1950 different tiles.
     
  14. bumpyglint

    bumpyglint Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    60
    For the example with the painting, after you have a strong land power it should always be a brainless idea to take sea surrounded by resources, because it's obvious you should need it in the 99 % of the case!! The strategic point should be where to place it, how to act with it, etc... Austria with Italy, Poland with gdansk, history is full of example where country tried to reach the sea to expand.


    1) Yeah, Mediterranean was GREAT, expecially for trade. In civ VI a sea like Mediterranean would be simply ignored, and this is not ok for me. Rome, Carthago, Athens ecc... will not exist in this game or will be more weak.
    2) Mediterranean didn't become "useless", simply the Atlantic became really more important after the America's discovery, and now (in our days) the Pacific is the new ruling sea. If you study history you discover that there aren't ages where the seas are useless, there are just ages where some seas lose importance and anothers gain it.

    I 100 % agree that plain sea tiles should not be usefull like the normal inland tiles, I already told it, the point is that overall a costal city should be good like an inland one, expecially in the old era. It could be done with more powerfull sea resources (like Civ V), with sea trade routes actually more powerfull and usefull, with special building etc...
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2016
  15. Calcifer

    Calcifer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2016
    Messages:
    61
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Italy
    As you said, access to sea tiles is useful for sea resources, sea trade routes and sea-related buildings. This does not mean that ocean tile yields have to be the same as land tile yields. Ocean tile yields being worse is perfectly reasonable for me.

    EDIT: turns out we agree :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2016
  16. bumpyglint

    bumpyglint Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    60
    Wait, BAD MISTAKE, I didn't write "not". I edited, I agree with this!

    P.s. as you could probably easily see english is not my first language.
     
  17. randomwalker

    randomwalker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2016
    Messages:
    18
    pitching in here:

    Real life: Transporting bulk goods over sea is cheaper than over land, and for most of human history it has also been faster and simpler. (One ship from port to port without crossing 3rd party territory).

    Game: while not taking a firm stance on whether sea resources should be boosted or not, it seems obvious to me that port cities should generate far more trade and more distant trade routes than land-locked cities. In my opinion, a city centre actually on the coast would indicate a more maritime culture and hence even more trade than just a harbour district (ie Venice, Hansa cities).

    Real life: Viking raiders, the British empire and many others were able to project power far from their homes and move quicker than land-based opponents could react. Explorers, envoys, missionaries and news travelled faster by sea than over land, not to mention supply lines.

    Game: In every civ game, ships have moved slower than land units on a road, which makes very little sense. I understand that turn-based warfare would be very different if you gave galleons 20 movement points, but significantly increasing embarked speed and naval unit speed would make the sea game a lot more important and interesting.
     
  18. vit_sin

    vit_sin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Messages:
    50
    Location:
    Canada
    It is not only that Ocean resources are low estimated, IMO, those resources need to be spread around ENTIRE ocean, especially should be tons of fish/crab/etc + oil/natural gas around single-tile-islands in the middle of the ocean. In CiIV, as well as CiV, as I recall, ocean was always underestimated in its power to feed/provide to humans and thus I do strongly believe Firaxis could do much, much better work for ocean in the game.
     
  19. EgonSpengler

    EgonSpengler Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    Messages:
    6,689
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree completely. And it isn't just the seas: Civ has always undervalued the economic impact of rivers and canals, and of the technologies that make use of them, such as the European cog. The Danube/Donetsk/Don/Dnieper river flows through what looks like 50 or 60 cities, including 4 national capitals (the list is in Wikipedia, I didn't bother to actually count them). Even in 2016, the Mississippi River is one of the US' major trade routes. I can't remember the exact numbers, but I think a Mississippi river barge carries cargo equal to 20 (or is it 50?) Mack trucks.

    Have canals ever been in a Civ game? I can't recall any, but it's been years since I've played anything other than V. I'm not talking about the big canals, Panama and Suez, either. I've heard that before the 20th Century, you could get from New York City to Chicago by canals that aren't used much anymore. I read somewhere that the Chinese canals were one of the things Marco Polo was most impressed with; he wrote that their city canals were so clogged with boats & barges you could walk across without a bridge.
     
  20. Babarigo

    Babarigo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2013
    Messages:
    72
    In my opinion, it was okay in Civ 4 and CiV. You just needed a lighthouse to get 2 food per tile. In Civ 4 you had the corporations, specifically Sid's Sushi Co which gave 0.5 food and 2 culture per each crab/fish/clam/rice resource. In archipelago maps you could have impressive amounts of food quite easily. But I agree with, it would be nice that that water got some attention from Firaxis. They did it for Civ BE so they could also make it for Civ 6 although in a different way.
     

Share This Page