Still no late game uses for iron and horses

[Winston]

I thought Echoes of Civilization did a good job with the resources. In that mod iron is used for autobahns and a trucking corp whereas horses are used for race tracks and oil is also used for plastics factories.
Also aluminum is used for aircraft whereas oil is used for tanks, rocket artillery, and some ships.
The system is simple and enhances gameplay in my opinion but there are also some other good mods like Petroleum or Industrial Steel.

I know you can always flog your obsolete resources to other civs for money but it feels cheesy because the AI isn't valuing the resource correctly in modern times - it would be much better if the resources kept an actual gameplay use.

Circuses and trade route yields are something at least but I'd like to see something extra along the lines of the mods.

 

[wigwam]

So I always saw the eventual obsolecence of a resource as just indicating that technology had progressed to the point that it was commonly available. I do have to wonder -- is there any first-world country that worries about having enough access to iron for steel these days? So sure, we do still use tons of iron for things, but it's readily accessible to anyone. I'm pretty sure nobody goes to war over an iron mine.

Probably not anymore, but iron mines were a pretty big deal as recently as World War II:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_iron_mining_during_World_War_II

I really like the resource model in Civ 5, generally speaking. Huge improvement over the old boolean nonsense.

 

[tnick777]

I think once you get to the Industrial Revolution there should be two new improvements - Industrial center and (something with horses... Vacation Houses?)

Industrial center adds hammers to the iron and vacation houses add tourism.

 

[VainoValkea]

Having economic uses for more of the resources would be nice, indeed. I particularly like the Hydro Plant and Nuclear Plant because they consume resources that are very relevant in the late game and are thus an interesting trade-off instead of a no-brainer.

 

[Phrozen]

I would say that as iron and horses become obsolete that they should pick up further bonuses. Gold for iron and maybe tourism for horses. Iron and steel smelting really was one of the big industry's in the Industrial Revolution. Horse racing was one of the most popular sports in the world up until the modern era. Some races are still huge internationally followed events like the Triple Crown races.

 

[Dunkah]

@Dunkah: I prefer the current Civ V model to the Civ IV model. Having some scarcity is a good thing, and modeling scarcity as a binary distinction (those who have vs those who don't) isn't as appealing as a more varied scale. It also makes resource warfare much more interesting: sapping an enemy iron source will hurt them even if the source isn't their only one, and grabbing that source for oneself makes sense even if one has a mine of their own.

So I guess I prefer the Civ IV model.

Problem always has been balance. It seems silly to me that I can only build two tanks becuase I only have 2 drops of Iron in my system, but if those tanks die I can rebuild them from scratch permanently.

It's almost impossible to balance the number of resources someone has based on thier location. The game can spread them out but that doesn't mean that there will be an even distribution of them.

I'd rather have it so that resources depend more on diplomacy than Luck alone. It gives a way to stymie a run away Civ or a massive Warmongering Civ, peacefully.

I would also like to see strategic Bombing allowed for Resources, and Espionage opened up to allowing spies destroying resources.

 

[Veras]

I like the idea of some horseracing building. It could generate, I don't know, some hapiness and perhaps money.

I think it would be interesting if we got some units and buildings that require more than one resource to be build. It would intensify the resource wars or the resource trading in the late game.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I like the idea of some horseracing building. It could generate, I don't know, some hapiness and perhaps money.

Tourism. Generating tourism from a strategic resource would be interesting and horses fit nicely.

 

[VainoValkea]

@Dunkah: Regaining the resource when using the unit makes sense from the gameplay perspective, though.

It's almost impossible to balance the number of resources someone has based on thier location. The game can spread them out but that doesn't mean that there will be an even distribution of them.

I find that problem to be even worse in the Civ IV model, where a player lucky enough to secure a single iron mine can crank out an unlimited amount of swordsmen while the others can get none. It's not an even distribution - and if everyone happens to get iron, the entire resource game loses its point.

I would also like to see strategic Bombing allowed for Resources, and Espionage opened up to allowing spies destroying resources.

These options are present in Civ IV, and quite often bombing an enemy resource would do little to help you because they usually had another copy somewhere. Also, there is no penalty associated with not having enough resources for units needing them (unlike in Civ V).

 

[Veras]

Tourism. Generating tourism from a strategic resource would be interesting and horses fit nicely.

Well, it's hard for me to think why people would go to other countries for a horserace, but Tourism really seems a good way to maintain the utility of the strategic resources (I just can't think on an example right now).

 

[Seek]

I like the Fallen Enchantress model (which I'm sure has precedent in some other game I'm not aware of) to some degree: each strategic resource grants +1/turn and different units require certain amounts of resources. So for example you'd want to start your iron mine early to gather 60 units of iron in order to build 6 swordmen.

We could still have the current mechanics in place: rich vs poor resource nodes (which grant 2 vs 1 <resource> per turn respectively) and a resource penalty if there is no source of <resource> currently being mined/traded for, and get greater depth by having buildings that increase the per-turn resources and having early resources get late-game applications because it would be easier to balance (no more "everyone has 45 sources of iron/horses").

It's a nice because it adds a time dimension to the equation and relies on accumulation which feels more realistic.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I think they should change the Forge to consume (instead of require) iron, and improve it

Say
+2 production
+1 production on worked iron
+25% military production
(Possibly switch forge & longsword on the tree, but that is another issue

As for horses, perhaps a cheap gold booster building (race track)

They should also add in a building for oil.(not sure of bonus... Perhaps a bonus to the railroad connection bonus)
And then, change the code so that if you are negative in strategic resources, the building provides no bonuses.

 

[Dunkah]

I like the Fallen Enchantress model (which I'm sure has precedent in some other game I'm not aware of) to some degree: each strategic resource grants +1/turn and different units require certain amounts of resources. So for example you'd want to start your iron mine early to gather 60 units of iron in order to build 6 swordmen.

Love this idea.

Would be even better if you had to have a storage facility somewhere that could be captured!

 

[stealth_nsk]

I like the Fallen Enchantress model (which I'm sure has precedent in some other game I'm not aware of) to some degree: each strategic resource grants +1/turn and different units require certain amounts of resources. So for example you'd want to start your iron mine early to gather 60 units of iron in order to build 6 swordmen.

Comparing this model to Civ 5 model:
+? Player want to start mining as early as possible and not break it. Whether it's advantage or not depends on the actual game.
- Less possibilities to trade strategic resources.
= Both models don't solve the problem with no late-game need for resources.
= Both models force people to get as many mines as possible.

I'd say there are no advantages for each of these models, they are just for different types of games. IMHO, having items in storage is better for fantasy games, while calculating items per turn looks more like real life economy.

 

[Ulthwithian]

bouncy: What wigwam said, and also consider that a large factor that led to Japan's Declaration of War against the United States in WWII was because we consistently used an escalating system of economic sanctions against them for their expansionistic efforts, and one of the first was to cut off sales of scrap iron to them.

Indeed, Japan is the posterchild (and has been for at least WWI) for being a Civilization whose entire foreign policy has been to obtain and protect access to critical resources. These days it is oil and (ironically) food, and while that's been true for the entire period, the above iron issue cannot be forgotten.

 

[Seek]

Comparing this model to Civ 5 model:
+? Player want to start mining as early as possible and not break it. Whether it's advantage or not depends on the actual game.
- Less possibilities to trade strategic resources.
= Both models don't solve the problem with no late-game need for resources.
= Both models force people to get as many mines as possible.

I'd say there are no advantages for each of these models, they are just for different types of games. IMHO, having items in storage is better for fantasy games, while calculating items per turn looks more like real life economy.

I don't quite follow: How are there fewer possibilities to trade? I'd argue that it increases possibilities in that you could trade a lump-sum or a per-turn amount.

Also, if anything, this system would enhance the "calculating items per turn" because you need to decide how many you need for your unit composition goals; as it is now its quite a simplistic binary system: do I have iron? y/n.

 

[Kruppe]

Well, it's hard for me to think why people would go to other countries for a horserace, but Tourism really seems a good way to maintain the utility of the strategic resources (I just can't think on an example right now).

Never heard of the Prix d'Amerique or the Kentucky Derby?

 

[Ulthwithian]

I think the 'best' addition of a late-game use to Iron would be to make maintaining a railroad connection between a capital and one of your cities would cost 1 Iron.

 

[Winston]

@Kruppe

Or indeed the Royal Ascot which is on the telly right now!

 

[Kruppe]

@Kruppe

Or indeed the Royal Ascot which is on the telly right now!

Oh yeah

Maybe are events followed only in EU and north america.