Stone without Stone Circles SUCK...

[Leyrann]

I dont want all resources to have the same yield. Thats not what I said. I just want stone to not be improved at the very end of the game (Rocketry) since stone has been used in the BC Era.

Stone can have a crappy yield - but why is it +1 production at the very end game tech when one is building Spaceports??

And as another poster pointed out Stone is used in concrete. Concrete was developed in the 1800s. Well before Rocketry. Also arguably Romans back in there era enhanced Stone to be Concrete. All in all stone should be "boosted" earlier than when we built NASA and flew to Mars. That's not when we magically discovered how to improve stone.

But it's not stone that's improved, it's the quarry. Rocketry comes with advances in propulsion technology. Because propulsion really is a kind of controlled explosion, that may very well mean it also comes with better techniques to get that stone out of the quarry.

 

[steveg700]

I don't really think so, I mean it's stone, not exactly the most useful production for your Mars reactor...

I'm sure spaceships can make use of ceramic components. Plus, there's shale oil.

 

[Josephias]

I dont want all resources to have the same yield. Thats not what I said. I just want stone to not be improved at the very end of the game (Rocketry) since stone has been used in the BC Era.

Stone can have a crappy yield - but why is it +1 production at the very end game tech when one is building Spaceports??

And as another poster pointed out Stone is used in concrete. Concrete was developed in the 1800s. Well before Rocketry. Also arguably Romans back in there era enhanced Stone to be Concrete. All in all stone should be "boosted" earlier than when we built NASA and flew to Mars. That's not when we magically discovered how to improve stone.

It may feel repetitive, but as some have pointed out, it is not the productivity of stone what has improved, but the productivity of the Quarry.

It may be an issue of the tech tree, actually, wich jumps directly from Chemistry to Rocketry. ¿Would it be better underestood if it was Dynamite (Explosives) who increased the production of the quarry?. You know.. now you can trigger controlled breakups of rocks you were never able to slice trough just with metal tools or with age-old erosion techniques. Ok, now consider explosives are in the same tech as Rocketry... profit!

 

[UWHabs]

Rocketry also helps the production from Gypsum, Marble, etc... and anything else that's quarried. Yeah, maybe it doesn't make a ton of sense, and would be nice to have that production boost earlier like around Dynamite. Heck, it could probably afford multiple boosts over time, since compared to mines, mines get improved earlier in every case, and then obviously +1 prod > +1 gold, making mines much better for production than quarries on the whole.

 

[Felis Renidens]

I am OK with that quarry is less useful than mine because you can always harvest the stone at the point it becomes less useful and gain a production boost - and then build a mine if on a hill. If not on a hill than a quarry that you can build is more useful than a mine that you can't. Later you may be able to plant trees and build a mill if you want.