Strategic Resources Rework

[lonesar007]

Having gotten decently far in the current released version of C2C several times now, I really think strategic resources need to be rethought and reworked.

I come to this after having a game recently where I had no access to sulphur, and no real way to get it. The game was basically dead. This has happened to the AI as well. Without sulphur, you they survive for a little while - basically through the first few gunpowder units - but after that they tend to get overrun. It really ruins the game, either by having AI you cannot fight or by having an AI that cannot defend.

It got me thinking that the way strategic resources are handled isn't really realistic or historical. With the C2C additions, its game breaking (in my opinion of course). Historically, units were mainly limited by production and technology, but rarely by natural resources. An easy example that everyone will recognize is the battles between the Indians and the European colonies. There was only a brief period of time before Indians had adopted horses and guns despite not actually producing any or owning the related natural resources. This is impossible to realistically reproduce in Civ. At best you need another country with multiple of the same resource AND the willingness to trade it.

I would propose technology being the driving factor behind units available. I still think strategic resources should be valuable, but they should provide bonuses that are not overpowered. Buildings that speed up production of related units or slightly better units (10% stronger?) are two things that these resources could provide.

I think this will keep the game more competitive and be closer to reality. That being said, I would be interested in everyone else's thoughts.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Historically, units were mainly limited by production and technology, but rarely by natural resources.

Not quite true, during the Bronze Age tin was very rare and many of the big nations had none in their lands. It is one reason they fought over what is now Spain. Most like Egypt imported most of its tin (and almost all of its glass).

I would propose technology being the driving factor behind units available. I still think strategic resources should be valuable, but they should provide bonuses that are not overpowered. Buildings that speed up production of related units or slightly better units (10% stronger?) are two things that these resources could provide.

I think this will keep the game more competitive and be closer to reality. That being said, I would be interested in everyone else's thoughts.

This is the way vanilla does it and I always thought it to be very unrealistic.

With some resources they appear long before they are usable. Perhaps that should be the case for most so that you can plan out your attacks and conquests.

Also it may be interesting to see if volcanoes (active and dormant but not extinct) could provide both obsidian and sulphur. It could be done with an auto building. The problem then comes with the volcano becoming extinct. Perhaps what resource is placed should be more based on what will be useful, so obsidian is more in the early game while sulphur is more common later.

 

[lonesar007]

Not quite true, during the Bronze Age tin was very rare and many of the big nations had none in their lands. It is one reason they fought over what is now Spain. Most like Egypt imported most of its tin (and almost all of its glass).


This is the way vanilla does it and I always thought it to be very unrealistic.

With some resources they appear long before they are usable. Perhaps that should be the case for most so that you can plan out your attacks and conquests.

Also it may be interesting to see if volcanoes (active and dormant but not extinct) could provide both obsidian and sulphur. It could be done with an auto building. The problem then comes with the volcano becoming extinct. Perhaps what resource is placed should be more based on what will be useful, so obsidian is more in the early game while sulphur is more common later.

Quick research shows that tin was found in many areas, and bronze working initially started in the middle east. China, England, France,Germany all had tin mines, and Italy even had some minor ones.

The bigger point is that there were not armies with bronze weapons fighting equally technologically advanced armies whom did not have bronze weapons for the entire bronze age. Every major country or empire had bronze during the bronze age. It was widely traded and disseminated. The same happened with iron, horses, oil, rubber, etc. There is simply no strategic resource that only countries with the means of natural production own for long periods of history. Planning out the future doesn't fix the problem. If I get the resource, the AI doesn't have it, and its faceroll time.

The current CRC needs sulfur to make ammunition, which is required for everything from a military standpoint for almost 2 eras. How does it possibly make sense from a gaming standpoint (much less realism) for the game to be effectively over if you cannot get sulfur?

In terms of civ, if I hold the bronze and you don't, it's very very unlikely you are taking that bronze from me. You simply cannot create troops that can take cities offensively. If it's sulfur its just lol.

 

[Thunderbrd]

1) It's not historically inaccurate. However, your example with guns was an example of theft and spoils being the means to overcome the limitation. With the equipment modification coming I very much intend for weapon theft and claiming equipment from defeated foes to be very possible - how to work that with upgrades to use entirely new weapon types will be a little tricky but I have ways planned out that I've been preparing for for years.

2) In the case of the native americans, the technology to create guns would've been a trick given that they did not mine nor smelt metal at all in most cases. They could've figured it out but the infrastructure for them to do so was a highly socially foreign matter. However, learning to effectively wield the weapons of their foes was something they not only learned but excelled at once they did and I'd like to represent how this can happen through the equipment mod. So... it's comin. But part of the point here is that just requiring the tech would not be a sufficient answer to a more realistic way to reflect that scenario.

3) Sulphur IS very necessary for gunpowder, but is actually a super common resource in the world. Anywhere there are caves there should be access. Most harvested sulphur has come from bat guano and volcanic sources. We really should implement, as DH suggests, ways to enhance access with these considerations. (Reminds me we need bats as animals in the game too.)

4) For the VERY rare civilization that was extremely limited in land holdings, there may be some real world examples of the drastic need for those civs to establish friendly trade with nations that could provide for that need - or just be provided with the end product (arms and ammunition) that IS actually used as the direct prereqs for these units. (Why seek the building blocks when you can have another nation provide the end product?) In perhaps hundreds of modern world examples, arms are provided to smaller insurgent nations and factions by larger patron nations or they wouldn't have been able to amass an even half effective fighting force. This really is something that is happening but there are numerous ways to make it happen in RL.

5) I also like the idea of criminal black market provision of arms being expanded on. Criminals should be able to create black market trade routes that transport access to a city's arms (and other things like drugs and so on) to a distant city location (home). This would then enable that home city to train units that require those arms.

6) Bronze is not required for most units. Copper is and iron is for the swords. Bronze working as a tech is required for many units. And with the equipment mod, it will just be a quality difference if you can get access to Bronze over just copper.

 

[stoferb]

Not quite true, during the Bronze Age tin was very rare and many of the big nations had none in their lands. It is one reason they fought over what is now Spain. Most like Egypt imported most of its tin (and almost all of its glass).

There is another way to make bronze - with arsenic instead of tin. In fact it was how the earliest bronzes were made. The problem ofcourse is the risk of poisoning your metalworkers so most bronze age cultures preferred to switch over to tin instead. The difference in real life vs civ though is that even though tin was rare it was not kept from being traded to pretty much everyone. In civ terms that would be like if one civ could trade away his only resource with several others at the same time and still get to keep it for himself.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

There is another way to make bronze - with arsenic instead of tin. In fact it was how the earliest bronzes were made. The problem ofcourse is the risk of poisoning your metalworkers so most bronze age cultures preferred to switch over to tin instead. The difference in real life vs civ though is that even though tin was rare it was not kept from being traded to pretty much everyone. In civ terms that would be like if one civ could trade away his only resource with several others at the same time and still get to keep it for himself.

Except in C2C you can make multiple tin smelters from the one tin mine and it is tin ingots you need to make bronze wares. Unfortunately the AI does not trade these often either.

 

[Rmi]

I wanted to suggest something like this too.

Elephants and horses truly punish the early civs without them. What i would like is that when you do kill enemy mounted units you get a chance for subdued animals.

Other options are tech % when you kill certain units or turn in captives for some tech% opponent civ knows.

Getting a treasure like unit on killing enemies. Using this treasure could get you a resource on a plot or city or whatever is possible.

Killing units let's you capture them sometimes like ships, representing stealing their weapons, mounts or vehicles and giving those to militia.

Make some national wonders that represent a concerted effort by the nation's people to collect a resource. A government can ask all people to collect birdpoop for saltpeter or something like that.

Make national units with like a 5 limit that represent stolen weapons/tech under certain conditions.

If all else fails, i'm also not above playing god and opening up the editor.
When you spend 20 hours in a game and it turns out you don't have sulphur and truly no way to get it, i don't mind cheating it. The same goes for opponents, i happily provide them with resources to make the game more interesting.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

So really what you want is to do away with strategic resources entirely so that everyone can build all "normal" units.

 

[Thunderbrd]

So really what you want is to do away with strategic resources entirely so that everyone can build all "normal" units.

Good point. These bindups create a problem for an era and then the critical strategic techs tend to move on to new and different requirements so the game challenge at that point is to survive the era without. It's usually possible too, just takes some strong strategy to compete in war or to ensure peace until the danger has passed. The AI isn't that good at realizing you have such a crushing weakness and when it's time to strike. Yet.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I don't know, in the PBEM game I played in the past my civ lacked some strategic resources and thus planning ahead to get them or trade for them was key to staying alive.