Treasure Fleets From Homeland Cities?

[aelf]

The concept of the Treasure Fleets is strange and incomplete, because not only does it reinforce an abrupt Eurocentrism, it simultaneously forgets that European "treasure fleets" historically brought goods from Asia and Africa as well: the central example of the Spanish Manila galleons, which certainly aren't named for Manila, California. This is to say nothing of Portuguese and Dutch Indian Ocean trade, nor the perhaps second-most famous "treasure fleet," that of the Ming dynasty (which, even though it's in the game in the Exploration Age, doesn't get a special victory condition for this, unlike Songhai...?).

To be fair, there are clearly Asian resources like spices and tea. I think the distant lands concept is an amalgamation of both Americas and Asia, especially since they have 'conventional' empire-like civilisations on them which are more like the Asian powers.

Anyway, there was a history-trained guy on here who denied the validity of the Ming treasure fleets as real treasure fleets. Obviously an absurd take, but the Ming expeditions didn't seem to change the trajectory of the empire, so it's fair for it not to feature as some kind of bonus for Ming.

 

[tedhebert]

And I agree with @Leucarum that the other Exploration Age paths are almost comically easy on any difficulty setting, which makes the map-dependent Treasure/Economic path all the more jarring.

There we differ... culture and military are easy I agree, but I think I succeeded the science one in only one of my games... most times I have between 0 or 2 yield 40 tiles...

to each his own troubles it would seem !

 

[Nigel_Tufnel2]

I've had lots of success with Treasure Fleets by playing as The Chola - you can easily take any cities you need. Although, I actually focus more on quick settling and fighting my +4 over Settlement situations, lol. I've been using Gedemon's YnAMP and playing larger maps, lots more choice city spots. I also always focus on settling to provide clear water pathways even in the Old World, and to deny opponents the same. It also can really help to play with the slower Era Speed.

 

[aelf]

I’m a little nonplussed by this affirmation.

After 12 complete games through all ages, playing different type of maps (fractal, continent plus, archipelago mostly) I have never ever failed to complete the treasure fleet path…

yes sometimes it took a lot of scouting with my 3-4 cogs to find the good places to settle, but I always buy cogs and build 3-5 settlers as my first actions in explo (depending on settl limit) and I always find at least 5 treasure ressources

How many settlements do you usually build on the distant land continent itself?

In my experience playing on Deity, without especially rushing it (but before getting Shipbuilding), it's difficult to find spots to settle on the continent itself. I do see like maybe two spots with one or two treasure resources, but they'd be right smack between foreign settlements and would almost definitely get attacked at some point. It's not very worth it, so I usually just rely on luck with the island chains.

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: Attention, thread restored.
@Brew God does this all look correct?
@Nikolai II could you please assist in case it is not?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The concept of the Treasure Fleets is strange and incomplete, because not only does it reinforce an abrupt Eurocentrism, it simultaneously forgets that European "treasure fleets" historically brought goods from Asia and Africa as well: the central example of the Spanish Manila galleons, which certainly aren't named for Manila, California. This is to say nothing of Portuguese and Dutch Indian Ocean trade, nor the perhaps second-most famous "treasure fleet," that of the Ming dynasty (which, even though it's in the game in the Exploration Age, doesn't get a special victory condition for this, unlike Songhai...?).

The Manila Galleon, though, is an example of a 'Treasure Fleet' that the game does NOT model: It was an element of a multi-part Distant Lands trade:

The Manila Galleon went from America loaded with American Silver to Manila, where the silver was used to buy Chinese silks and porcelain, which the galleon then hauled back to Europe. Since the Chinese economy was based on silver coins and China was desperately short of silver, the Spanish made a killing in Manila, and then of course made another killing in Europe when they unloaded the Distant Lands resources there.

But this trade, exchanging one Distant Lands resource (American silver) for another set of Distant Lands resources (Chinese silk and porcelain) is left out of the game entirely, since the Exploration Age lumps all the Distant Lands into one map entity without any differentiation among continents, islands, or biomes.

This, by the way, also has the result that most of the Treasure Resources are in a relatively narrow band in the middle of the map, since none of them (sugar, tea, spic es, et al) seem to spawn in the 'high latitudes'.

 

[MutilationWave]

The Manila Galleon, though, is an example of a 'Treasure Fleet' that the game does NOT model: It was an element of a multi-part Distant Lands trade:

The Manila Galleon went from America loaded with American Silver to Manila, where the silver was used to buy Chinese silks and porcelain, which the galleon then hauled back to Europe. Since the Chinese economy was based on silver coins and China was desperately short of silver, the Spanish made a killing in Manila, and then of course made another killing in Europe when they unloaded the Distant Lands resources there.

But this trade, exchanging one Distant Lands resource (American silver) for another set of Distant Lands resources (Chinese silk and porcelain) is left out of the game entirely, since the Exploration Age lumps all the Distant Lands into one map entity without any differentiation among continents, islands, or biomes.

This, by the way, also has the result that most of the Treasure Resources are in a relatively narrow band in the middle of the map, since none of them (sugar, tea, spic es, et al) seem to spawn in the 'high latitudes'.

The narrow band thing is intentional I think, but not done perfectly. If you have an inland city, you can't spawn treasure fleets from the resources, and I'm sure the AI (and eventually the player?) would rather have different resources inland.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The narrow band thing is intentional I think, but not done perfectly. If you have an inland city, you can't spawn treasure fleets from the resources, and I'm sure the AI (and eventually the player?) would rather have different resources inland.

It's not the inland nature, it's the polar nature: there are no Treasure resources (at the moment) far north or south of the
'equator' of the Distant Lands.

And that's largely because the nature of the Treasure rsources they picked at launch: spices, tea, sugar - all tropical reources. Yet sub-arctic Furs were among the lucrative resources from the Americas, and the Grand Banks fisheries off Newfoundland were being exploited before the Pilgrims even got to New England - by the time they landed at Plymouth Rock, English, French and Basque fishermen had been wintering on the New England coast for almost 20 years!

Another way of pointing out that the 'Distant Lands or Treasure resources could be a lot more variable in their locations and therefore provide a much more variable game situation than the current, which is pretty much limited to luck of the map finding islands or a bit of distant coastline in the temperate zone where the resources fall.

 

[Nikolai II]

Sure can @The_J . Just give me a poke.

 

[aelf]

It's not the inland nature, it's the polar nature: there are no Treasure resources (at the moment) far north or south of the
'equator' of the Distant Lands.

And that's largely because the nature of the Treasure rsources they picked at launch: spices, tea, sugar - all tropical reources. Yet sub-arctic Furs were among the lucrative resources from the Americas, and the Grand Banks fisheries off Newfoundland were being exploited before the Pilgrims even got to New England - by the time they landed at Plymouth Rock, English, French and Basque fishermen had been wintering on the New England coast for almost 20 years!

Another way of pointing out that the 'Distant Lands or Treasure resources could be a lot more variable in their locations and therefore provide a much more variable game situation than the current, which is pretty much limited to luck of the map finding islands or a bit of distant coastline in the temperate zone where the resources fall.

This isn't exactly true, not after this patch at least. In my last game, I just saw tea spawn far up north, just before the tundra line. All the treasure resources on my side of the ocean spawned quite a bit north of where the equator would be, thus denying me (a southern empire) the opportunity to get to them before the AI did.

On that note, the new map generation is less balanced, maybe too much so.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Yes, there are some areas which just don't have treasure resources. Combined with decreased landmass on defaul maps (including intermediate islands on continents+) it creates a lot of problems for peaceful play. I hope nee patch will improve resource distribution.

 

[queenpea]

I've had lots of success with Treasure Fleets by playing as The Chola - you can easily take any cities you need. Although, I actually focus more on quick settling and fighting my +4 over Settlement situations, lol. I've been using Gedemon's YnAMP and playing larger maps, lots more choice city spots. I also always focus on settling to provide clear water pathways even in the Old World, and to deny opponents the same. It also can really help to play with the slower Era Speed.

I’ve played Chola a couple of times, and it’s funny to me that an Economic/Diplomatic civ can really only be successfully played aggressively, à la Mongols of the seas with its ridiculously overpowered unique unit.

I know little of Chola history, but it is strange to me how much of the gameplay leans into the command and conquer of it all.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I’ve played Chola a couple of times, and it’s funny to me that an Economic/Diplomatic civ can really only be successfully played aggressively, à la Mongols of the seas with its ridiculously overpowered unique unit.

I know little of Chola history, but it is strange to me how much of the gameplay leans into the command and conquer of it all.

Ridiculously overpowered (military) units will tend to move gameplay towards Command and Conquer styles.

On the other hand, the penalties for both going over the Settlement limits and razing captured cities combine to place definite limits on how much Conquering you can get away with in a single Age (another Consequence of the Age system - penalties accrue much faster than in a unitary 500-turn game). The Settlement limit especially does not seem too limiting, until you reach the Crisis period at the end of the Age over the limit by 3 - 4 and all the Consequence Chickens come home to roost.

As usual, this seems to affect the AI more than humans (once the human has gone through it once!). While I have never lost a city to Crisis, I have seen AI 'empires' ( Antiquity 10+ cities) unravel like a ball of yarn in a room full of kittens when they entered the Crisis period 4 over the Settlement limit AND with low Happiness to boot*.

Even though overall the Crisis isn't that overwhelming most of the time, I would like to see Game Options that include varying the severity of penalties both in Age and Crisis periods. That would include reducing or eliminating the Raze City and Settlement cap for the player who really wants to conquer the world without hinderance, even though World Conquest has been a self-defeating fantasy throughout history.


* That particular case was Augustus in the first game I tried playing Carthage, so I was rather glad to see it happen: Historical Retribution, so to speak . . .

 

[queenpea]

Ridiculously overpowered (military) units will tend to move gameplay towards Command and Conquer styles.

Yeah, I guess my point generally is that I don't really understand the model for Chola. You get bonuses for trade, but they are rather weak compared to their naval abilities. One of their unique buildings helps you build naval units, which further encourages you to Command and Conquer. If I could recategorize them, I would label them Militaristic/Economic. This feels more honest to me than Economic/Diplomatic, which to me, implies a more peaceful approach.

 

[MutilationWave]

* That particular case was Augustus in the first game I tried playing Carthage, so I was rather glad to see it happen: Historical Retribution, so to speak . . .

I've only played Carthage once, it was really fun but I'm trying to play all the civs and leaders, I just haven't made it back to it.

That being said- the only city I conquered in all antiquity was Roma. I was like no narrative event? Not even an achievement?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I've only played Carthage once, it was really fun but I'm trying to play all the civs and leaders, I just haven't made it back to it.

That being said- the only city I conquered in all antiquity was Roma. I was like no narrative event? Not even an achievement?

Given that they already have a ready-made title for such a Narrative Event:

"Roma delenda est"

- taking a swipe at Cato, and @Zaarin might even be able to translate it into a Punic version . . .

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

This isn't exactly true, not after this patch at least. In my last game, I just saw tea spawn far up north, just before the tundra line. All the treasure resources on my side of the ocean spawned quite a bit north of where the equator would be, thus denying me (a southern empire) the opportunity to get to them before the AI did.

On that note, the new map generation is less balanced, maybe too much so.

Haven't seen more than 1 - 2 stray Treasure resources spawn much north of south of a center 'equator' line except on the main continent of the Distant Lands, and they were buried behind Distant Lands AI Civs' territory and so not available without a major war and so not really worth it.

In general, though, the post-Patch maps seem to be much lighter on Treasure Resources in general than before. Before I almost always could find 3 - 7 Resource sites on the islands between Home and Distant lands, since then I'm lucky to find more than 1. Except in my last game, where one fat island had sites for 5 cities and 6 Treasure Resource sites, and I managed to get all 6 sites under my cities before the AI got to them.

I'll repeat, though, that the Economic/Resource Legacy path in Exploration is far too entirely dependent on map generation for any success. You either find 0 resources available without major effort (war or settling Far Away with devious routes for the Treasure Fleets) or too few Resources reachable in time to complete the path (and no way at all to speed up the fleets in map speed or generation time) or you find just enough resources at your doorstep and complete the entire path before the Age is 2/3 over.

 

[Zaarin]

- taking a swipe at Cato, and @Zaarin might even be able to translate it into a Punic version . . .

Rūm lippūl.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Rūm lippūl.

Excellent!

But I'm afraid Firaxis might think it looks too much like an exotic Caribbean alcoholic cocktail . . .

 

[CoconutTank]

Definitely not feeling the exploration and modern economic victories in retrospect, mostly b/c of being at the mercy of map generation like Boris mentioned before. It's actually kind of funny b/c I've seen some grumblings here and there from ppl wanting strategics to be more scarce and have more things gated behind strategics in order to relive the strategics scramble from Civ 5 and Civ 6. If that's what they really want, I hope they'll pursue the exploration and modern econ victories in earnest...