Truffles?

[blackcatatonic]

Lot of people in this thread complaining about tobacco being too much for the game's rating. So wine is perfectly cool but tobacco not so much? What exactly is the difference? Honestly confused about this.

Tobacco is demonised to a far greater extent than alcohol. Not sure what the restrictions on smoking are in the US but in the UK, you can no longer smoke in a covered public place, for instance. Plus, wine is like the civilized face of booze. It's not like you can grow vodka in the game or anything

Seriously, though, I do think tobacco ought to be in the game, along with coffee, tea and cocoa.

 

[Camikaze]

Leaving aside off-topic discussion, the important difference for the game's classification is simply a legal one. I'm not entirely sure precisely how it applies to classifications themselves, but here at least all advertising of tobacco is banned (and this extends quite broadly to anything that promotes smoking, AFAIK). Wine and tobacco are clearly treated very differently by the law, and inclusion of the latter would have an impact on the classification the game would receive.

 

[Depravo]

Oh that can't be true. Off the top of my head, I can think of several games that included tobacco as a trade good: Colonisation, at least two earlier versions of Civ, Conquest of the New World, Trade Empires, Industry Giant... the list goes on.

Anyone hear of Paradox getting in trouble for including tobacco, slaves and opium as trade goods in several iterations of EU and Vic?

If we've really got to the stage when referencing tobacco's existence on earth risks getting a product pulled, it's time for a revolution.

 

[headcase]

Tobacco references usually mean a T rating I think (not an instant M; Beatles Rock Band has it with a T rating) (Edit: That's just the ESRB though). Good for modding in as probably a recoloured version of an existing resource (not sure which) would look enough like tobacco. Beer would be good too (appearing as barley and hops on the tile with a nice frosty mug of the stuff for the icon).

It's true people look at wine differently than booze. Like in Ontario, Canada, beer and booze is only at government stores and licensed restaurants, while some grocery stores have a license to sell wine with plenty of alcohol in it.

I like how this game uses graphics in a pseudo-realistic way. Instead of showing truffles, it shows truffle pigs. The fish are hard to see, but the seagulls that hang around are easier to see, etc.

 

[Calouste]

Lot of people in this thread complaining about tobacco being too much for the game's rating. So wine is perfectly cool but tobacco not so much? What exactly is the difference? Honestly confused about this.

Tobacco advertising is strongly regulated or outright forbidden in a number of countries, same with smoking on TV and in movies. Alcohol has far less problems in that area, and I can't see 2Kgames risking getting a more restrictive rating in a few countries for a very minor game element. It's not about what we are cool with or not, it's how the laws in various countries affect a game's rating.

 

[Calouste]

Oh that can't be true. Off the top of my head, I can think of several games that included tobacco as a trade good: Colonisation, at least two earlier versions of Civ, Conquest of the New World, Trade Empires, Industry Giant... the list goes on.

Anyone hear of Paradox getting in trouble for including tobacco, slaves and opium as trade goods in several iterations of EU and Vic?

If we've really got to the stage when referencing tobacco's existence on earth risks getting a product pulled, it's time for a revolution.

You're talking about 15 year old games, a lot has changed since then. And Paradox caters to a very specific public, far less mass market than the civ franchise.

 

[Depravo]

You're talking about 15 year old games, a lot has changed since then. And Paradox caters to a very specific public, far less mass market than the civ franchise.

I don't see how Paradox games being more of a niche would affect the rating they are given by the censors.

The list wasn't exhaustive; any case Colonisation was of course remade just a couple of years ago with tobacco (but without slaves).

 

[Wolfbeckett]

There were no slaves in the original Colonization either. There were indentured servants, which aren't the same thing.

 

[Zibi1981]

I personally lack three resources in Gods & Kings:
1. honey (which should be placed in woods and jungle tiles): +2 food, +1 gold
2. copper (required for training of spearmen): +2 production - not luxury resource, as it is now
3. tea or coffee (luxury): +1 food, +2 gold

 

[Golem of Prague]

When I saw the pigs roaming in forests, I cheerfully assumed that the new resource will be Bacon.

Oh the disappointment.

 

[fat_tonle]

Copper needs to be strategic. Simple as that. If it gets too discombobulated at the top row with all the resources, remove Iron and Horses once you hit Aluminum and Uranium/Oil tech. or just change the menu all together where you don't have all the resources listed across one another.

Pigs need to be pigs. Food boost and nothing more.

 

[qemist]

salt, citrus, crabs, copper, tulips, porcelain, jewelry, truffles

One is not like the others.

They are all not not like the others.

Copper should be strategic resource. How do you build bronze weapons and huge bronze statues without copper? Copper's electrical applications also make it important in the modern era.

I've never heard of citrus, crabs, truffles or tulips being a major item of world trade. Salt was historically important. In general I think they could have found more historically relevant trade goods.

 

[fat_tonle]

How do the current luxuries work other than +4 happiness? Does Marble really grant 15% wonder production for ALL wonders? Seems kinda OP. Why don't you get that boost with other types of resources relative to the wonder like Civ IV? Then you actually prioritize.

Also Citrus should grant +1 movement for all sea units pre-refridgeration.
Boars/Truffles should do not need a happiness bonus.
Crabs also do not need a happiness bonus.
Salt could grant food/luxury boost but it's not really a luxury either.

These little things would add a little more diversity and immersion into resource gathering.

 

[GhostSalsa]

Copper being a strategic resource would require breaking the normal logic of strategic resources, don't you think?

It would be around from the beginning of the game, but be vital in late game, leading to too much power imbalance or pointless re-rolling. Or it would lead to changing it so copper is revealed late game, which would be historically dumb, and make copper equivalent to aluminum.

Or changing it to only have strategic value early game, which would also be dumb, and repeat the current problem with iron. (Why doesn't iron contribute in any vital way to industrial and modern era building?)

 

[GhostSalsa]

Also Citrus should grant +1 movement for all sea units pre-refridgeration.

Bear in mind that sea travel is heavily simplified and abstracted. You can go in any direction, every turn, an equal distance. You never hit storms and sink outright. A boat can be damaged to 1 hp but sail the world that way for 1000 more years. All this without a supply promotion (why would boats ever not have supplies?!). And when you learn steam travel, an embarked unit in the middle of the ocean suddenly has a new engine.

It's best to think of sea travel as "a representation of average progress that presents each turns movement points with those problems invisibly factored in." Clearly the devs aren't trying to make us think about the details when it comes to sea travel, scurvy included (aside from that new world scenario).

I do like the citrus idea, though. Just pointing out that realism and boats don't mesh in this game.

 

[OmniPotent42]

I like the idea of each luxury resource giving a different bonus as mentioned before.
Copper: melee units gain extra 10% combat strength
Marble: 15% extra wonder production (as is)
Citrus: maintinence on naval units reduced by 33%
Cotton: +10% construction of combat units
Silk: +10% gold in all cities
Crabs: +25% gold from pillaging
Truffles: gain 2 gpt by trading away

 

[fat_tonle]

Bear in mind that sea travel is heavily simplified and abstracted. You can go in any direction, every turn, an equal distance. You never hit storms and sink outright. A boat can be damaged to 1 hp but sail the world that way for 1000 more years. All this without a supply promotion (why would boats ever not have supplies?!). And when you learn steam travel, an embarked unit in the middle of the ocean suddenly has a new engine.

It's best to think of sea travel as "a representation of average progress that presents each turns movement points with those problems invisibly factored in." Clearly the devs aren't trying to make us think about the details when it comes to sea travel, scurvy included (aside from that new world scenario).

I do like the citrus idea, though. Just pointing out that realism and boats don't mesh in this game.

You are taking it way too far though. I am working within the constructs of the game as is. If ships had to return to port how many "YEARS" would it take? As it does now since every turn is potentially a few years transpiring in your game. Ships should probably be able to make a round trip across the globe in the span of a turn if they worked in "real time" relative to the game. So working in this scenario, adding some uniqueness to resources in terms of bonuses already featured in the game, I don't see a problem with that.

 

[HeraldtheGreat]

I like the idea of each luxury resource giving a different bonus as mentioned before.
Copper: melee units gain extra 10% combat strength
Marble: 15% extra wonder production (as is)
Citrus: maintinence on naval units reduced by 33%
Cotton: +10% construction of combat units
Silk: +10% gold in all cities
Crabs: +25% gold from pillaging
Truffles: gain 2 gpt by trading away

Bonuses for silk and citrus seems like overkill, don't you think?
________________________________
Stupid truth always resisting simplicity.
-John Green