1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] What are peoples impressions and opinions on the resource-upkeep for late game units?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by kaspergm, Apr 11, 2019.

  1. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,541
    Gender:
    Male
    I mean, there's usually not even 2 niter or oil on the whole landmass most of the time.

    And you needed 2. 1 was for upgrading and that was dumb but the problem was always the cheap cost of upgrades. Now that upgrades are more expensive, that worked towards fixing the actual problem.
     
  2. kaspergm

    kaspergm Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,481
    I really like the resource consumption of the early units. I like that you can no longer rush Iron Working and insta-upgrade a handful of warriors to swordsmen and crush your neighbor. Same for horses.

    I kind of get the point with per-turn upkeep of oil on units, and actually oil seems to be rather plentiful on most maps - and it gives a great encouragement for coastal cities, which is a big plus - so I think that part works fine, minus Infantry requiring oil. A per-turn oil upkeep for plains seems much more reasonable.

    I do think in general that each resource stack yields too few resources per turn. I don't mind the aspect of fighting over resources, but when you have a huge empire with only 1 Uranium slot, that doesn't leave you a whole lot of room to power your cities. Or maybe it's because power requirements for cities are through the roof. 3 power for each level 3 building seems off, when one tile improvement (windmill/solar farm) only gives 2 power. Even at a 1:4 conversion ratio for coal and oil, numbers seem to run up way faster than what map can supply.
     
    acluewithout likes this.
  3. Jaybe

    Jaybe civus fanaticus Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2001
    Messages:
    2,531
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Or maybe you aren’t supposed to have enough resources to power every building and fuel every unit you want.
    It is a continuation of the dreaded difficult choices meme. :)

    Personally, I don’t care to play on any maps smaller than huge. So if I find I don’t have access to a new resource, if I don’t have it, I can generally get it by either settling it or conquering it if necessary.

    But yes, many of the resource requirements are borked. I am quite thankful there are mods available I can adjust to my own preferences.
     
  4. Giskler

    Giskler +1 Sleuthing

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,322
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Norway
    I just play with abundant resources on now so I don't have to have the headache of being stuck without a critical strategic resource because it only exists in a small corner on the other side of the world.
     
  5. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    1,373
    I'm usually tight on resources, especially oil, aluminium and uranium. What is really out of wack compared to these shortages is the +1 uranium and oil per university when winning the nobel prize of physics. It's too much of a game changer and I don't see the connection to the RL prize.
     
  6. Sostratus

    Sostratus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    1,241
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    This is why I don't like infantry-oil. It invalidates their use case in favor of tanks. When oil is the limiter, there's literally no point in paying 430 production for a 70str, 2move unit when you can pay 480 prod for an 80str, 4 move unit. The only use case to use infantry is if your opponent has no oil and cannot build any tanks; but if they don't have oil they aren't really a threat at all anyways.
     
    mentos15 and acluewithout like this.
  7. Pietato

    Pietato Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,382
    Location:
    New Zealand
    THIS. That prize is insanely gamebreaking.

    There is nowhere near enough Uranium on the map, even with Huge Abundant maps.

    I also find the government which gives power in every city to be the best, because it saves you so many resources, and cuts downs CO2 heavily.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 13, 2019
    Sostratus likes this.
  8. Sostratus

    Sostratus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    1,241
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    I want to like corporate libertarianism. But if I have say, 10 cities, that's 30 power or 7.5 coal/oil. Do you even have 7.5 coal+oil deposits in an empire that size? It's just such a good bonus. And the project boost is over the top.

    The worst was how they buffed Synthetic Technocracy between reveal and release from +2 to +3 power, and nerfed corporate libertarianism from +15% for encampment and CH to just +10%, and they made the science penalty global instead of just cities without governors (rude.) -10% tourism is a trivial penalty unless you're going for culture victory-> you would want Digital Democracy instead. It should be -10% culture because that would actually make you weaker at defending against CV. I think CL needs to be buffed to its reveal state, at least the production bonuses.
     
    acluewithout likes this.

Share This Page