Why no chickens?

[LegioCorvus]

You ever wonder why certain resources are missing from the game, or why certain ones are there? Like, for example, chickens. Chickens are one of the major types of livestock. Their consumption has outpaced beef all over the world, and their eggs are essential for a great deal of foods. Their lack of inclusion baffles me. Balance issues?

This one is kind of unusual, but what about coffee?

There are many claims that renaissance thought was fostered by coffee shop discussions, then the newest sign of social power and not the Starbucks thing we have going today. At any rate, as Starbucks itself can attest, coffee is a majorly consumed product in the world today, and is a natural stimulant.

The only drawbacks I see are that it would probably have an unusual bonus attached (+1 in cities with resource). That, and it is a drug. Otherwise, I'd argue about tobacco. Good profit crop, would benefit from plantations. Downside, +1 . Not sure of the bonus. I don't know what stance the Civ guys have on narcotics, as they've had a long and profound effect on our societies, but they're up there with Hitler for adding controversy to the game.



Ones I don't understand:

Incense Really? What am I missing about this one? I've known people to use incense occasionally, but definitely not to the level I've seen people use sugar or dyes.

Bananas Why bananas? I know they're a decent source of found, but are they really that profound? Isn't 'banana republic' a pejorative term for a country that is dependent on limited agriculture (i.e. bananas)? Does it just represent all fruit? I'm not getting this one, either.

 

[Continental Op]

You ever wonder why certain resources are missing from the game, or why certain ones are there? Like, for example, chickens. Chickens are one of the major types of livestock. Their consumption has outpaced beef all over the world, and their eggs are essential for a great deal of foods. Their lack of inclusion baffles me. Balance issues?

This one is kind of unusual, but what about coffee?

There are many claims that renaissance thought was fostered by coffee shop discussions, then the newest sign of social power and not the Starbucks thing we have going today. At any rate, as Starbucks itself can attest, coffee is a majorly consumed product in the world today, and is a natural stimulant.

The only drawbacks I see are that it would probably have an unusual bonus attached (+1 in cities with resource). That, and it is a drug. Otherwise, I'd argue about tobacco. Good profit crop, would benefit from plantations. Downside, +1 . Not sure of the bonus. I don't know what stance the Civ guys have on narcotics, as they've had a long and profound effect on our societies, but they're up there with Hitler for adding controversy to the game.



Ones I don't understand:

Incense Really? What am I missing about this one? I've known people to use incense occasionally, but definitely not to the level I've seen people use sugar or dyes.

Bananas Why bananas? I know they're a decent source of found, but are they really that profound? Isn't 'banana republic' a pejorative term for a country that is dependent on limited agriculture (i.e. bananas)? Does it just represent all fruit? I'm not getting this one, either.

I've always wondered about the absense of chickens as well. There's beef, there's pork, there's salmon. But no chicken.

 

[Bob the Barbari]

You could ask the same question about potatoes.

Personally I tend to think that certain types of food like potatoes or chickens that have quite low requirements regarding climate, soil etc. are included in those standard farms that you can build next to a source of fresh water while resources like rice or sheep represent places that are best suited for certain plants or animals.

As for bananas they are probably meant to represent tropical fruits in general. Besides they have a nice animation.

Regarding tobacco: people sometimes think it has something to do with political correctness but there is tobacco in Colonization so why not Civ 4? The answer is simple: it would be useless. Think of it: would you really take +1 in all your cities for some lousy +4-5 on just a few tiles? Wouldn’t it be better to just put cottages there? Personally even if it would add +1 (besides +1) I still wouldn't use it most of the time. It just wouldn't be wort it.

And while we're at coffee. Why not tea as well?

 

[AfterShafter]

Chickens would be overpowered, obviously!

 

[EvanMeisterX]

I always wondered that too. What about Beans, too? There are many resources Civ, for some reason, doesn't have. I guess that's what mods are for.

 

[naterator]

More resources just reduces the challenge because there's more happiness and health to be had. I think it's a pretty good balance as it is. Also, more resources can create more headaches; I, for one, am glad I don't need saltpeter to make gunpowder units anymore.

A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.

 

[Badtz Maru]

Perhaps it's because chickens farming is not tied to a particular geography or climate. Raising cows generally requires some grazing land, sheep also need appropriate terrain. Pigs - not so much, but for the most part domestic animals in Civ4 are linked to the kind of terrain their wild ancestors inhabited, and they are animals that do best in terrains similar to where their wild ancestors came from. Chickens are descended from jungle fowl, but their domestication is in no way limited to jungle-like climate. If they put them in the game, for realism's sake chickens would show up in jungles, but because of the way the game works, you wouldn't be able to domesticate chickens unless you had jungle in your civilization.

 

[Izmir Stinger]

Flax, cotton, barley, rubbertree, poppies, peas, yams and peanuts are all plants with important historical signifigance that didn't make the cut, in addition to those already named: tobbacco, coffe, tea, beans and potatoes.

Bison, lamas and donkeys were all important animals to our ancestors, not to mention dogs, the earliest domesticated animal and an important source of protection, hunting assistance and, yes, food for the last 10,000 years.

Flint, salt and natural gas are all missing from the list of strategic resources.

Naterator hit the nail on the head: if every plant, animal and geological resource that has played an important roll in history were in the game, it would simply be too much. They had to make cuts, and while chickens are definitely among the the top ten most important animals for humans, they didn't make the cut.

 

[mica8911]

Yes chickens and potatoes are big time. Salt is huge. Also apples and oranges.

Deer is a strange resource to me.

 

[mechaerik]

Chickens would be overpowered, obviously!

Obviously! It would provide like 6, 3 for the chickens, and 3 for the eggs. It would also give +2, because chickens rule.

 

[Mallin]

There are no chickens in civ because it may remind some of us what it is like to hear a rooster crow at 3:00 in the morning.

It gives you a sudden urge to get a shotgun...

 

[Izmir Stinger]

Deer is a strange resource to me.

Yeah, that one seems weird. Obviously wild game -large mammals like deer in particular - were very important for early man as the success of a hunter gather lifestyle depends on their abundance. However, the Civilization games focus on the last 6000 years of human progress, as we moved away from hunting as our primary source of food and started to adopt animal husbandry and agriculture. Their presence in the game is baffling, especially when you compare it to how the game handles the other three now obsolete animal resources. Rather than diminish in importance like fur, ivory and whales, they get a boost late game from supermarkets - thousands of years after the point where your citizens would need to hunt to survive.

 

[qnl]

since no one mentioned this: bananas were HUGE in world history, especially with the spread of Buddhism in the African and Arab world. Some more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana#History

 

[naterator]

Incense Really? What am I missing about this one? I've known people to use incense occasionally, but definitely not to the level I've seen people use sugar or dyes.

Incense is a historical heavyweight. The incense road was a major trade route between egypt, europe, and india. It was for the middle east what silk was for china.

 

[Izmir Stinger]

Yeah, except for deer, all the ones that are in the game make sense, though incense is another that probably should have gone obsolete like fur and ivory.

 

[Perfection]

More resources just reduces the challenge because there's more happiness and health to be had. I think it's a pretty good balance as it is. Also, more resources can create more headaches; I, for one, am glad I don't need saltpeter to make gunpowder units anymore.

A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.

I'm sorry, but Perfection needs the taste sensation that is chicken!

 

[naterator]

I'm sorry, but Perfection needs the taste sensation that is chicken!

right on there, i'm certainly glad i live in the real world where chicken is plentiful rather than living in Civ sucking incense fumes.

 

[BufordTJustice]

I try to build the Chicken Itza every game.

 

[none]

I like all these ideas. Aren't there mods around that introduce extra resources?

 

[Mustakrakish]

Chicken should be there, nothing else. Chick-chick-chicken!
Deer out, chicken in!!!!