Having City Improvements producing resources

[Optimizer]

Allowing city improvements to produce a resource would add enormous possibilities to the game.

Examples:
Stud farm - requires Horses, produces Horses. (We get rid of that classical problem: "Sire, whe still haven't manage to breed the horses that we have bought from the English during the last 1000 years!")
Fuel Plant - requires Coal, produces Oil. (The Germans were dependent of such installations during WWII. Of course the Allies tried to bomb them.)

For balance, these buildings would have to be expensive or just supplying their own cities.

A really ambitious modder could create entire production chains which would make global trade very interesting.

Please, do it!

[Optimizer]

I'm happy enough with the possibility to edit units to this property. They don't need to add any new original buildings.

[Optimizer]

Hey! I just managed to rate my own thread! Isn't that cheating?

[Carver]

Sounds logical, but could radically change the game. I say, if implemented, you should only be able to have one of each type of improvement. It should supply that city only and would not be tradeable. This would be realistic, as even non oil-producing nations facing an oil embargo manage to smuggle in a small amount of petro. So even with no oil, you could have one city trickling out tanks... sounds allright.

[Optimizer]

At least someone who believes in my idea!

[candybo]

I've always thought the "city-produced" resource was a good idea. The best example I have is from the classic "Capitalization": Factory 1 (Washington) has petroleum, builds refinery/processing plant, producing petrochemicals, i.e. plastics. Taking that plastic, factory 2 (New York) builds something else, (SS Parts, Supercomputers?), and so on....



Could make inter-city trade within your Civ more interesting, no?


edited for addition

[Adagio]

I like the idea

[Tiberius]

I like the idea.

For balancing purposes I think it should be a small wonder that produces a resource and only under certain circumstances, because otherwise resources would become too common and too easy to obtain (no more trading, etc).

I imagine it working aprox. like the Iron Works: you have 2 types of resources, build a small wonder and obtain from it a third type of resource.

What do you think?

[Bleyn]

That has potential. Though, I must say, I would prefer it to be a setup where you merely require possesion of the resources and not close proximity to each other.

I understand why they limited Iron Works the way they did. Could have potential to be very unbalancing if you could pick exactly where to plant it, and be sure of having it in almost every game.

But for a resource converter, requiring proximity to one resource would be fine, but please not two.

[Tiberius]

Oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't clear enough. I've said I imagine it working aproximately like the Iron Works but not exactly like it, but I haven't detailed what the differences would be.
I perfectly agree with you that requiring proximity to two resources would be unbalancing. I was thinking in terms of two available resources, not for the city with the small wonder but for the civ. Not proximity, just availability.

[Palaiologos]

The idea is good, but in the late game where your cities have more or less all the improvements, trade will become obsolete.That is if it is implemented as an improvement for all cities to built.

Being a very expensive improvement or an improvement that requires resources in the city proximity would somewhat balance it.

It should only supply one city,though.

And only horses,oil and aluminium should be available via this method.

But is a good idea.

P.S. I think Germans were dependant on Rumanian oil if anywhere else.

[Galvatron]

It's a very good idea so we can simulate international trade and even build monopolies on some goods and perhaps manufacturing trade goods out of the resources.

Would be a very important addition to the game.

[DrFell]

Not sure about manufacturing the raw material resources in cities, but manufacturing new ones (both luxury and strategic, or maybe only luxury) might be a neat way to cut down on the power of ICS. Thing is, at the moment the more of the map you control the more resources you will likely control. This just screams for an infinite expansion type strategy. But if new resources can be manufacture out of old ones (like the oil->petroleum example earlier, dye+silk->some type of clothing, horses-> horsemeat etc) you could build expensive plants to manufacture the goods, likely beginning in the industrial age. This could give small civs with control of only a few resources a fighting chance in trading with bigger empires, if they focused on trade (think the dutch or the phonecians, amongst others). Would be better than the current "only the big or very lucky empires win" type situation which occurs in civ3 right now.

[Optimizer]

Thank you all for your ideas! Resource production could have some really interesting applications - for instance, some small rich countries could buy cheap raw materials from the poor ones and sell them advanced stuff at a high price.

[Panag]

hi ,

it sounds intresting , but we should use something complicated as a resource , ....

oil and minerals make plastic , plastic is needed to build unit X , or building y , something like that would be great , ....

have a nice day

[Optimizer]

We should keep the really advanced ideas for mods.

[Caliban]

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

it sounds intresting , but we should use something complicated as a resource , ....

oil and minerals make plastic , plastic is needed to build unit X , or building y , something like that would be great , ....

have a nice day

Interesting. Does anyone know "Emperor of the fading suns" (1997, I think)? It was not really an exciting game, but its resource system was great...

[ZargonX]

I remember Emperor of the Fading Suns; great game. And yes, it did have a really well fleshed-out resource system. Something like that could work well in Civ, but I think it would definately need to be kept optional; not everyone wants to deal with that level of micro-management. But, even a simpler resource-chain system could really add a lot of options to the game.

[Adm.Naismith]

One thing I really learned during so many years babbling about Civ "wish list" is that you can always find a single game that did a better implementation of a single game concept: a better trade system or a better combat system, a better diplomacy model or a better research system, a better graphic or a better building model, a better population model or a better random event management.

The key, IMHO, is that you can't build a game that fit every taste in a viable gameplay, a realistic time effort and a learning curve not so stepped to need an alpinistic player effort

OR is the keyword. Chose a game trait and focus your game mostly there.
When you try to manage 6000+ years of history you must manage so many things that usually you'll need many dedicated and detailed different games! Please look at my signature to have a feel about my Civ game opinion.

In this thread your focus is on trading and producing, but how about exploring, fighting, discovering, expanding, have diplomatic agreement... and so on?

Not mentioning a cluster of different game to suit every different taste, the Civ Dream Game should be a game "skeleton", a main structure with a general AI to support modular expansion that Firaxis or authorized developers (maybe advanced modder, too) would sell as separate parts.

On a common background (you must have some limit, you know ), every player should chose and fit detailed or general module, everyone with a dedicated AI part to manage the related game rules.

An example, thinking about an Object Oriented model (not exactly, but you get the idea):

General Civ skeleton, with main game interface
Main Map generator (world appearance, define type of supported map, define a Terrain related victory - as global dominance)
Basic Resource module (layer to add production effects on the main map)
Basic tech module (a simple research tree, it also define a Tech related victory, if allowed)
Advanced tech module (a complex, multipath tech tree: inherit the Tech basic victory adding detailed condition)
Basic combat module (a fight with simple rules, resolved at high level as Civ currently do; it also define the basic Combat victory as total conquer)
Advanced combat module (a tactical detailed zoom, with formation support, advanced stack etc.)

Every time you can chose a basic module for every aspect (trade, production, fight, diplomacy, etc.) as the basic game should probably be sold, or detail some part of the game installing (like a plug-in) a different module for your beloved aspect of the game.

Free or bought, you simply take what you want, and advanced fan community or authorized developers could always try to build and develop a different aspect. Firaxis/Infogrames will still gain lot of money selling the basic game and licensing commercial module to others developers: in first person shooters that's already a reality.

Well, time to awake now: the dream must end, before the pratical obstacle and the mess of code interface will change it into a nightmare

[Caliban]

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith
The key, IMHO, is that you can't build a game that fit every taste in a viable gameplay, a realistic time effort and a learning curve not so stepped to need an alpinistic player effort

Does Firaxis pay you for this?

No, okay, I think you are right... but we still hope the perfect game will come one day.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Caliban
Does Firaxis pay you for this?

No, okay, I think you are right... but we still hope the perfect game will come one day.

When Civ III was about to be released and some limits where know I did so many critics that I barely avoid a flame (some posters probably forgive me because I'm Italian and - if not for translation mistake - I don't give name to anyone).
I still think some people add me to their "ignore list" because of my not really positive note about the Holy Game I shouldn't be alllowed to mention (MarkG or DanQ, can you confirm this? Only by numbers, not by name of course).

But game market change, and so do game programming. I hope someone will enhance the "best strategic game of the breed" in a way I'll like it. Quick programming miracle are appreciate, but not really required

[Caliban]

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith


When Civ III was about to be released and some limits where know I did so many critics that I barely avoid a flame (some posters probably forgive me because I'm Italian and - if not for translation mistake - I don't give name to anyone).
I still think some people add me to their "ignore list" because of my not really positive note about the Holy Game I shouldn't be alllowed to mention (MarkG or DanQ, can you confirm this? Only by numbers, not by name of course).

But game market change, and so do game programming. I hope someone will enhance the "best strategic game of the breed" in a way I'll like it. Quick programming miracle are appreciate, but not really required

Hey, CONSTRUCTIVE criticism is always welcome here!

And all of us know that Civ III is far away from being the perfect game...

[BigFurryMonster]

Nice idea. But it should not increase Micromanagement.

[Caliban]

Originally posted by BigFurryMonster
Nice idea. But it should not increase Micromanagement.

It would decrease micromanagement, as you would not have to care about colonies or resource trading any more when you are able to simply produce the resource you need...

[Zero]

well if you would not have to worry about establishing colonies, defending vital territory that gives resource and such, it would take alot away from the game... its all a matter of balance, and if city produced resource can somehow have Pro (obviously generate resource) and a con (perhaps has limit of some sort) that scales it perfectly agst each other, it would work.

degree of micromanagement required for a perfect game, thats more of a personal question. Some people would love the idea of logistical supplying of troops, given report of how many people serve in each represented unit, decide how many to give them leave to boost morale, sned them a celebrity to sing concerts... Some of us (actually i tink most of us including me) would think such idea as horrendous.

[Caliban]

Originally posted by Calc II
well if you would not have to worry about establishing colonies, defending vital territory that gives resource and such, it would take alot away from the game...

I did not deny that... the struggle for resources is one of the most challenging parts of CivIII...

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Several obvious ways in which you could have this feature, and yet still preserve the importance of natural resources:

1) Most of the improvements or wonders mentioned would be the result of late game techs! Thus, throughout the rest of the game, you'd still need these resources, and Luxuries!

2) Some of the ideas mentioned have the improvement converting a more common resource into a rarer type-eg. coal--->Oil. Therefore, you'd still need to have some source of coal in order for it to work. Other improvements mentioned would need the resource it produces-in order to build it-eg. stables need horses to build but, once built, becomes the prerequisite for future mounted units! Again, though, you need to aquire that resource, at first, or else you're stuffed!

3) These improvements will, by there nature, become targets in any war with another civ! If they are destroyed, then you'd better hope that you have a natural source of the resource produced within your grasp, or else you might be up a certain creek without a you-know-what .

Anyway, that's my thoughts!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[Zero]

Oil should be found in ocean squares... that my opinion tho you can rarely have a city reaching ocean squares, so if you could build a sea colony OR have offshoreplatform produce oil it would be nice.

One thing that must be implemented with artificial resources for balance sake. Cannot be traded, Cannot be traded within empire, Produces major pollution. Some wonders can also serve as resource producer, in wonders case it should pretty much mimic natural resource if thats wat the wonder is soley for.

[Zero]

hbout coal to oil conversion to being 2:1? after all when converted it weilds extreme inefficiency.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Calc II
hbout coal to oil conversion to being 2:1? after all when converted it weilds extreme inefficiency.

AFAIK Civ III doesn't manage quantity of available resource: one is enough to supply all your (connected) empire. So we should introduce another variable (quantity), a meter to let the player know how much resource is left, and a table to show resource consume per turn, per city dimension and number of units...