Resource effects?

Printable View

11-03-2006, 22:26
wisefather

Resource effects?

Hi, on rtw i loved how there was a broad range of resources that could be imported exported. Apart from slaves and grain etc, all they really did was make money for the settlement they were in. My point is, wouldnt it be better if certain resources did different things? for example

1) Wood- Improves building time, and ship building.
2) Iron- Improves your units weapons attack points.
3) Copper- Improves your units armour and shield points.
4) Horses- Enables recruitment of cavalry units.
5) Rock- Improves building time of town defences and stone structures.

I really think it would make the game more interesting! :D Also, what resources and effects would you like to see? I like the idea of Rock as a resource in places like wales where it is abundent. My history is hazey, but i think in real life a lot of it was exported to england to build stuff. Anyway plz tell me what you think, I'm a really big fan of the economy side of the game ^^

P.S sorry if someone has all ready made a post about this!
11-03-2006, 22:38
Phalaxar

Re: Resource effects?

I don't really like it. If you didn't know, STW was like that - iron in certain provinces meant you could improve weapons etc - and it just frustrated me. At the time we're playing in MTW II I think trade was definitly universal enough for access to any of those anywhere. At most prices should change.

I'd like to see a fair few resources, it was somewhat interesting. :D But only really the special stuff, like marble, olive oil or wild animals. Just wood seems too common to me?
11-03-2006, 22:40
parcelt

Re: Resource effects?

I like it. Sounds a bit like the effects of resources in CIV or in Rise of Nations.

This would be an easy way to add a nice layer of strategy to the game, and make some of the less interesting provinces, well, more interesting!
11-04-2006, 00:21
Kavhan Isbul

Re: Resource effects?

I agree with Phalaxar that abundance of iron ore should not make weapons better,a s it was widely traded, but it should make them cheaper in the province with the resource, which should be reflected in unit cost. Similarly, wood should probably have an impact on the cost of buildings. And if you think wood is too common of a resource, simply go to Egypt.
11-04-2006, 10:02
Encaitar

Re: Resource effects?

M:TW had limitations on building blacksmiths to regions with iron in them iirc. Made certain regions very valuable - which was quite neat. From memory Aragorn and/or Navarre had iron, so when I was playing as a faction around that area, I always made a real effort to capture those particular regions (Switzerland too for it's special pikemen).

It was better IMO than having big armouries all over the place (which you could get in Rome), as it gave more individuality and meaning to regions.
11-04-2006, 17:17
GeneralMikeIII

Re: Resource effects?

I think I'm with wisefather on this one, especially for the ones he specified. It will go a lot further towards the settlement specialization thing CA is trying to do with the cities/castles thing. I kinda liked how they did the iron in M1, but I don't think there were enough places to get iron (there were only 9 provinces on the whole map, IIRC, and 3 or 4 of them were concentrated in Spain). I liked the thing in M1 where you had certain provinces you would go for (Switzerland, iron provinces, Toulouse, etc.). It did add another layer of strategy.

What might be cool is if you could transport your resources, simulating local trade. If for example there is a lot of stone in Wales, but you want to have your tough defenses in Wessex or Flanders, you could select to trade the resource to that settlement, so Wales loses the bonus and the other one gains it. Or trade iron to Switzerland and get uber-super pikemen. I didn't like how they did it in CIV because you could have 25 cities or more all drawing off the same single iron deposit, and I just don't see that as very realistic. And with the trade thing, the player will have some control over it, but you need to have the province to trade the resource, so it is still important to get those resource provinces, even if the resource is just about useless in the province it is originally in.

Then there is an added military strategy to the game in disrupting trade routes by taking linking provinces (sorta like in RISK)...

:goes to investigate how hard it would be to mod this in:
11-04-2006, 18:33
ProudNerd

Re: Resource effects?

Quote:

Originally Posted by wisefather

Hi, on rtw i loved how there was a broad range of resources that could be imported exported. Apart from slaves and grain etc, all they really did was make money for the settlement they were in. My point is, wouldnt it be better if certain resources did different things? for example

1) Wood- Improves building time, and ship building.
2) Iron- Improves your units weapons attack points.
3) Copper- Improves your units armour and shield points.
4) Horses- Enables recruitment of cavalry units.
5) Rock- Improves building time of town defences and stone structures.

I really think it would make the game more interesting! :D Also, what resources and effects would you like to see? I like the idea of Rock as a resource in places like wales where it is abundent. My history is hazey, but i think in real life a lot of it was exported to england to build stuff. Anyway plz tell me what you think, I'm a really big fan of the economy side of the game ^^

P.S sorry if someone has all ready made a post about this!

Copper is a soft metal, and would be totally ineffective against steel or iron weapons.
11-04-2006, 22:08
wisefather

Re: Resource effects?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProudNerd

Copper is a soft metal, and would be totally ineffective against steel or iron weapons.

lol sorry about that :oops:, but still you see my point about resources having different effects.
11-04-2006, 22:12
wisefather

Re: Resource effects?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeneralMikeIII

I think I'm with wisefather on this one, especially for the ones he specified. It will go a lot further towards the settlement specialization thing CA is trying to do with the cities/castles thing. I kinda liked how they did the iron in M1, but I don't think there were enough places to get iron (there were only 9 provinces on the whole map, IIRC, and 3 or 4 of them were concentrated in Spain). I liked the thing in M1 where you had certain provinces you would go for (Switzerland, iron provinces, Toulouse, etc.). It did add another layer of strategy.

What might be cool is if you could transport your resources, simulating local trade. If for example there is a lot of stone in Wales, but you want to have your tough defenses in Wessex or Flanders, you could select to trade the resource to that settlement, so Wales loses the bonus and the other one gains it. Or trade iron to Switzerland and get uber-super pikemen. I didn't like how they did it in CIV because you could have 25 cities or more all drawing off the same single iron deposit, and I just don't see that as very realistic. And with the trade thing, the player will have some control over it, but you need to have the province to trade the resource, so it is still important to get those resource provinces, even if the resource is just about useless in the province it is originally in.

Then there is an added military strategy to the game in disrupting trade routes by taking linking provinces (sorta like in RISK)...

:goes to investigate how hard it would be to mod this in:

I think your idea about sellecting certain resources from settlements is an awsome idea! :2thumbsup: Also i think it would be rather cool to have long distant trade routs, after all there was items available from the far east in england in the medievil age.