Suggestion - Strategic Resources

[krizcillz]

Hi there, this came up on the Facebook group so thought I would share it here.

[Apologies if this is the wrong place to do so, never quite got my account sorted properly here.]

Suggestion is essentially rework Strategic Resources such that benefits vary depending on:
- Species type (mammal, reptile, robot, etc.)
- Homeworld type

Essentially, what I would like to see is some resources being more valuable to one empire than another, leading to players and AI preferring specific resources rather than the traditional "grab everything, it's all good".

This would require some kind of look up with an adjustment based on species. The type of benefit could remain the same but some species could get zero benefit (thus not wanting it and being willing to trade it) and others could get tonnes of benefit.
This would make trading resources more realistic (I have no need for space bananas, but you might) but could also extend to the AI devaluing to up-valuing planets in trades as well. "Yes we'll sell you that planet, it's worthless to us || Yes we'll pay tonnes for that world!".

What I would suggest is that each species gets a base modifier for each resource (0.0 to 2.0) [none or double].
I would then give each type of planet a base modifier (0.0 to 2.0).

The total benefit of a resource would then be
= [Resource base benefit] * [Species modifier] * ([Planet modifier] * [Habitability])

This would lead to situations where a species who can barely occupy an arctic world wouldn't benefit from their resources.
It would also provide more benefit for generalised species who live in varied systems.

Thoughts?

 

[--Yigito123--]

I'm pretty sure they've said a lot of times that they won't add gameplay changing elements to species types (Apart from robots of course but they're not simply a species type). It would be better to naturally produce this effect where an Empire doesn't need a particular resource because of the way they're developed their economy, government and navy, not arbitrarily enforced by the game because you happened to like the look of that reptilian portrait.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

I'm pretty sure they've said a lot of times that they won't add gameplay changing elements to species types (Apart from robots of course but they're not simply a species type). It would be better to naturally produce this effect where an Empire doesn't need a particular resource because of the way they're developed their economy, government and navy, not arbitrarily enforced by the game because you happened to like the look of that reptilian portrait.

Or just tie it to traits instead.

 

[Diettinger]

I like the idea of more resource types and uses and advocate for a 4th research field: chemistry and materials. If we look at scientific advancement and engineering, many engineering advances follow advances in materials and chemistry, and many materials and chemistry research programs are started by the need to address and engineering need.

I always imagine that Minerals represent a variety of mineral types, not just one, and when they add strategic resources they are just adding the ultra rare or those common resources with very difficult processing requirements. That is probably enough for the most part. Perhaps... as an extension, adding a few Chemistry and Materials advancements upon which certain engineering technologies are dependent.

Chemistry and Materials
Cast Iron
Pig Iron
Low Carbon Iron ---> Engineering: Corvette Hull Enhancement #1 (+100 Hp)
Blister Steel
Bessemer Process ---> Engineering: Advanced Design and Build #1 (Building and Ship Build times -5%)
Siemen's Open Hearth Process ---> Engineering: Advanced Design and Build #2 (Minerals +5%; or Processed Materials +5% if we want to go into two pools here)

 

[krizcillz]

I'm pretty sure they've said a lot of times that they won't add gameplay changing elements to species types (Apart from robots of course but they're not simply a species type). It would be better to naturally produce this effect where an Empire doesn't need a particular resource because of the way they're developed their economy, government and navy, not arbitrarily enforced by the game because you happened to like the look of that reptilian portrait.

It strikes me that, whilst we can change our policies, all empires are ultimately identical by the mid game in terms of ship builds, tech, and planetary setup.

Perhaps not by portait, but some other mechanic such as new traits or even events to move players towards needed more of specific research would add a lot of replay value.

Unlike other paradox titles I find with Stellaris there are only so many times identical armies can not fight while getting eaten in a circle.

 

[Diettinger]

I would think that the ships would likely be similar in real life too. It is more likely that racial predisposition for certain tactics would govern this more. Racial strategic and tactical doctrines would generally guide the builds away from a generally balanced fleet to one extreme or another.
Ie: strategic good doctrine: balanced fleet between patrol, offensive, defensive capabilities, and strategic and tactical manuever.
Fanatical attackers may value speed and offensive power.
Merchantile: minimize standing navy (costly overhead) but continuously 'sell' upgraded vessels to maximize profit.
Industrious: design one ship and mass produce it to capture economies of scale.
Inventive: constantly prototyping new ship technology. Lots of unique designs but also better built because of constant application of learning.

 

[Peko?]

I like the idea of more resource types and uses and advocate for a 4th research field: chemistry and materials. If we look at scientific advancement and engineering, many engineering advances follow advances in materials and chemistry, and many materials and chemistry research programs are started by the need to address and engineering need.

Which is exactly why it fits into Engineering.

Chemistry and Materials
Cast Iron
Pig Iron
Low Carbon Iron ---> Engineering: Corvette Hull Enhancement #1 (+100 Hp)
Blister Steel
Bessemer Process ---> Engineering: Advanced Design and Build #1 (Building and Ship Build times -5%)
Siemen's Open Hearth Process ---> Engineering: Advanced Design and Build #2 (Minerals +5%; or Processed Materials +5% if we want to go into two pools here)

At least don't use hundreds of years old processes. This is supposed to be sci-fi.

 

[Diettinger]

Fair point. I was trying for an example which could be looked up and referenced to help others ground their ideas in reality. I did not have time to make up anything good though.