Resource missing

**leonardusius** · November 07, 2015, 02:10 AM

I see the same big mistake in Dei with resource allocation, than in original vanilla; I wrote about it but no fix at all. How could be possible to not add to Dacia the gold resource when is obvious (historically) that one of the most plentyful of gold resource in that era was the Dacia, which in fact triggered the 2 daco-romans wars of Trajan. I can't believe that is missing. DeI team, please fix that ! BTW, where is a thread about reporting bugs ?

**Ygraine** · November 07, 2015, 02:37 AM

The resources in DeI are placed based on strategical balance rather than historical authenticity. There have been talks about re-arranging some of the resources in both GC and the other campaigns but you'll have to get a definitive answer from Dresden about it!

But I agree with your general opinion - for example Persia having slaves didn't make sense due to Zoroastrianism and other examples.

**gornoviceanu** · November 08, 2015, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted by Ygraine

The resources in DeI are placed based on strategical balance rather than historical authenticity. There have been talks about re-arranging some of the resources in both GC and the other campaigns but you'll have to get a definitive answer from Dresden about it!

But I agree with your general opinion - for example Persia having slaves didn't make sense due to Zoroastrianism and other examples.

If this is true, I think that is a bad choice. There was a reason Rome went for Galia and Dacia and didn't bother conquering the germanic people.. the lack of resources that would be valuable to the Empire. Yeah, sure, the germans put up a very good fight but the truth is Germania just wasn't worth it.

I can see very rich provinces causing wars between empires / alliances if the AI could be taught to understand that certain resources are the jackpot. Maybe that passive CAI that still happens sometimes could be fixed by giving CAI incentive to win rich provinces.

**leonardusius** · November 08, 2015, 05:32 AM

So, I strongly suggest a submod which depicts here the historical views, even if that means regions have multiple resources. For multiplayer purposes it is a holly grail.

**KAM 2150** · November 07, 2015, 03:18 AM

There is a huge thread called Bug Reports and it is sticked thread so I guess it is rather hard to miss

We already changed some resources for more historical in 1.1 so Dacia is in need of gold in my opinion

**leonardusius** · November 07, 2015, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by KAM 2150

We already changed some resources for more historical in 1.1 so Dacia is in need of gold in my opinion

What you point ? I don't understand.

**KAM 2150** · November 07, 2015, 05:16 AM

Nisa got horse resource as it was a place where best ancient horses were breed and slave resource was taken out from Persia.

**leonardusius** · November 07, 2015, 05:56 AM

Originally Posted by KAM 2150

Nisa got horse resource as it was a place where best ancient horses .

Same was Gaetia/Getae. They were mentioned in historical sources as excellent horse riders.

**Augustusng** · November 07, 2015, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by leonardusius

Same was Gaetia. They were mentioned in historical sources as excellent horse riders.

It's not a question of who was an excellent horseman, but the kinds of horses available. If we just gave the warhorse resource to every faction known for their horsemen, the whole steppe would just be filled with that.

**leonardusius** · November 08, 2015, 03:00 AM

Now I think I catch your humour, but Dacia was not in need of gold, and DeI team surely know that Dacia was the biggest land full of gold in roman times...please fix that. With horses for Getae I understand: one is to be excellent riders and one is to have horses as strategic resources mentioned by sources. Here you're right, but for gold of Dacia, not.

**KAM 2150** · November 07, 2015, 06:09 AM

Well, there should be still a limit on amount of resources to make them strategic. No other ancient horse can be compared to horses from Nisa.

**Dresden** · November 07, 2015, 03:04 PM

1 - Resources are placed for strategic/gameplay reasons and always have been. For example, all locations have access to fish and timber, but the resource system exists to have them in limited locations. This adds to the strategic element of the economy side of things.
2 - We have moved some resources. Slaves are no longer in Persia (since they were actually against that historically) and horses are in Nisa.
3 - Some resources - slaves, horses, salt - can be produced once you get them through trade. So, they have limited locations to start for a reason.

**leonardusius** · November 08, 2015, 05:18 AM

So, I strongly suggest a submod which depicts here the historical views, even if that means regions have multiple resources. For multiplayer purposesit is a holly grail.

**Dresden** · November 08, 2015, 01:09 PM

Resources are based on the main building, we would have to overhaul a lot of the building system for multiple resources.

Most of this has been a part of the mod for 2 years and has worked.

**leonardusius** · November 09, 2015, 01:07 AM

Originally Posted by Dresden

Resources are based on the main building, we would have to overhaul a lot of the building system for multiple resources.

Most of this has been a part of the mod for 2 years and has worked.

Yes, but you're missing a lot of .....accuracy. maybe a very welcome submod like I said will appear.

**TFCAliarcy** · November 08, 2015, 03:55 PM

So now that resources are being mentioned, is there any reason behind there not being any amber in the Baltics?

**Dresden** · November 08, 2015, 04:00 PM

Amber was added by CA with their new building system, which we don't use. If you notice, though, it actually isn't a real resource. It is more of a special building chain.