Resource outposts

[mvm900]

For the love of god, please put in some way to extract resources without making a city. It sucks seeing a bit of oil like off the coast of a single poo snow tile or something like that and having to build a bad city to do it.

[WimpyTheWarrior]

Civ3 had a concept of Colonies, which were 1 POP mini-cities (1 tile only) built by expending a worker. It was not a true city as it had no production or border growth, but it granted you access to the resource that the Colony was placed on.

I always loved Colonies and wondered why they were removed from Civ4 onwards. You can read about Colonies here: https://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/infocenter/#terrain

[cerberusiv]

Colonies or outposts were a good solution to this but the difference in Civ VI, compared to V or earlier, is that there is no science or culture penalty for more cities. Yes, you have to build a settler and yes, there could be loyalty problems if you have R&F, but there is no other penalty for that extra city provided you keep it small by limitng housing or food so it doesn't require extra amenities.

A city that gets you a strategic, or luxury, resource you would not otherwise have is not a "bad" city.

[Gonzo_o0]

Opportunity cost. Welcome to Civ 6.

[mvm900]

Originally posted by cerberusiv:

Colonies or outposts were a good solution to this but the difference in Civ VI, compared to V or earlier, is that there is no science or culture penalty for more cities. Yes, you have to build a settler and yes, there could be loyalty problems if you have R&F, but there is no other penalty for that extra city provided you keep it small by limitng housing or food so it doesn't require extra amenities.

A city that gets you a strategic, or luxury, resource you would not otherwise have is not a "bad" city.

Yeah, sure, then you realize you have to build a settler for a city that only gets you maybe one resource. Which is terrible both early game and in long/marathon games where the time to wait can be hellish. Also takes a pop away which isn't that terrible usually but can be prohibitive if you're already on a bad string of luck and/or got behind. (Combined with, again, producing said settler, of course.)

Doubly worse if it's like, just outside your borders and/or on the edge of a continent.

[mvm900]

Originally posted by WimpyTheWarrior:

Civ3 had a concept of Colonies, which were 1 POP mini-cities (1 tile only) built by expending a worker. It was not a true city as it had no production or border growth, but it granted you access to the resource that the Colony was placed on.

I always loved Colonies and wondered why they were removed from Civ4 onwards. You can read about Colonies here: https://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/infocenter/#terrain

Oh neat. I have civ 3 but never played much. Maybe I'll check it out another time.

[Kimmaz]

Maybe you could build a "new" District that they add, or change the Encampment. So that if you build it on your border you gain a 1 tile radius Around that encampment only. it in addition to your normal border limits.

[w.f.schepel]

I have yet to play a game where I needed a 'colony'. (Diff of Emperor or better.) Sure, there are strategic resources in weird spots, but there are a) always resources in better spots, and b) you can make cities work just about anywhere. Trade routes and districts do that for you. You literally don't need need a single resource to make a city work thanks to easily available mechanics. The only problem you might run into is loyalty... But nothing that old fashioned military solutions can't solve.

[Exemplar]

I think the idea of a resource outpost is cool, but with caveats. I guess the main question is, "How, exactly, is this somehow different than just a size 1 or 2 city?". Cities don't "need" to grow, and as a matter of fact, if the placement is solely for the purpose of garnering strategic or luxury resource, why, indeed, would you want it to, as it would only chew up amenities and likely be sub-optimal.

What are some real life examples of such resource outposts, which do not have a cultural population center in the relative proximity? I can think of scientific research stations, as in Antarctica, but no one's really pulling oil or uranium or whatever else out of there... yet. Other examples of which I can possibly imagine are the result of figurative trade deals or exploitation of the native populace which is actually an implied military occupation.

In the end, I'm guessing what you really are looking for is a conditional exception to the loyalty mechanism?

[Sentient_Toaster]

Deepwater Horizon was about 50 miles from the nearest point of land at the time of that infamous oil spill.

There's fishing areas being exploited all over the ocean far from land in international waters, much further than you can build fishing boats in Civ.

I think the idea of a resource outpost is cool, but with caveats. I guess the main question is, "How, exactly, is this somehow different than just a size 1 or 2 city?".

One obvious answer is no ability to produce anything at all besides extract the resource.

[Kimmaz]

Could you not create a large fortress defencive building by expending/using a great general, and gain the tiles around it. I seem to recall having done that. You can even take land from a enemy if your borders is next to eachother.

[Exemplar]

Originally posted by Sentient_Toaster:

Deepwater Horizon was about 50 miles from the nearest point of land at the time of that infamous oil spill.

There's fishing areas being exploited all over the ocean far from land in international waters, much further than you can build fishing boats in Civ.

Well, to that I argue tiles give a disproportionate view of the amount of space they actually cover. A standard size map is about 82x54 hex grid for a total of about 4428 total hexes. This, divided into the surface area of Earth at roughly 197million square miles means each hex is roughly 44,490 square miles. Surface area of the entire gulf of Mexico is about 618,000 square miles, or in real life terms is about 14 hexes total in a rough enlongated oval. A city on the USA south coast, let's use New Orleans, extending 3 tiles cultural border in all directions is more than half of the gulf of Mexico. 50 miles is..well, nothing, all within the "first tile".

Originally posted by Sentient_Toaster:

One obvious answer is no ability to produce anything at all besides extract the resource.

This isn't really an answer to me, though. It more begs the question. "I will do this so I have no ability to produce anything there," doesn't make sense.

I said it's a good idea, we don't need the justify the existence of the idea. I only wonder how it's somehow fundamentally different. I mean, even if you have a regular work force, a modicum of defense (or law enforcement) and all that comes with that (doctors, stores, restaurants, bank, i dunno, some leisure employees) you have what is essentially a population 1 city at or just under 1000 people. And those 1000 people don't even need to be along the same 5 sq miles of main street and a few side streets. Even if they "all live in the center tile", instead of spread amongst the 7 initial tiles, it's still 1 person per 44 square miles. (although people won't live in every section of square mileage of course, but still, that is the population density)

[hopsblues]

Originally posted by Exemplar:

Originally posted by Sentient_Toaster:

Deepwater Horizon was about 50 miles from the nearest point of land at the time of that infamous oil spill.

There's fishing areas being exploited all over the ocean far from land in international waters, much further than you can build fishing boats in Civ.

Well, to that I argue tiles give a disproportionate view of the amount of space they actually cover. A standard size map is about 82x54 hex grid for a total of about 4428 total hexes. This, divided into the surface area of Earth at roughly 197million square miles means each hex is roughly 44,490 square miles. Surface area of the entire gulf of Mexico is about 618,000 square miles, or in real life terms is about 14 hexes total in a rough enlongated oval. A city on the USA south coast, let's use New Orleans, extending 3 tiles cultural border in all directions is more than half of the gulf of Mexico. 50 miles is..well, nothing, all within the "first tile".

Originally posted by Sentient_Toaster:

One obvious answer is no ability to produce anything at all besides extract the resource.

This isn't really an answer to me, though. It more begs the question. "I will do this so I have no ability to produce anything there," doesn't make sense.

I said it's a good idea, we don't need the justify the existence of the idea. I only wonder how it's somehow fundamentally different. I mean, even if you have a regular work force, a modicum of defense (or law enforcement) and all that comes with that (doctors, stores, restaurants, bank, i dunno, some leisure employees) you have what is essentially a population 1 city at or just under 1000 people. And those 1000 people don't even need to be along the same 5 sq miles of main street and a few side streets. Even if they "all live in the center tile", instead of spread amongst the 7 initial tiles, it's still 1 person per 44 square miles. (although people won't live in every section of square mileage of course, but still, that is the population density)

How about oil reserves in north Alaska?

[Exemplar]

It's USA territory, and has been since 1867, ceded in a deal by the Russians because they felt they wouldn't be able to defend it from the British, potentially moving in from British Columbia. In game terms, it's an extended cultural border from low population centers, or possibly reflective of a strategy of trading properties so as to create a buffer zone from an aggressive opponent, or both.

1860 map. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_America#/media/File:1860-russian-america.jpg

Imagine sending 5 settlers to coastal localities in a snowy expanse at far north latitude and buying all the land tiles around and between them, while they remain size 1 or 2 "cities". That's Russian America.

This current iteration of Civ doesn't generally allow the AI to just sell properties because it's a strategy too exploitable by human, but you see people do that sometimes in multiplayer.

[WimpyTheWarrior]

Originally posted by Exemplar:

What are some real life examples of such resource outposts, which do not have a cultural population center in the relative proximity?

I would point to the city of Malaca in peninsular Malaysia. At various times it was controlled by the Portugese, the Dutch, and finally the British. Batavia (current Jakarta) would be another example, and also the British colonies on Borneo. Tin and rubber were the critical resources in the Malaysian peninsula, and another reason for the colony of Malaca was control of the Straits of Malaca for the important spice trade from the Dutch East Indies.

Outside of SE Asia, Goa was a Portugese trading colony on the Indian east coast. The island of Zanzibar in current Tanzania would be an example in Africa. Modern S. Africa was at one point a Dutch colony.

During the period, colonies were often formed by companies under charter from their respective crowns. Think of the British and Dutch East Indies Companies. The colony gave a presence (and arguably a pretext) for stationing troops. These resource and trading colonies were extremely important during the 15th - 19th centuries.

An interesting argument can be made that the offshore processing centres in India and elsewhere are the 21st century equivalent of the 18th century colonies. Like the earlier versions, the Indian processing centres are segregated from the local population with separate access and infrastructure (power, water, telco, transport). The current resource is data, the new valuable resource for information economies.

EDIT: Improved grammar.

[Exemplar]

I'm not sure how much of that is related to the subject, not just explained by suzerain status of a city state or military occupation. Especially when you start talking about a "colony", you're talking about settlers from the home country. South Africa wasn't just "some way to extract resources without making a city"~re. op. It was the European occupation of the Zulu nation. The subject is kind of getting greyed out.

Are feitorias really what we're talking about? Maybe. That might be the strongest case for an example. Feitorias weren't built for "...a bit of oil like off the coast of a single poo snow tile..." though. (not that oil needs to be the exact case, but any case) They were built where there were already native populations collecting and consuming the resource, and facilitating free trade. It seems to me the op refers to places where there are no previous claims to territory and the expressed purpose is to collect an adjacent resource. As in, sending a builder to "some place", constructing an oil platform, which isn't within player's cultural border, nor a product of international trade or other dealing. As it stands, with the appropriate tech, you can improve tiles within an allied city state territory, thus receiving the benefits. (i.e. at plastics send builder to coastal city state of which you are suzerain, build offshore oil rig, gain benefit of 1 oil)