I suggested the following idea at the another thread before.
Let’s introduce a low-price building named “Fur Hut”, “Hunting Hut” or the any other suitable term.
It is the front line for the fur hunting, where the hunters drop-off and skin the obtained preys in.
Perhaps keep using the current module of Tribal Marketplace for it.
The Fur Hut can only be built on “the hill” which is called “the mine” by the Europeans. When it is covering on there, no one can dig the resources under it. However unlike Mountain Monastery, it would not supply any resource except for LoS. It is just a cheap mark able to be built by Villagers and Chiefs easily.
People built the Fur Hut at the hunting ground and bring furs back from there, and then Villagers sell it to the Buyers from outland at Market in the village. So that, if the player has 1 Fur Hut at least, he/she can assign Villagers “gathering” coins at Markets like they are trading. Due to the limit to the number of the gatherers, more Markets are built, more Villagers can be assigned, more coin income there. Meanwhile, the hills under Fur Huts contain less and less resources.
The hill and the Fur Hut on the hill will not disappear even if no more animals can be hunted for fur there. The Europeans call this “the mine is dry”. If the opponents destroy the Fur Hut in time, they can still find the gold, silver or bronze for digging at the hill. If not, the hill will lose its shiny luster and look rocky. Anyway, the Fur Hut will keep existing and supplying the LoS around it. If lose all the Fur Huts or all the hill under Fur Huts become rocky, Villagers cannot continue working and gathering coin at Markets, since unable to get fur from Fur Huts, no more fur can be sale. In the end, the rocky hill will turn into flat ground together when Fur hut is destroyed.
Such a mechanic does not require the development of new module, just change the code, use a method similar to Mountain Monastery, and make Market a building that can be gathered by Villagers.
I’m really hoping something is done about the horrible coin gathering but it might take more of an overhaul than even this for a totally satisfactory solution.
My prefered solution would be diversifying the sources of coin to include things like dens of fur bearing animals that could also be gathered by natives. Really any of the non-traditional mines like salt mines and treasure ships should already be fair game for them.
The mineral source for wild animals is an interesting approach, and really anything is better than what has been done now. Even just allowing natives to mine salt and having an upgrade or shipment of bison and a salt mine could be a good way to provide a reliable source of coin.
I think the solution should be based on the principle of minimal intervention in the existing mechanic.
This means that the new mechanic for obtaining coins will be similar to mining or Tribal Marketplace, except that it can improve some uncomfortable points, such as disappearing with the mine and so on. Making metal mines the exclusive natural resource of other civs, or binding the natural food source to the coin source in the early game, will have a large impact on the existing mechanic.
Therefore, in my opinion, the point is not to add new sources such as salt mines or treasure ships that can be directly gathered by the natives or anyone. Technically, metal mines still have to be the main source of coin for the natives, otherwise we have to completely adjust the cost of each unit and technology for the balance. This will consume more devs’ power.
My idea about Fur Huts is to let Villagers work at Market, which makes coin income very reasonable.
As long as the mine is regarded as an ordinary hill, it will not be weird to have Fur Huts on it.
On the other hand, this is not technically different from the existing mechanic, which means that we do not need to change the cost of other things.
There is a lot of potential with this idea too, it just doesn’t seem like it would fit as the main coin gathering mechanic.
It is a very good solution to the problem of natives still being locked out of mines completely if the tribal market is removed like it should be. Even if you could only make one at a time and it just worked like an oovoo + pasture in AoE4 it would allow you to access the resource in some capacity.
Honestly, my current solution seems to be the simplest - Villagers have an innate gold trickle that happens no matter where they are, but when within X units of a Fur Trade - which should be built near mines for maximum efficiency - their innate gold trickle greatly increases.
Gonna be frank, there’s no real way to make either the Hauds or Lakota interact with mines in a way that will make sense. The easiest way is to simply give them a building that mines for them, or a building that converts the mines into another way to collect the resource - like a specific animal that contains gold instead of food, and is produced as long as the mine exists.
No matter how you do it, however, it’s going to be a complete fabrication of history anyway. Might as well do it in the simplest way possible, code-wise.
It is the only possible relationship that would make sense. The problem is how it could be implemented.
It is not exactly that, but they are sacred places where the surrounding nature is protected. If it is protected, it means that it will never be depleted and that is why it is perhaps passive income. Being in such remote places it could be said that it is similar to a cottage.
Here you can imagine anything, but with the fur market depleting a mine I can’t imagine anything rational.
Don’t like this idea.
That means the opponent has no way to limit Lakota player’s coin income, while the miners of other civs are killed by the Axe Riders.
The correction is one thing, the balance and entertainment are also another important things.
The hunters of other civs can also gather coins from that kind of animal, I think it is meaningless.
The opponents will try their best to kill those animal over as fast as they can.
Feel like an equivalent building to Cherry Orchard and Mango Grove but it contains coin rather than food and wood. It could also be named Tribal Marketplace, and use the same module. The easiest way indeed, although it still disappears once exhausted.
However, making metal mines the exclusive natural resource of other civs is really an idea worthy worrying. Since Technically the current structure of Lakota and Haudenosaunee is designed for the coin from mines. If there is Cherry-Orchard-like Tribal Marketplace, the balance, strategy as well as the gameplay will all be impacted.
It is a game, not a textbook.
The civ will completely be changed if the core part is gone. Unless we can sure that people will willing to pay for “New Lakota” and “New Haudenosaunee”, it is more possible to only fix a part of structure at low cost. Just replace the offensive existing surface with the another way which is not offensive, but keep the same structure to avoid impact the core.
Have you looked at my proposal? It aimed to remove the burden of Tribal Marketplace (this match is living proof of the burden), while being simple, tweakable, and expandable (can be used for future civs).
It’s not the most elegant, nor is it as radical as some forum posters want. But being practical is exactly the goal.
Here, I want to clarify some things about what I did for my mod;
Lakota villagers are more expensive, at 145 food, and have slightly better combat stats and move faster. The Medicine upgrade in the market was removed, as well as the card Pioneers, and the base health of the villagers was lowered. They are affected by teepees, and have a build limit of 60. Power budget was heavily modified to make the coin trickle work.
At 0.05 gold/sec, it’s essentially non-existent unless you have a large amount of villagers, and at that point it’s just giving you some extra gold to make up for the cost difference of the Lakota Khuwa (name of the villager) and their much lower build limit.
When near the Fur Trade - which has a build limit of 5 - the passive trickle is increased by 150%, and Khuwa will gather 10% faster. Upgrades are available to increase the passive trickle by a small percent, going up to 100% bonus, which means at max, the coin trickle hits 0.25 gold/sec at its highest rate.
That’s not very much gold, and is only enough to sustain the economy in the later-game by a small amount. A majority of the gold collected comes from the Fur Trades themselves, which will auto-mine any mines near them. (I’m debating on their ability to hunt and gather wood.)
it’s a fairly simplistic fix, but it does the job and moves their focus off gold - I shifted the costs of their units to be primarily wood/food. The only units that cost food/gold are the two armed with rifles.
I respect and appreciate your comments on using your knowledge of the Lakota people.
It seems that your mod has almost changed the core of the current structure of this civ, so I can hardly imagine how such an economic system can sustain the gameplay. A cherry orchard-like building, or a method of covering a specific building on a mine and letting villagers gather coin from a certain place, using these existing mechanics will make it easier to understand and to consider balance and build order, because it is less likely to interfere with the core gameplay.
For example, in my edition of 3 Asian civs, the stereotypes and movie-like fantasies of Asian religions in the current game have been greatly reduced:
I use other units to perform the same or similar functions, such as 2 Japanese cartographers, Chinese armed caravan leader and members, etc.
The monastery is separated from the mercenary, transformed into an exclusive religious building, allowing the existing assets of religious warriors to be reasonably used. Besides, introduce the equivalent building to the European tavern, the inn.
Certain wonders that should be located in the motherland are replaced with ones that are reasonable even if they appear in new territories, such as a forge to replace the Golden Pavilion, a trade workshop to replace the Porcelain Tower, a Qila (meaning “fortress”) to replace the Agra Fort, and so on.
While adding something new and making the game as accurate as possible, I believe that I have retained the core gameplay, which makes people easier to imagine how to adapt to these changes and makes the balance easier.
The devs have made at least one attempt to correct the native American civs, but they have not done the same thing with the Asian civs. Perhaps their emphasis on native Americans can make your opinions easier to be adopted than mine.
Anyway, do you sure your structure of the New Lakota is also fit the New Haudenosaunee?
At least, we all know there is no teepee for Haudenosaunee.
I absolutely wanted to change the core gameplay of the Lakota. As they are, they’re stuck in a cav-centric, early-game focus that takes too much of their power budget, rendering them completely useless if you need/want to use infantry or play them outside an early game focus. They have huge holes in their gameplay loop that other civs don’t have and aren’t constrained by.
The structure of the civ has to be shared to multiple civs basically.
Europeans, American empires, Asians, Africans, Revolutionary states, and here the North American natives you are working for.
Do they own the Khuwa Villagers too? Do their Villagers trickle coin too? Do they use the same fur system? Do they change the cost of their units into almost no coin? Do they be affected by anything like by Teepee?
It is clearly that you love your people very much. But developing a game need not just love.
If you remake the whole civ and even unable to share it to other civ, that is too uneconomical for the development team.
German Settler Wagons are not shared across all European civs. French Coureurs des Bois are not shared across all European civs.
In the same manner, the Lakota Khuwa would not be shared across the Native civs, and is intended to be stronger and a better fighter than a regular Villager, but it does not really gather resources that much faster than a normal Villager. It’s intended to be able to defend itself and move from herd to herd faster than a regular Villager, due to the lack of estates or farms and the requirement that the Lakota have to hunt for food an entire game. This gives them a little leeway in hunting, as they know their villagers won’t be killed by a raiding group of cavalry, and could defend themselves or survive an attack long enough for backup to arrive.
In the start of the Hauds rework I’ve made, they have normal villagers. I will change nothing about them, other than the small gold trickle that will be increased when working near a Fur Trade, just the same as the Lakota Khuwa. It will be a smaller gold trickle, however, as the Hauds can build both a farm and an estate.
I think there is another way to link mines to hunting to allow for Lakota to utilize them: Buffalo Jumps
It would be more along the lines of mines = hills/mountains (like mountain monasteries). It could function similarly to your “salt licks” by attracting/generating bison. Buffalo Jumps were in rocky areas and stone figures were constructed to help funnel the bison to the cliffs so it would actually fit somewhat.