C3C : Strategic Resources Scarcity Sucks!

[Aqualung71]

Double post.....sorry, deleted this one

[Aqualung71]

I like the challenge of having to cope with fewer resources in C3C. Unfortunately however, as with many features that seem to be designed to make it more difficult for the human player, the AI is not able to adapt as well as a human and I'm afraid that the change is actually counterproductive.

So often, what should be a risky or marginal war against a large AI with a strong military, turns into a no brainer because they don't have horses/saltpeter (preventing damaging Cavalry led counterattacks) or even rubber (extending the utility of your own Cavalry as they won't have infantry).

Perhaps the AI should also get resource bonuses.....hmmm!

[Mountain Sage]

On the other side, when YOU have no iron and no saltpeter (or iron but no saltpeter and no rubber), things get more, well, interesting.

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by Mountain Sage
On the other side, when YOU have no iron and no saltpeter (or iron but no saltpeter and no rubber), things get more, well, interesting.

Yes they do. That's usually when I scour the market to see if someone will trade with me. If not and I have no real chance of taking the resource by force I then esc/newgame/temperate/standard/.......etc.

[Iron Giant]

Started new game last night:

I got no iron.
Good start city, but on a thin strip of land between two AI.
I built the Great Library.

North of me I might win a long, costly war with Longbowmen.

South of me are the Romans.

They got:
2 Iron
Ivory
Temple of Zeus (just built)
double my number of citys due to better start location.

I think the resources are too, too scarce.

[CerberusIV]

The resources thing cuts both ways.

My current game gave an isolated start. I didn't use suicide galleys but did build the Great Library so sat and waited for the AI's to turn up. I got 14 techs out of that, virtually to the end of the Medieval.

I had horses, so could build my Hittite War Chariots, but no iron, no saltpeter and no coal. I managed to buy some (expensive) iron and coal, built RR's, factories and a couple of coal plants (mainly thanks to the Romans declaring war, landing a Legion and a MI which my war chariots crushed, and giving my GA). I missed US but got ToE and Hoover.

The really good bit is that there are 7 civs left, only 6 sources of rubber and I have 3 of them! If I get oil then 2 civs are easy pickings for tanks and bombers and that will give me the missing resources.

I nearly quit this game at several points but am now looking forward to the payback for hanging in there.

I do think that strategic resources should not be quite so scarce and hope this is fixed but it makes for a different game where you have to choose who to war with carefully.

[Tall Stranger]

It definitely cuts both ways. In a previous game, my adversaries included the Celts, who didn't have iron, and the Russians, who didn't have horses. Sure, it crippled them, but since they were both on the other continent, it resulted in a mega-powerful Sumeria, who wound up posing a pretty significant challenge.

[geniemalin]

I had no iron or horses. I fought a nasty archer/catapult war against the Maya to seize an iron deposit just north of me.

I still have no horses. I have no saltpeter, having just traded for Gunpowder, and none anywhere near me.

This has been an interesting game, and is forcing me to think on my feet. If you get al the strategic resources, especially if you get them without struggles, the game, especially warfare, can turn predictable. I like the unpredictability that the scarcity injects.

[Harovan]

The reduction of the strategical resources is absolutely atrocious and makes war in Conquests not an option, but a necessity. This moves the otherwise enjoyable game dangerously close to the category war game. But for a war game it has a too poor combat system and not nearly enough unit types. So it isn't a game for builders anymore, but for warmongers there are better, more complex war games on the market. This fact severely reduces the usability of Conquests. The obvious solution is (sadly!), don't play it at the moment, enjoy other games and wait for a fix.

Oh, and before anyone complains and says, blah, blah, you can modify the odds of resource appearance in the editor, I know that, but it's the standard rules that should balance out a game.

[CerberusIV]

Yes, I am not unhappy with the resource scarcity for now (the next game or two that I play) but it needs to be sorted in the next patch for the long term playability of the game.

[lancealot]

As mentioned b4 - the scarcity and a problematic diplomatic system cause the game to heavily rely on war.
I am a builder type of player (with an occasional war of course ), but in my current monarch where im playing on a huge map with continents- i managed to control 1 continent out of 3 ,and i still have to wage war in order to have the essntial coal and oil (there are only 3 in the entire map!!).

I think it's a bit nuts and even though i manage to stay one step ahead of my rivals its more annoying than challenging.

[vmxa1]

I am actually thinking about using PTW instead now. Many useful things are in C3C, but the game is much different than is was.

I do not want to use the editor to change things, but the resoure and lux rationing is forcing me to just make troops and not do much building. I like an occassional warmonger game, but not a mandatory one.

I am giving the 1.15 a few more spins, but man......

[SirOsis]

What are the actual changes from PTW to C3C? I have been looking in the editor and where can you change the scarcity/abundance of resources?

I don't think there is such a thing.

[SirOsis]

I do see appearance ratio in the Natural Resources tab but they are the same value in C3C and PTW. Also luxuries have no appearance ration so this must be handled somewhere else.

[CerberusIV]

Originally posted by SirOsis
I do see appearance ratio in the Natural Resources tab but they are the same value in C3C and PTW. Also luxuries have no appearance ration so this must be handled somewhere else.

For some reason, apparently due to the addition of the new terrain types, the same settings result in fewer strategic resources in C3C compared to PTW.

In the example I gave earlier I now have 3 oil and three other civs have 1 oil each. So an 8 civ standard map in C3C has 6 of each of oil and rubber for 8 civs whereas PTW would often give one per civ.

Luxury resources are indeed handled differently and were deliberately reduced and scattered more widely on each continent.