Resource Frustration

[Aramis]

While playing on a huge map, with 9 civs total, and having reached AD 450, I discovered only 2 civs have access to Iron (1 source each). This was getting well into the game, and I was busily exploring, mostly in search of iron, and without success.
I've been annoyed at the paucity of resources before but had learned to adapt (my wars are for resources). A world lacking iron, tho', makes for a boring game. When and if I find some I don't want to be stuck in the modern era sending MI and MA in against pathetic spearmen and archers. What kind of war is that? Where's the fun?
I figured that game was an anomoly, so I gave it up and have been trying to get another one going, but iron (and now horses) is as hard to find as it was before. Now the whole scarce resource situation is bugging me again.
It took me over a year, from the time I started playing Civ, to be content with whatever starting position I had and learn to adjust. But the last few days I find myself falling back on the old habit of restarting the game numerous times.
I thought about modding the game so I'd have more resources around, but I can't find a way to do that short of making my own map--which takes the fun out of exploring.
I tried playing with more civs, smaller maps, harder and easier levels, but the frustration remains, and all I can do is whine incessently and complain bitterly .
Sigh. I may have to go back to playing PtW.
Thanks for listening

[vmxa1]

I have not tried this, but it looks like if you changed the occurrence ratio in the editor, you could get more of a given resource.

I forget how you do it, but by making a new conquest.biq you would get maps with the new rules.

Maybe someone from the creation forum could tell us.

[Aramis]

Occurence ration: the higher the number the less often it appears? Or the other way around. And is occurence linked in some way to the number of civs? The last game wherein I had a lot of civs resources seemed more abundant.

[Fried-Psitalon]

The occurrence ratio is tied directly to the number of players - the more players, the more resources. I believe 150 is approximately 1 of that resource per player in the game, but I might be slightly off. 100 is definitely not; that produces less resources than players.

[Jaybe]

If you need to have PTW frequency for strategic resources, in the editor multiply appearance ratios by 1.33.

[Aramis]

Thanks. I'm going to go experiment with it for awhile.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Just boost the appearance ratio up by something large, generate a map and you will see a BIG difference

I upped the ratio to 900 (the max) for Horses.

This map has three more Horses just out of sight on the same continent. It's a Small map, BTW.

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

While they admit the appearance ratio was lowered, there must have been another change as well: Strategic resources are now clustered like Luxuries. Quite often a whole continent has no say, Iron, but 4 out of 5 Coal etc.

[Aramis]

Multiplying Horses, as an experiment, by 1.33 (218 on the appearance ratio--rounded up) meant every civ, on a debug experimental game, had plenty of horses. Same thing with iron. Problem was, I like games where I have an abundance of iron (or anything else) and dole it out in trade to those civs I choose.
So despite my whining at the start of this thread, I'll stick with the game as it is. Fewer resources does make for interesting games.
btw, changing app. rations to 900 is pretty amusing. There'd be no need for trade.
btw again, I thought setting Iron to 0 (a la gold) would make it more randomly dispersed. Nope--there wasn't any.

[Aqualung71]

Originally posted by RMS
Problem was, I like games where I have an abundance of iron (or anything else) and dole it out in trade to those civs I choose.

You mean, you like playing games where you have an unfair and unreasonable advantage that is so powerful it would be hard to lose

[Aramis]

Of course not . . . well, yeah. But just from time to time.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
The occurrence ratio is tied directly to the number of players - the more players, the more resources. I believe 150 is approximately 1 of that resource per player in the game, but I might be slightly off. 100 is definitely not; that produces less resources than players.

An appearance ratio of 150 will mean that there will be 1.5 resources per civ.

[alexman]

That was true up to PTW.

However, in C3C an appearance ratio of 150 means that there is 1.125 resources per civ (75% of PTW ratios).

[Last Conformist]

I like the sparser resources in C3C. Makes strategic resources, well, more strategic.

It get kinda ridiculuous, tho, sometimes. I had a game where my 53% of world land area contained no oil. This with eight civilizations.

[Aramis]

I've now modded the game to give an increase in Iron and Horses (I set both at, I think, 180). Nearly all 11 civs in current game have at least one or the other. Several have both, and enough to trade. This makes the playing field a bit more level at the start. I don't anticipate any of the civs remaining stuck with Spear and Archers when all the rest are building Cav and Rifle.
I left all other resources alone.
IMHO, an element of fun disappears from the game when I invade the AI with tanks and infantry and roll right over their ancient units.
I like all other resources being scarce. I anticipate some good warring in the current game!