Have you heard the news?

[lockstep]

Another excerpt from civfanatics.com to support the 'one-resource-every-city'-assumption:

To access any good, you need to build a road to that good. That good must also be connected to your capitol in some way, be it by road, harbor, or airport. If the good in question lies outside of your borders, you will also need to build a colony on that square. For luxury resources, all cities connected to the trade network will automatically receive the benefit of the luxury. For resources, all networked cities should now be able to build units that require that resource.

BTW, civfanatics´Civilization III Info Center (http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3infocenter.shtml) is quite interesting reading.

[Inverse Icarus]

yep. and even if you have bronze linked to your capitial via road, if Antium isn't linked to it somehow, Antium can't build phalanxes.

looks like infastructure is so much more in civ 3.

you could get away with not building any roads for quite a while in civ2.

[Guest]

Originally posted by tniem
I am pretty sure that Dan has said that you only need one resource to build anything with that resource. One resource = every city. You just might run out so it would be a good idea to have a backup.

Plus you can't trade a resource if you are currently using the resource in production in your cities. To trade you need multiple resources.

This IS exactly the way it works.

I hate people who are posting that have no clue as to what they are talking about, if you are "speculating" then say so, don't say "It works like this.", when you mean "I THINK it works like this"!

[Kestrel]

Re: Needing Horses for Chariots.

I agree in the early days that one might need wild horses to start with, but is it not beyond the bounds of possibility that after a few thousand years or so (and the discovery of something like "Animal Husbandry" ) that a Civ might learn how to BREED horses rather than just capture them from the wild ?

Or is this already built in to the existing Civ3 Resource model that after a time the horse resouce is no longer required to produce horse units ?

[splangy]

Originally posted by Kestrel
Re: Needing Horses for Chariots.

I agree in the early days that one might need wild horses to start with, but is it not beyond the bounds of possibility that after a few thousand years or so (and the discovery of something like "Animal Husbandry" ) that a Civ might learn how to BREED horses rather than just capture them from the wild ?

Or is this already built in to the existing Civ3 Resource model that after a time the horse resouce is no longer required to produce horse units ?

ask your mommy about how babies are made, sheel tell you that in order for a baby to be made you need a mommy and a dady, you dont just press a button and *poof* a baby horse is made so im pretty sure that you gona still need horses to make things that require horses (I know, stunning )...

[Kestrel]

Splangy - Thanks for your mature and erudite reply.

You are surely not suggesting that by 1,000 A.D. a Civilization will not have figured out how to breed horses ? In the real world Civs have been breeding horses for thousands of years, not merely capturing them from the wild.

In the 19th Century there were few countries still with Wild Horses and yet Horses were fundamental to the economies of most nations.

I'm merely making the point that the existing Civ3 resource model may need to evolve if it is to be in line with reality.

[Lung]

Damn! I lost my post!@#$%

Anyway, i was just *****ing about winning Civ3 by military victory seems to be unviable. If it is too difficult, players won't pursue it as an option, reducing it to one gigantic love-fest!

BOR-ING!

I just hope i'm wrong about this.....

[Lung]

b.i.t.c.h is a female dog. I wonder why they censor it??

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Lung
b.i.t.c.h is a female dog. I wonder why they censor it??

So, you where 'female doging' about winning Civ3...?

[Executor]

The best way to get around censoring is to bold or italicize a letter in the word like so: bitch

[Leonidas]

That's good news about units being tied to resources. At least that cuts down on having to move hundreds of units

[faded glory]

Originally posted by Lung
Damn! I lost my post!@#$%

Anyway, i was just *****ing about winning Civ3 by military victory seems to be unviable. If it is too difficult, players won't pursue it as an option, reducing it to one gigantic love-fest!

BOR-ING!

I just hope i'm wrong about this.....

No lung, you will just have to learn how to deal with it. CTP is unrealistic at best. This new model means your going to have to think things through long and hard before you fire in anger at a neighbor...

Your going to need reources..

As for lovefests....well, Im sure there will always be Dictators like you and Megomanical warlords like me

I think i will enjoy Civ3. Especially a PBEM feature. I want to be one of the first to get into a PBEM. This way we can all be newbies and learn together(heh). That is normally alot funner! (wonders if 'funner' is even a word )

See you in the Civ3 PBEM world Lung

[Skanky Burns]

ask your mommy about how babies are made, sheel tell you that in order for a baby to be made you need a mommy and a dady, you dont just press a button and *poof* a baby horse is made

Kestrel stated that you would not need wild horses if you knew how to breed horses... You would still need some initial horses, but you would not need to keep replenishing them with other wild horses, just breed more horses from your existing horse population.

And anyways, to answer the original question:
The way i think they have implemented this is that by the time breeding your own horses is feasible, your civilization is instead starting to build tanks and such... horseless carriages

In other words theres no horse-breeding.
Bas*****

[splangy]

Originally posted by Kestrel
Splangy - Thanks for your mature and erudite reply.

You are surely not suggesting that by 1,000 A.D. a Civilization will not have figured out how to breed horses ? In the real world Civs have been breeding horses for thousands of years, not merely capturing them from the wild.

In the 19th Century there were few countries still with Wild Horses and yet Horses were fundamental to the economies of most nations.

I'm merely making the point that the existing Civ3 resource model may need to evolve if it is to be in line with reality.

You need to breed them from somthing!! Do you think that horse breeding is growing them? I cant desipher what your trying to say?

[Alfonsus72]

Have you heard the news from the CG cover story?:

"If you trade a resource with another country, you, yourself cannot use that resource. So, if you trade horses with France you will need another horse resource square or else you will not be able to use things like Cavalry. (I'm not sure if this information is old or not. (page 50)"

This breaks the old idea of 1 resource square = infinite quantity of that resource for you and your partners.

I hope the limitation of "if you have only 1 resource square, only 1 city can be producing the resource output simoultaneously" would be also avaliable. This would made the game much more interesting and competitive and fix the "infinite units spawn". Any clues?.