Does One Resource = Infinite Builds?

[Falconius]

This issue came up as a secondary discussion on another thread, but I wanted to start its own thread to put more focus on it.

Does having access to one particular resource give you the ability to produce as many units (that require that resource) as you want?

For example, I control an iron mine. Does that mean I can build all the ironclads I need?

If this is true, it would seem to negate the whole point (as I undertsand the point, anyway) of having resources in the first place. I was hoping for something more realistic, like one source allowing you to build a certain number (of that unit type) each turn, maybe not just one but say ten or so.

Does anyone have any confirmation on this? Any screenshots or other info that tell it like it is?

[CapTVK]

I think it's related to the trade model with the cities. Cities that have "access" to the resource (direct or by trade) can build those units.

Otherwise the system would be pointless anyway. You would only need one resource of each.

[squid]

two questions

correlary:

having traded a resource to the French, say for 2 gold/turn, does that deny you access to the same resource if you do not have two of them?

and if the French were paying for a resource and then find some of their own, how would they end the payments?

[Shadowstrike]

Somehow, I vaguely remember suggesting this on the chat today.....

However, no matter who suggests it, its quite an intriguing idea. Limiting the building of units can be a decisive factor in wartime. He who controls the resources, controls the world. This would be even more true if this was done.

[Jaybe]

Re: Does One Resource = Infinite Builds?

Originally posted by Falconius
...
Does having access to one particular resource give you the ability to produce as many units (that require that resource) as you want?

For example, I control an iron mine. Does that mean I can build all the ironclads I need?

If this is true, it would seem to negate the whole point (as I undertsand the point, anyway) of having resources in the first place. I was hoping for something more realistic, like one source allowing you to build a certain number (of that unit type) each turn, maybe not just one but say ten or so.

Does anyone have any confirmation on this? Any screenshots or other info that tell it like it is?

One occurance of each required resource, either by resource or trade, is required to INITIATE the construction of something, by as many connected cities as you want. Or it provides the luxuries to as many cities as are connected, etc. Duplicates may be used to trade with others (1 per trading partner).
It might be a good idea to have reserves, in case you lose one due to loss of resource, communications route (road etc.) or trade disruption -- or they just get DEPLETED.
Sorry, it's been awhile since I 'learned' this. Don't have the sources.
This is just going to be a lot more realistic than what we had before.

If you are producing with one, trading with another, and you lose access to one, do you lose the production capacity or the trade, and what are the consequences of losing the trade???

In other words, this is going to be a blast!

[Falconius]

Re: two questions

Originally posted by squid
correlary:

having traded a resource to the French, say for 2 gold/turn, does that deny you access to the same resource if you do not have two of them?

Quoting CivFanatics.com:

"If you trade a resource with another country, you cannot use that resource yourself. 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. "

Funny, they also use France as an example.

[Akron]

Yes, one resource allows you to build all the units you want that require that particular resource. Having a limit would just add unneeded complexity to the game. As for the strategy around resources, it appears that you won't be able to get all the resources from your own territory, so you'll have to trade for some.

[ixnay]

I remember hearing that resources will deplete, but how? Will they deplete and disappear after a specific amount of time? Or will it be based on how many units are built using the resources?

[Akron]

My guess is that resources will deplete randomly. That was how it was handled in SMAC.

[ixnay]

I would like to see them be depleted based on usage; so that the peaceful civs who don't build lots of units can keep their resources longer and trade them. If it is random, I don't think I'll mind though.

[Falconius]

Re: Re: Does One Resource = Infinite Builds?

Originally posted by Jaybe
One occurance of each required resource, either by resource or trade, is required to INITIATE the construction of something, by as many connected cities as you want. Or it provides the luxuries to as many cities as are connected, etc. Duplicates may be used to trade with others (1 per trading partner).
It might be a good idea to have reserves, in case you lose one due to loss of resource, communications route (road etc.) or trade disruption -- or they just get DEPLETED.

So the only reason to have more than one source of any resource is for trade to others, or as backup to any disruption to your sources.

I hate to be one of the "pessimists" on the board, but I am very dis-heartened by this news. Up til now I was expecting a resource model similar to Imperialism II. You would collect your resources and then use them to trade or build units. But you were limited by the amount you actually collected.

So you couldn't build an infinite amount of Ironclads just because you had one iron mine. Each Ironclad required a unit of Iron to build it. This made it more imperative for you to find as many sources of iron (and the other resources) as possible. But you could also increase your output per mine with certain improvements & upgrades.

It seems like the Civ III model will be over-simplified compared to that.

[Falconius]

Originally posted by Akron
Yes, one resource allows you to build all the units you want that require that particular resource. Having a limit would just add unneeded complexity to the game.

That's a degree of complexity that would only add to the fun.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Falconius


That's a degree of complexity that would only add to the fun.

I remember those increasing 'degrees of complexity' in CtP. In my eyes, it killed the game.

[Akron]

Re: Re: Re: Does One Resource = Infinite Builds?

Originally posted by Falconius

So you couldn't build an infinite amount of Ironclads just because you had one iron mine. Each Ironclad required a unit of Iron to build it. This made it more imperative for you to find as many sources of iron (and the other resources) as possible. But you could also increase your output per mine with certain improvements & upgrades.

In civ 3 it will be imperative to secure as many sources of iron as possible, since you can prevent enemies from getting them and trade them away to civs you can trust for money or other resources. I don't see how adding a limit will increase the fun. It will just increase the complexity. I don't feel that the resource model needs to be over emphasized, as it already adds a lot of strategy as it is, without unneeded complexity.

[Wittlich]

I believe that Dan (from Firaxis) mentioned awile back that resources can and will deplete overtime. So I suggest you have more than than just a single resource coming into your Civilization (ie, have 2 or 3 ore sources vice only having 1 source of ore).