The Civ III Economy

[Falconius]

I'm trying to sort out the economic system in Civ III.

In Civ II, you built your camel and sent him off to a foreign city. When you got there, you received a lump sum of gold, plus extra trade in the caravan's starting city, plus you got a bonus toward your current science research.

In short, you got a big payoff for an investment of only 50 shields (to build the caravan).

But the money you received didn't come from the other Civ. It was just given to you by the game. The other Civ didn't lose anything from its treasury.

But in Civ III, each Civ will actually be shelling out money to buy resources (among other things). The money doesn't come out of nowhere; it comes from the Civ's treasury. There would seem to be a finite amount of money to go around.

On the other hand, it seems like there is less to spend money on. You can no longer rush-build Wonders. And under certain gov'ts you can't hurry city improvements. And under other gov'ts, you whip your people into hurrying a city imp. rather than paying money for it. Spies/Dips no longer "Incite Revolts," but still use "propaganda" (seems similar, but unsure of the $$ required).
What else is there to spend game money on?

It seems there will be a lot less money coming in, but also a lot less going out. The Civ version of a recession!

Am I missing something? Anyone have a different view of the economy?

BTW, I think this is my longest post ever. Hope it wasn't too boring!

[Stuie]

Things to spend money on in Civ3

Well, here are some things you can do with your money:

- First and foremost, pay the support costs of your military units and your city improvements
- Establish Embassies with other civs (this costs money now)
- Anything on the Espionage screen (you didn't think this was free, did you?)
- Rush-builds (these will be allowed for cash under some government types)
- Science (indirectly - if you have excessive income you can divert more to Science)
- Entertainment (indirectly - if you have excessive income you can divert more to Entertainment)
- and of course Trade, which you have already mentioned.

Is that enough? There might be something I'm forgetting.

[El hidalgo]

As to where it comes from, I believe you get bonuses for roads and rivers, and perhaps for ports as well. You also get bonuses for gold and certain other resources -- just having the resource alone gives you money. And a lot of the trade options seem to be just that -- trade. You don't just buy iron from another civ, you trade them furs for iron (unless you would rather pay cash, of course).

[Crouchback]

Diminishing value of gold

Gold does seem to be less important in Civ 3, and I don't recall seeing a tax slider to go along with the luxury and science bars. But the strength of gold unbalanced Civ 2, I'd alway go for a rich and militarily powerful society, then buy science and happiness improvements.

As for trade, you can get gold by selling the rare resources you control as well. And won't knowing it weakens a competitor make exploiting the unfair bargaining position all the sweeter?

David

[CapTVK]

Re: Diminishing value of gold

Originally posted by Crouchback

As for trade, you can get gold by selling the rare resources you control as well. And won't knowing it weakens a competitor make exploiting the unfair bargaining position all the sweeter?

David

That would be fun if you were playing against a human player. But outsmarting the computer soon becomes as dull as outsmarting a fire hydrant. Sure, it will give some satisfaction but as your opponents only keep spewing water it becomes boring rather quickly. On the higher levels that argument will be moot anyway as the AI's will receive those resources by other means ( cheating).

[Stuie]

Re: Diminishing value of gold

Originally posted by Crouchback
Gold does seem to be less important in Civ 3, and I don't recall seeing a tax slider to go along with the luxury and science bars.

Actually, you wouldn't need a slider for taxes - they would be whatever is leftover after luxuries and science are taken out. So if your science is set at 5 and your luxury rate is set at 0, then your taxes by default would be 5. If you look at a screen from the final game, you'll notice that tax.science.luxury rate is indicated in parentheses next to the Civ name in the unit window (http://www.civ3.com/images/screensho...s_armyview.jpg).

As for the argument some are making that gold will not be as important in Civ3, I disagree, though it depends on your style of play. If anything, it will definitely enhance my play style, as I will have to make trade offs between a large army, trade, and espionage. I was never one for rushing a lot of buildings to completion. Now, if I desparately need a resource from another Civ but have nothing else to spare, I can use gold to trade for it. If I want to investigate a foreign city prior to targeting a specific improvement with my air forces, I need gold to initiate the espionage mission.

I guess I'm just saying we shouldn't underestimate the value of a healthy economy in Civ3 until we see how it works - should be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[cyril25376]

Originally posted by Falconius
It seems there will be a lot less money coming in, but also a lot less going out. The Civ version of a recession!

I disagree. You can either buy or exchange luxuries against luxuries or strategic resources. In Civ3 the other civ has to agree for the deal, so you can't trade with a civ you are at war.(like you could do in Civ2)

There are also some strategic decisions:
1) Shall I sell a strategic resource to another civ to get some money or is the risk very high that I will be attacked by this civ only a few turns later, because now the civ is able to build strong attack units ?,
2)In Civ3 trade needs a good infrastructure, without roads, harbor or later airports no trade is possible. So when disconnecting an enemy from his strategic resources, he can't build some units.
IMO the trade system of Civ3 is better implemented, so the trade system will be superior.

[Mars]

Gold will be intensely important. Now, not only do you have to have a strong army you also have to have a strong economy to back it up (instead of just high production.) Esponiage, a key factor to the game, requires gold now, not production. Then to make production important as well, they got rid of rush builds for certain things (wonders, and city improvements under certain govs). So gold is important in civ 3, and the only reason its not used for rush builds is make production still have a vital role in the game.If you ask me civ 3 is excellently balanced in these aspects

[BigLupu]

I wonder if I could do some real interesting business as a "dealer" or "retailer" of resources: Buying a resource from one civilization and selling it to other civilization with higher price?

For example my "supplier" could be at war with my "client" or maybe the resource supplier just doesn't have contact with my client yet. Later in the game I would need capable marketing (=diplomatic) skills to preserve my role.

[Sarxis]

Good point! I wonder if we will be able to 'distribute' resources from one civ to another and make a bit of profit.

Though, once the other player finds out (if AI is that smart), you will probably lose your business.

[BigLupu]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
Good point! I wonder if we will be able to 'distribute' resources from one civ to another and make a bit of profit.

Though, once the other player finds out (if AI is that smart), you will probably lose your business.

Yeah, that's sometimes the way in the real world also. Assuming this is possible let's see what means AI has to find out what resources you are distributing. Also if the AI is smart enough to act as a distributor of resources how can I find that out? 8 days and counting...

[Andy]

We should also not forget the impact of the wonders on gold production. I believe that the new Wall Street small wonder allows you to collect intrest on your existing gold stockpile. Very intresting new type of economic wonder.

[Ironwood]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
Good point! I wonder if we will be able to 'distribute' resources from one civ to another and make a bit of profit.

Though, once the other player finds out (if AI is that smart), you will probably lose your business.

There is historical precedent for this. The Arabs made their living trading between China and the West. The Phonecians founded their civ on controlling the Mediterranian and trading between distant civs. Being the first on the water may have considerable advantages.

[player1]

BUT, what is value for CASH in yours civ?
In civ2 & civ1 main value of CASH was in rush buying things.
Or in giving it to stupid AI.
Relly, what is 50 gold, you can't buy anything with it, but you can give it
to AI any he would be VERRY HAPP (that I call a CHEATING FOR PLAYER)

Since in civ3 I don't think that you could invest your CASH in science (rush buying science) or luxury, and some government won't allow a rush buying what can you do in yours civ with lets say 5000 gold.
You can only play spies and do bribing stupid AI.

"You give 50 gold to AI, hes says how nice, than he gives 50 gold to
next AI, he says now nice, etc...)"

Anyway, AIs give to much value for CASH which is'n that usefull.

In civ3 it look like CASH is almost wortless.

Maybe it's use is in going to deficit by puting tax rate to 0% and earning science that way.

[Skanky Burns]

With some governments, you can rush-buy. Im guessing that these would be Republic and Democracy. So for these governments, the cash has a use. For the other governments, they (probably) cant rush-buy, but thats not so bad either as they arent really good at raising a large amount of cash.