Resources allocation rigged??

[AnnC]

Originally posted by jimmytrick Yeah, I am ready.

Until something more interesting comes along.

[Wulfram]

I think this effect comes from Humans being more discerning in picking city sites, I usually go for grassland and plains which can't have Iron or Coal, which seem to be the ones I have problems with.

The AI however builds his cities all over the place, including with loads of mountains all over, places which are very likely to have useful strategic resources.

I must admit that I almost always have to trade to build my Railroads (Until I march my mighty armies in and seize it by force!)

[Boracks]

Since food seems to be plentiful (except in the desert), I often build cities to include some hills and/or mountains. This way, when new resources appear, I can REALLY curse about having 14 mountains, with mines on all, and still have to trade for iron AND coal.

And I HATE jungle!

[Lorizael]

I think maybe you're being a little paranoid. I have had games where I got many strategic resources and then games where I had absolutely none.

However, the placement is not completely random. There is a trend.

Most of the strategic resources (of one type) will be clumped together in one area. This way you can have a sort of OPEC thing where one civilization (I know it's more than one country but you get the point) controls all of the Oil, or Saltpeter, or whatever. In reality, you do get areas in the world that will have more of one thing than another, so this is not unrealistic, either.

[Pyrodrew]

The best strategic resources don't go to the weaker civs... they exist in areas where it is hard for a civ to be strong.

Example - Oil is found in desert & tundra. Desert also has saltpeter. How many AI Civs can turn themselves into superpowers starting there??? And I would guess some human players don't even bother trying if they start in the desert or tundra. Jungle is also hard to thrive in... yet jungle can have coal (rare & good for coal plants & railroads), jungle can also have rubber (10 defense infantry). Mountains have gold, iron, etc.

So it's not that the good resources go to the weaker civs, but rather the bad terrain tiles, of which no superpower can be created from... yet a civ can start in. The only exception to this is hills.

[Chronus]

the best bit was english sitting on most of it and me arming and tecching zulus to declare war on english (they were too far away for me, and it looked like afghanistan, my bombers from my carrier providing air cover while zulu mujahedeens advanced. once we got the wells, they happily traded the oil to me

Cool story! I like reading about these kinds of ideas.

I noticed in one game though, that although I didn't have many strategic resources, I did have bundles of luxury resources, so the old maxim of "you always have something to trade" is very true.

This was very much like my second game. I was on a small contenent w/ only horses and lots of silk. Didn't get any other resources until much later. When I finally discovered the other civs, I was able to trade out my silk for techs & other resources. It's amazing what you can do with what appears to be so little.

I wasn't claiming that the game was broken

I know you weren't. Your thread title implied that the feature was "rigged". Another thread out there uses the word "broken". Still others use similar, yet different, words. The best word I could think of to refer to all of you collectively was the word "people". I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Pyrodrew
The best strategic resources don't go to the weaker civs... they exist in areas where it is hard for a civ to be strong.

Example - Oil is found in desert & tundra. Desert also has saltpeter. How many AI Civs can turn themselves into superpowers starting there??? And I would guess some human players don't even bother trying if they start in the desert or tundra. Jungle is also hard to thrive in... yet jungle can have coal (rare & good for coal plants & railroads), jungle can also have rubber (10 defense infantry). Mountains have gold, iron, etc.

So it's not that the good resources go to the weaker civs, but rather the bad terrain tiles, of which no superpower can be created from... yet a civ can start in. The only exception to this is hills.

You know that actually makes a lot of sense. It's all in the eye of the beholder, or something to that effect.

[Fake Boris]

In my own game at regent with 16 civs, in which I have always been in the lead (between 2nd and 5th, but never first), I found ressources to be extremely balanced: I had no horses, but loads of iron. Plenty of saltpeter, but no coal. 3 aluminiums, 2 rubbers, 2 uraniums, but no oil.
Plenty of Wines, but no other luxuries.
In sum, I didn't have all that I wanted, but at any time I had enough to trade with other civs.

[VDmitry]

BEFORE game starts - map is generating. Landscape, than places resources and starting locations.

In game there is only resource random events. Are they fully random or not - it is a question.

[rid102]

To confirm, I went back to one of my old games and played from an old save.

I started a war with the Germans, let them capture a couple of my cities then gave them another half-a-dozen cities or so as part of a peace deal. I did the same with the Greeks also.

Mosied along for a while with my empire about 1/3 the size it was. The Germans look dominant. Discoverd Gunpowered, and low-and-behold, the Saltpetre appeared in exactly the same squares as it did before (i.e. German territory).

Conclusion: There is no balancing of strategic resources. It all seems to be 100% pre-determined.