No war for oil

[badams52]

I'm sure you meant spent production on palaces as they can't buy palaces.

[Dida]

Seemingly, what the American uses in the war is Modern Armor and the Iraqi is still fighting with tanks and regular infantry, no wonder they lost so badly.
However, Baghdad has population of about 5 million, that means it's a size 34 city. It would a defense so high the Americans would have heck of a time trying to take it out.
How the hell did they manage a size 34 city in the middle of desert is really beyond me. Saddam must be a very good player.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Dida
How the hell did they manage a size 34 city in the middle of desert is really beyond me. Saddam must be a very good player.

I have a suspicion that Saddam may still be playing Civ2, in which case he can achieve that growth with food shipments from other cities.

[mrmitchell]

The resources system in Civilization III is kind of screwed. I mean, it's better than nothing, but still.

For example, America has oil fields in America. In Civ3, one tile of oil anywhere on the nation would supply to the entire nation. In Real Life, one tile of oil anywhere on the nation would be about as effective as...uh, can't think of a good one right now. But that's enough of my whining. (It's also one of my only wines about the game. )

---
I usually don't have to war for resources in most of my games. Of course, I always remember fondly one of my best games (the India Rubber Campaigns, as I call it. )

[Flanker]

How the hell did they manage a size 34 city in the middle of desert is really beyond me. Saddam must be a very good player.

With Euphrat and Tigris right in the desert that wouldn´t be so tough. Lots of flood plains there! However, I think Saddam plays as the AI with very many not so good but plenty ground units. When US is using precision attacks the woun´t damage the ground units either...

[x Krelian x]

You guys are funny.

[King_Henry]

I never get any saltpeter, which I need for my cavalry. I wind up attacking with knights and pikes, which are slaughtered by cavalry and musketman. I got saltpeter in the peace deal.

[TheStinger]

I often trade for oil at some ridiculous cost to myself and then bulid up my forces and then take it. Doesn't do much for my rep though

[Lord Merciless]

Actually I go to war in order to deny other civs from having the resources.

In my civ games, peace will only occasionally break out.

[Zachriel]

Re: No war for oil

Originally posted by pigskinwriter
I keep seeing these "No war for oil" signs of war protesters and think how stupid they're being. Then I come home, start up my Civ3 game and realize that I'm in a war for rubber!

It's the random map generator. Who else would put "our" oil half-way around the world! The fault belongs with Firaxis.

[Prince]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
Actually I go to war in order to deny other civs from having the resources.

In my civ games, peace will only occasionally break out.

"This will cause peace with the English, sire. Are you sure?"

1) No, we should reconsider
2) Yes, the scum deserve it!

[badams52]

[Lucarse]

The worse thing a CIV can do in my game is have a resource i want or need.

'If i was you i'd put that city somewhere else, it'll be better for you'

[Thirgaral]

Coal...I need coal...all other civs always seem too get plenty when I get none...I want railroads!!!!

[HAND]

Originally posted by Thirgaral
Coal...I need coal...all other civs always seem too get plenty when I get none...I want railroads!!!!

Yes...In my present game i'm dominating a continent without any coal! I'm going to have to invade a much smaller continent to get 3 coal resources!
Having railroads is like a smaller golden age!