strategic resources

[vee4473]

The following scenario happens more often than I would like, and it's the reason that I hate the inclusion of startegic resources in Civ3, even though I like the concept:


There have been many times when I play a game and there is no oil or aluminum etc... in my territory that I need in order to build certain units.

Now, they are randomly scattered on the map and other civs may have double or triple of a resource, but many times they only link ONE to their empire! Via road or rail...you know.

Now, that means I am effectively cut off from that resource because even though let's say the Germans have 2 oil tiles, they only link one, so I can't even ask to trade oil with them, because they have no surplus.

So many times I have wanted a resource that I don't have access to, and I notice another civ has the resource just hangin' in the breeze.

I sit there saying to myself, "am i supposed to just let the turns pass until they decide to build a road on that oil tile so I can ask them for an oil trade? Or must I go to war for it?

Perhaps a patch that makes strategic resources available to an empire if the resource is within their boundaries is in order. (instead of having to actually have a road on it.)

I think this is a good way to make the random access to strategic resources more of a viable game play mechanic.

Because it will always give you a diplomatic option to obtain the needed resource.

As it is now, you have to hope that all the civs build roads on all their startegic resource tiles, otherwise you are cut off and have no choice but to either wait or go to war, or decide to live without the resource.

This is the single biggest factor that makes me dislike civ3, and get tired of playing it.


I have since made a custom game of civ3 where resources are more prevalent and do not expire to combat this.

[Catt]

Re: strategic resources

I actually very much like the concept of strategic resources and the way they are implemented in the game -- but I may be well out of the mainstream, because I don't even like the suggestions of many posters that resources should be of defined quality and should deplete with absolute predictability instead of randomly.

But I understand your frustration.

Originally posted by vee4473
There have been many times when I play a game and there is no oil or aluminum etc... in my territory that I need in order to build certain units.

Now, they are randomly scattered on the map and other civs may have double or triple of a resource, but many times they only link ONE to their empire! Via road or rail...you know.

I usually only see this with extra luxuries, and then only in the very early game. In my experience, by the time of oil and certainly by aluminum, the AI has usually RR'd all territory (at least that which it hasn't recently acquired after bombardment of terrain improvements ).

So many times I have wanted a resource that I don't have access to, and I notice another civ has the resource just hangin' in the breeze.

I sit there saying to myself, "am i supposed to just let the turns pass until they decide to build a road on that oil tile so I can ask them for an oil trade? Or must I go to war for it?
[. . . ]

Because it will always give you a diplomatic option to obtain the needed resource.

As it is now, you have to hope that all the civs build roads on all their startegic resource tiles, otherwise you are cut off and have no choice but to either wait or go to war, or decide to live without the resource.

May I suggest that there is already a diplomatic option? Offer a Right of Passage Agreement, and then send some of your workers to connect the resource to their trade network. Then propose a trade.

Catt

[wilbill]

I think the strategic resources pose one of the more interesting challenges in Civ 3. When stuck without one, the choice of how to deal with it really forces you to weigh the options.
Just one more way in which the game presents challenges to which there may not be a single, obvious solution.

[Jawa Jocky]

I've only seen this happen when they don't have the tech to see that they have the resource. I've given gunpowder, and often many tech before that, so a backward civ could trade me saltpeter.

If they have the tech, give them some of your slaves. The AI will start RR everything quickier if you help them out a little.

[theNiceOne]

I will add to the voices that enjoy this feature. The few times I noticed that I lacked oil or rubber has changed those games into a lot more challenging and interesting games.

[Datajack Franit]

Trade-less games for sure

[joncnunn]

Some of my more enjoyable games involved not having a strategic resource and working around it.

[Bluefrog]

I don't like the idea of "as long as the resource is in your boundaries, it's automatically hooked up." In fact, I hate that idea...there are times I don't want to hook it up. The one that pops to mind, of course, involves my curretn game, AU204. The only other civ on my continent are the Greeks, and I know I'm going to need swordsmen to effectively take them out. I'd much rather build up vet warriors, then upgrade...but I want to make sure I have iron inside my borders, to hook up when I want to upgrade.

[vee4473]

Re: Re: strategic resources

Originally posted by Catt
I actually very much like the concept of strategic resources and the way they are implemented in the game -- but I may be well out of the mainstream, because I don't even like the suggestions of many posters that resources should be of defined quality and should deplete with absolute predictability instead of randomly.

But I understand your frustration.



I usually only see this with extra luxuries, and then only in the very early game. In my experience, by the time of oil and certainly by aluminum, the AI has usually RR'd all territory (at least that which it hasn't recently acquired after bombardment of terrain improvements ).





May I suggest that there is already a diplomatic option? Offer a Right of Passage Agreement, and then send some of your workers to connect the resource to their trade network. Then propose a trade.

Catt

you give a good option Catt, but I have always had a problem with right of passage, i hate giving any ai civ the right to go where they please in my territory, but of course that means i go where i please in theirs.

Bluefrog:

maybe I didn't uns\derstand your post, but having the resource automatically available if it's in your borders doesn't mean you have to use it to upgrade. Just like if you have a road on the square...you don't have to upgrade, it's an option.

if you want to upgrade, fine, if not, then fine.

i may be wrong here. maybe it's more of a realistic simulation to have other civs with the resource in their territory, but if they don't connect to it, then it isn't available to anyone.

[Jaybe]

vee4473,
Bluefrog was referring to being ABLE to build more Warriors (and then paying gold to upgrade) rather than HAVE to build Swords at 30 Shields because Iron is connected.

[vee4473]

ah, you mean where obsolete units are removed from the build list?

that sucks too.

[Jaybe]

No it don't! Can you imagine having to scroll through all those units to get down to MI or MA?

[vee4473]

Well, it sucks if you are someone who likes to build obsolete units.

I never wanted to build a warrior if a swordsman is available, but to each his own.

[Bluefrog]

vee, building obsolete units may seem a little backward, but there are advantages. Chiefly, it allows your border cities to be more of an active part of your empire in the early game, where 10 shields for a warrior isn't a huge investment, but 30 shields for a swordsman would take a prohibitively long time. In addition, gold in this game is a fluid commodity, in that all gold produced, outside of corruption and science, is put in a treasury that can be used in any city. Shields cannot do this.

So, while a city may not be able to produce swordsmen effectively, it could produce warriors with the intention of upgrading them through gold collected from the entire empire, once you decide to hook up the iron.

Some may consider this an exploit, because the AI would never think outside the box, as it were, and do this itself.

On occassion, yes, I prefer to build older units, then upgrade them. But, having the entire list of obsolete units in the build list would not only be cumbersome, but it would be highly, highly exploitable.

[vee4473]

interesting.

i never thought of doing that.

Maybe because if I have new cities that can't produce the better units quickly, I just produce them at the more advanced cities and send them to the border towns.

of course that ties up my more advanced cities with building units for the smaller towns, which means they can't spend time building wonders, etc..