C3C : Strategic Resources Scarcity Sucks!

[Cort Haus]

Shogun, I'd like to change the name of the thread to 'Strategic Resource Scarcity is a Contentious Issue', but it's not possible to change the name of a thread.

Most of these posts prove my point - that this mod turns C3C into a straight wargame, more fun to wargame in than previous versions, but builders might as well stick to PTW.

In Civ 1 and Civ 2 the designers made war mandatory (all AI's would declare war on the human at once). Civ 3 was the first where where peace strategies were an option for the player. These strategies have now been removed from the game, forcing the player into military solutions. Hence I find comments about 'needing strategy' a bit off-the-mark. Yes, it deepens strategy for some, and eliminates options for others

[Cort Haus]

Here is an example C3C game running under the BETA PATCH:

Standard archiplelago map, average settings, Monarch - English.
Currently Industrialising - but RR halted due to loss coal deposit after two turns. :fume:

The start was poor - a narrow northern strip of a continent with no rivers or hills (mostly coast/sea tiles to work with), and Germany nearby.

I used the seafaring abillity to quickly get contact & generate commerce (cheap harbours) and held a tech lead all the game so far. I rexed to about 20 cities, up to the borders of Berlin itself, and nearly all of a nearby continent, and built the Statue of Zeus to allow me to ignore military builds until late Middle Ages. This Rex gave me a respectable land %age, and I recently completed the FP on the second continent.

I had Iron on my second continent, but couldn't access it till astronomy - not a problem, the SoZ was taking care of the military deterrent. I had no Saltpeter - not a problem, I was eventually able to trade some from a backward civ for musket upgrades. I had one source of coal, which I gleefully used for two turns when it went ping.

Now one civ (Persia, on a big fat island) has three coal (not yet hooked up), Carthage has one and they are slowly eating America, who also has one. The other source is in Germany, which leaves England, Babylon, Byzantia and Scandinavia with none.

Hopefully Persia will have some spare coal hooked up to trade for in a while. If they don't I'll probably have to build a lot of Knights (no Saltpeter on the market either) and go and try them out against German Riflemen.

As for the three AI's without coal? I don't fancy their chances, somehow. If you're an AI under these rules, it's get lucky with coal or hasta la vista baby.

[Cort Haus]

The English are orange.

[Cort Haus]

.

[Cort Haus]

The second wonder was Smiths - for the GA, which is a few turns in. Many cities are on prebuilds to switch to factories.

[vmxa1]

Cort Haus I feel for you partner. If you are are saying resources are now rarer, I would probably agree. Are you making a case that there should be enough coal for all civs in the game?

[Donegeal]

It would seem to me that your particular situation would require a more peaceful approach. Knights against Riflemen just ain't gunna work (unless you have stacks and stacks of Treb/Cannon, and even then, it won't last long). In all my resourse poor games I find it best to play REAL nice. I would wait for Persia to connect their extra ones (which the AI seems to put a priority on), trade for it (use whatever you need as it is that important) then rail like a mad man.

[Cort Haus]

I was being kinda sarcastic about the Knights v Riflemen.

It's fun atm, at 1345 - with Replaceable Parts and ToE both 4 turns away. I hope I've got rubber, because good ol' Bismo just kicked off with Cav against my Rifles and Ancient Cavalry

I sacrificed a few Ancient Cav pillaging their side of the border to slow their attacks down - and I've got 2 ivory around the border to defend too.

I brought the workers down to start to build fortresses along the slim 4-tile border.

It's a no-Saltpeter, no Coal civ (me) vs a Saltpeter and Coal Civ(Germany) - let's see what happens.

[Cort Haus]

Yes, vmxa1, I think this discussion is pointing to the claim that no civ can go far without coal, and there's not enough of it to go round.

As donegeal says, offensive options to find coal in my game don't look grand - thanks to the lack of Saltpeter. It's wait for Persia to hook up it's third (already selling second to another AI, grrr) and hope another Ai doesn't get the chance to trade before me, or hope for rubber in four turns and build a ton of Infantry and Arty to use against Germany.

[Cort Haus]

I got Replaceable Parts - and no rubber. That's no Saltpeter, No Coal, No Rubber. My 20-city Rex (beating every AI civ) only got me Iron on a secondary continent at 30 (thirty) squares distance as the corruption-crow flies from my capital.

Only four out of eight Civs got Rubber. There was none at all on my main continent (3 civs - England, Germany, Babylon), 2 sources on a 3-civ continent (Carthage, Byzantium, USA), 1 source on a 1-civ continent (Persia), and 2 sources on a 1-civ continent (Scandinavia). So far, Babylon has got the rubber on Carthage's continent - with a lone city bagging the resource under the oh-so-annoying AI cheat - which just got so much more powerful.

All this boils down to 1 civ out of eight - Persia - with both the essential Coal and Rubber.

That's 87.5% of Civs with very little chance unless a warmongering human is playing them. That ain't right.

[Cort Haus]

The F8 says that I have 12% of the land? - that's as near to one-eighth of a world of eight civs as you can get and nearly nothing in strategic resources.

I think part of it is the penalty for being seafaring - you get put on some spindly tip of a continent which apart from being tough under the new FP rules, is also tough under the resource allocation rules.

That's the third game I've tried as the English on 'pelago - and each time they've had the same dry, crappy one-tile-wide sliver of land. It's a shame 'pelago maps are so spindly and not more blobby.

The only question remaining is : should I bother to see this game out?

[Shogun Gunner]

Cort Haus, I see your point after reading your postings. I guess I had not considered the limitations on the fully peaceful builder. I have not seen a game where 1 out of 8 civs have coal and rubber. That does seem a bit extreme.

Of the four C3C games I've played, I've been out in the cold regarding resources in two of them. It has forced me to a peaceful approach and trying to buddy up to a powerful civ. I had not worried about that in the past.... that is what prompted me to post the comment about strategy. I had to change my warmongering ways and try to win via a different route.

Now when I play, I leave every victory option open when setting up the game. I never know which one I might need to utilize.

So, there are pros and cons. However, it seems that your suggestion is a nice solution -- a slider/radio button for resource scarcity like there is for barbarians. Doesn't seem like that would be so hard to do. It would be changing one variable in the random map generation during startup.

[Cerbykins]

Well, has peaceful builder ALWAYS been an option at all difficulty levels? I mean, could we realistically make a go of it at Deity before? (there's probably an AU for it, but this is an area I know VERY little about! )

[vmxa1]

It is not resources I am short of, it is luxs. I have had two games in a row where I only had two on the whole contient in a two contient game.

It makes those markets nearly useless. Once in a while I can get a lux or two in a trade, but them it expires and its get out the fire hoses.

[Dactyl]

One unforeseen consequence of the resource scarcity in C3C is that it can render certain UU's useless. Here's an example. I'm playing a game as the Celts at Emperor level. The UU for the Celts is the Gallic Swordsman. There was no iron in the land I owned so I had to fight my way to it. By the time I got the iron hooked up into my road network, it was 170 BC. One turn later I got Feudalism. That made the Gallic Swordsman obsolete. A couple of turns later, I went to war and won a battle with a Gallic Swordsman. That kicked in a Golden Age, but it also made it impossible for me to build any more Gallic Swordsmen. I had to build Medieval Infantry instead. In short, I only got to build a handful of my UU's. (In point of fact, I would have liked to have been able to build the Gallic Swordsmen for a while longer because of their movement factor.)

The main consequence of the new resource scarcity is that is seems to make it more of an all-or-nothing kind of game. If I'd had a source of iron next to my capital in the game I mentioned above, I would have built my UU's relatively early and I would have rolled right on over my neighbors. The game would have been relatively easy. I also agree that it seems to hurt the AI more because the AI isn't as adaptable. I'd like to see a choice of relative scarcity for resources, like that with barbarians. Assuming that C3C has been well designed and implemented, that shouldn't be much of a programming challenge.

In general, I'm not terribly displeased with C3C, but it is beginning to suffer from the same problems of many software projects. Once a piece of software has matured, it can be dangerous to add new features because of the likelihood of unforeseen consequences. I'm seeing some of this in C3C.

[Shogun Gunner]

Originally posted by vmxa1
It is not resources I am short of, it is luxs. I have had two games in a row where I only had two on the whole contient in a two contient game.

It makes those markets nearly useless. Once in a while I can get a lux or two in a trade, but them it expires and its get out the fire hoses.

Which is why I like one ideas forwarded in the "Civ 4" forum (General/Future) about variable levels of luxuries and resources.

It's basically that instead of every instance of a resource being "1" a value is assigned to an instance of a resource. Perhaps a scale of 1-100. A formula would need to be worked out to scale the level of your resource/luxury to the effect. For example, "20" iron would allow 5 military units needing iron.

I think it's a good idea that would solve this resource inequity/deficiency with a side benefit of permitting greater sophistication in trade - both benefits for the peaceful builder.

[Cerbykins]

One unforeseen consequence of the resource scarcity in C3C is that it can render certain UU's useless.

Actually, that brings to mind something else. UU's based on needing less resouces rather than being stronger, like the Indian War Elephant (AFAIK) now also become more meaningful.

Oh, (afternote) and if peaceful builder is ever to become a big thing, then there has to be some kind of score value in following that path. Right now, 'doing the right thing' and 'being a good guy' pays you nothing, only the territory and pop you can accumulate. And future tech, but there - who cares?
Might already be in that forum. If so ignore me...the first paragraph was my main point

[Cort Haus]

Yes, I'm going to start playing India - it might be the only Civ in the box that suits my playstyle.

I'm currently playing the Mongols with no horses. I have a modest 90 tile island next to 800+ tile continent with four starting civs. It's 1010AD and there will soon be one civ (Aztecs with SoZ).

Five civs got three horses between them, and one saltpeter.

One Saltpeter between five civs. What a joke.

[justjake73]

I have one Wine and one Spice, one Iron in my territory and there is one on a peninsula. I built a road and planted a colony so I could trade SOMETHING. My SP went poof, but the Celts had NO Iron in their entire country - so no UU, no Knights or Pikemen - but they have THREE saltpeter!! I had to wait until they discovered Gunpowder then they were EAGER to trade!!

[Donegeal]

Hell, instead of waiting for them to discover it, clean their clock. After all, they are just sitting there asking to get killed off with just spearmen and Archers.....

[steven8r]

The Ol' "Settler Sneak"

Here's a trick that I shamlessly used in a previous game. Monarch, Spanish, Standard. I had no Coal and found-out later that I had no Rubber or Aluminum--perhaps some others. At the time I was mostly interested in Coal. I'd been peaceful the entire game.

I waited until 2 of my neighbors got into it. Everytime the Koreans took an Arab city, instant Culture Hole. I sent-in Settlers to the available areas (w/ Resources) and was able to snag what I needed.

Sure, my new cities were corrupt, but at least they were getting me the needed resource(s) and some luxes too. I knew that it was just a matter of time before the Korean Culture 'took back the gaps' so Colonies weren't an option and w/ some Temples and Libraries, my cities weren't likely to flip too soon.

Later in the game, the Hittites were sacking the Sumerians (who'd already exterminated the Inca) and they were close to their OCN so were razing all the Sumerian cites. Again with the Spanish Settler Sneak.

I managed to pull-out a Space Race Victory in spite of having almost none of the Industrial/Modern Resources.

Steven

[Aqualung71]

I have to agree with Catt and MrWhereItsAt....while scarcer strategic recources at first glance makes the game tougher, in the long term it only hurts the AI more. The human player knows he MUST have those resources and will resolve to build enough of whatever military units he has available to capture a certain resource by force (be it Saltpeter for Cavalry, Iron/Coal for RR or Rubber for Infantry). The AI does not have such resolve and persistence.

Scarcer luxuries is a different issue. This definitely makes it harder for the human player, who usually favours Republic/Democracy which often require almost all luxuries in mid to late game to keep the citizens happy. In the AI's preferred warring governments of Communism and possibly now Fascism, happiness luxuries are not so important. So, there may be a tendency here for the human empire builder to be a little more considerate of his AI trading partners. And remember, once you ruin that reputation by instigating wars it can be pretty hard to trade for luxuries!

I've also seen some interesting stuff on the Civ4 threads along the lines of incorporating "quantities" of resources into the economic model. That is, in the current model it matters not whether you have 1 coal or 10 coal (except for your increased ability to trade it). An interesting proposal is to require a certain resource level to build a factory, to RR a tile, etc. You then need to keep track of how much of a certain resource you have, and at what rate you are using it. And in the context of a scarcer resource world, you will then need to make more strategic choices about how many factories to build, how many tiles to RR (ie, connect all your cities, or completely RR an entire supercity, but you can't afford to do both), and perhaps you may even only have enough aluminium to build 30 MA without finding some more.

Now THAT would make it more interesting.....as long as the programmers can improve the AI enough to make it cope with this concept.

[justjake73]

woops double post

[justjake73]

I was wrong...Egypt has 2, which means Egypts best friend will be a third industrial power.

[justjake73]

Only two *&%$# rubber in the entire %$@#& world and of course I have NONE. This game is starting to $^#&&# SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cerbykins]

Stay calm. You got the fatal bombard bombers option, right? (well, a bit later on)
They don't need rubber....right?

[justjake73]

I quit that game. I can't build Tanks, Infantry or Guerillas without it, and I would have gotten my @ss handed to me!!!! The game has turned from fun to aggravating.

I just complained to Firaxis about this. I await their response.

[Risa]

Stay calm. Guerilla doesn't need resources.

The same as Artillery.

And you can biuld bombers later (if you have oil). They are MONSTERS.

[:) Smiley]

Speaking of bombers, one of my favorite uses with them is to bomb the roads on strategic resources in AI territory. Before long they're running out of tanks and sending out cavalry.

Settler Sneak can also be done on the short range. Sometimes a resource is just one square outside my border. I build a city next to it, and suddenly that coalfield is under my control. The AI doesn't seem to get mad. If they had pulled something on me, there'd be war on the way.

On Coal and Railroads... when was the last time you saw a steam locomotive? That strategic requirement ought to be replaceable by either Oil, or the discovery of Electricity.

[justjake73]

I went to the editor and changed all strategic resources to appear in the same ratio as Horses. I used that to generate a map and every one has started in a decent distance from Luxuries.

On Coal and Railroads... when was the last time you saw a steam locomotive? That strategic requirement ought to be replaceable by either Oil, or the discovery of Electricity.

There should be a Synthetic Rubber tech too.