Game inbalance through limited resources?

Mannamagnus · August 13, 2001, 04:44

From what I get from the info we got so far is that some resources are very scarce. So I guess it's not unimaginable that at some point you control all uranium deposits.
This means that if that happens you have a virtual carte blanche to nuke the s**t out of all the other civs as long as you don't trade uranium with anybody.

Buck Birdseed · August 13, 2001, 04:50

Ah, but by the time you get nukes the guy with all the steel will have blown you into smithereens.

Actually, it's meant as an additional challenge.

Gramphos · August 13, 2001, 04:51

I don't think this unbalances the game. It's one of the best features in the game, it makes it more realistic. And would you still not trade Uranium if someone offered you 20 gold/turn for it?

This feature brings this game to a hole new level of strategy.
Is it worth to sell Uranium to the Russians? (Probably not as they are an aggressive civ, but you could sell it to the Babylonians)

TechWins · August 13, 2001, 05:02

This feature is great for the game. If you have uranium you might not have oil so you will need to trade your uranium for oil. If you do posses all the resources you need wouldn't trading a little uranium to a peaceful civ for some extra cash be worth it? What would really make this even more challenging is if certain units require more than one resource. Has that been confirmed, whether or not certain units will require more than one resource? I don't think it has but I'm not positive.

Mannamagnus · August 13, 2001, 05:05

Not having to build SDI would easily be worth 20 gold/turn. Also if I'm the only one with nukes I can get several times that amount from taking over cities.
And napcase I would make sure to be a nice guy until I'm the only one with a sufficient amount of nukes. The only thing which is worrying is the pollution.

Gramphos · August 13, 2001, 05:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Mannamagnus
Not having to build SDI would easily be worth 20 gold/turn. Also if I'm the only one with nukes I can get several times that amount from taking over cities.
And Snapcase I would make sure to be a nice guy until I'm the only one with a sufficient amount of nukes. The only thing which is worrying is the pollution.

But if the only resource you have is Uranium I doubt you'll survive long enough to get nukes

.
And how would you be sure that you were the only one with Uranium? And 20 gold were just taken from the air as I don't know how mush the AI would give for Uranium, in MPgames it may be mush higher.

Mannamagnus · August 13, 2001, 05:31

Civs used to brag:"our words are backed with nuclear weapons!" so I guess they will let you know wether they have a nuclear arsenal/uranium.

Gramphos · August 13, 2001, 05:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Mannamagnus
Civs used to brag:"our words are backed with nuclear weapons!" so I guess they will let you know wether they have a nuclear arsenal/uranium.

They might not yet have discovered it.

Mannamagnus · August 13, 2001, 05:42

True

Todd Hawks · August 13, 2001, 07:49

I think the ressources will be so plentyful that if you controlled all uranium, you would control nearly the whole planet and then you'll win no matter if the AI has nuclear capacity.

Todd

gremalkin · August 13, 2001, 10:31

I have certainly read that the resources would be randomly spread across the map.. Therefore to control all of an individual resource would be either a colassal piece of luck or that you control the vast majority of the map.. In the first case I'd say enjoy yuor position of power - it'll never happen again. In the second case I'd say Stop playing - you've won..

It's certainly not something to worry about..

SerapisIV · August 13, 2001, 11:44

Well, more then likely iron is gonna be pretty well spread all over the planet, so early combat and units shouldn't be resource limited (though horses may be), but as Firaxis has said before modern units require several resources, (oil, iron, rubber, maybe others), so it's doubtful that any one civ will have all the resources for a tank, so trade becomes a requirement. I can see rapidly changing alliances as the modern era begins in Civ3, which should be very cool.

Laszlo · August 13, 2001, 14:38

This limited resource thing looks like a good idea. Say, a three civ embargo could be a real threat to one civ. And realistic too. I once saw a table showing US imports of certain metals and things. Our iridium comes like 95% from one small African country, and there were about five other metals above the 80% range.

Also, I heard that during World War II there were only two known sources of uranium, one in Europe and one in Africa. This definately affected US plans when they were afraid that Germany was hot on the trail of nuclear weapons development.

Mahdimael · August 13, 2001, 15:59

The game map is inherently imbalanced. Some people start on a small island with another civ and some start on a rolling plain in a vast continent. The resources are just an extension of this feature. If you start on an island, you develop ships earlier, etc. Circumstances partially dictate what you do, and that's part of what makes civ fun

Inverse Icarus · August 13, 2001, 16:40

Quote:

Originally posted by TechWins
This feature is great for the game. If you have uranium you might not have oil so you will need to trade your uranium for oil. If you do posses all the resources you need wouldn't trading a little uranium to a peaceful civ for some extra cash be worth it? What would really make this even more challenging is if certain units require more than one resource. Has that been confirmed, whether or not certain units will require more than one resource? I don't think it has but I'm not positive.

tanks need rubber steel and oil if i recall.

and personally, i love the resource system. it allows you to hurt civs without moving in an army, and enhanses war to the umpteenth power.

imagine the modern era, moving your tanks into the Chinese oil fields, and pillaging the roads, severing their oil link. the chinese lose the ability to build Tanks, Mech Infs., etc, and you're rolling over them.

also, resources could play a new role in internatioal affairs. again, the scenario with China. only they're getting oil from the Babylonians. you are going to want to PAY the Babylonians to stop selling oil to the Chinese.

but how do u know they wont trade it behind your back?

you're going to make them trade you all their excess oil (is that possible Dan or Jeff?).

or you just flatten Babylon

Vlad Antlerkov · August 13, 2001, 16:54

And if there is no uranium on a random map? What then? No nuclear arms "race" (I'm still skeptical that the AI will be able to stay in technological lockstep with a human player)?

I think the amount of uranium might be determined at least in part by the planet age (remember that selection for random maps?). Younger planets might have more uranium, older planets less. (10-billion-year-old planets might have very little uranium, but at that planet age, I think any civs on that planet would have other problems to deal with, such as their sun about to drop out of the main sequence.

)

Inverse Icarus · August 13, 2001, 17:04

fool.

sorry about that. slipped.

anyway, FIRAXIS GUARANTEED that there will be at least 3 areas for each resource on a random map.

BELEIVE MY FRIEND. BELIEVE IN ~~GOD~~ SID!

XarXo · August 13, 2001, 21:53

Well, anybody has think in the secondary effects with the resurces?

If Ivory makes extra happy citizens, WHAT WILL MAKE URANIUM???? I don't know anybody who says "oh! We've uranium, a Nucler Power Plant and a Nuclear Residus Diposit, WE ARE HAPPY!!"

And, what will hapens with our "precious" Ivory when we discover Ecology? "Killing elefants make us happy???" If there are GOOD effects, also MUST exists the BAD ones!!!

And... 3 squares? What happens if ALL the squares appears at the Antarctica???? I can't imagine a war and a network of colonies in our precious sixth continent. Penguins working at mines? WOW!! We need a Penguin-Civ and Penguin-Barbarians, also Penguin-culture, Penguin-units...

Well... Returning to the real world

, the consecuences of a nasty-for-cities-and-very-very-rich-in-resources continent could be an exciting success

!!!

Sorry for the stupid list of tribes... Is the biggest mistake in the game (in my opinions, of course...) .

ixnay · August 13, 2001, 22:59

I think there will be 3 regions of resources, not just 3 squares...

It would be amusing, if a technologically inferior civilization (unknowingly) controlled most of the uranium, and wonders why everyone else is intent on conquering them...

ixnay · August 13, 2001, 22:59

Double post...

dearmad · August 14, 2001, 00:27

I hope we can adjust the frequency of certain resources- I'd love to play on a Uranium poor planet where some AI CIV controls it all- scary and challenging. I'd probably specify 1 region or 2 max for Uranium every game.

The more I think abut it the more I like the resource change I've read about being added to CivIII- the designers seem to have done an excellent job with their chosen additions.

genghisvick · August 14, 2001, 00:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Mannamagnus
From what I get from the info we got so far is that some resources are very scarce. So I guess it's not unimaginable that at some point you control all uranium deposits.
This means that if that happens you have a virtual carte blanche to nuke the s**t out of all the other civs as long as you don't trade uranium with anybody.

Hopefully resources will be somewhat spreadout so it will be hard to control all of any resource.

Warm Beer · August 14, 2001, 01:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Kyller

It would be amusing, if a technologically inferior civilization (unknowingly) controlled most of the uranium, and wonders why everyone else is intent on conquering them...

Yet another reason the resource model is wonderfull... increased realism.

TechWins · August 18, 2001, 13:19

I'm not sure if anybody else ever noticed this but I'm going to show it anyways.

Quote:

Resources, like iron, oil, and uranium, allow the construction of specific units and buildings.

That quote came from civ3.com. This means that you will need certain resources to build certain buildings. This will only be sucessful if there isn't a building such as the Civ2 aqueduct that if you don't build it your city will be severly hampered. What I mean is that if you don't have a certain resource to build some important buildings this could unbalance the game. This might play a little too much importance on resources. What do you guys think of this?

Inverse Icarus · August 18, 2001, 13:22

EW! BUILDINGS?!?!?!

if i dont have erm.... ehhh... i cant think of anything right now...

ah ha! oil for a port facility?

shade · August 18, 2001, 14:03

Uranium=> nuclear plant

I'm amazed noone thought of this:what about a world wide embargo against ... YOU,the human player.We all know what happens in Civ2 when you are a decent civ,every AI creates a pact against you,this could now happen with resources.
OR they can act as in Civ2 and demand whatever they want for the resource you need.

(another reason to hope for a somewhat smarter/more logical AI)

Shade

Odin · August 18, 2001, 14:50

I think the new resorce model is very good, I just hope the AI can use it and doesn't automatically reject any offer! VERY IRRITATING!!! :banned:

If the AI is at least competent imagine the posibillites of diplomacy: you are the only nation with plentiful horses (You live on dry plains, rest live on the wet coast) if any nation goes to war with you or your allies NO KNIGHTS FOR THEM!!!

Rusty Nail · August 19, 2001, 15:55

It would be useful if the availability of individual resources could be defined as a map parameter. This could be used to correct any unintentional imbalances and to create some special game situations, e.g. you could make it impossible for anyone to build certain buildings or units, for example nukes (no uranium), which I don't care for anyway. It might also be a way of improving the AI if they have certain tendencies , i.e. give them a little edge. Also useful of course for scenario building. Have they said anything about this?

Imran Siddiqui · August 19, 2001, 16:41

Quote:

If Ivory makes extra happy citizens, WHAT WILL MAKE URANIUM????

Ivory is a luxury in the game, Uranium is not.

And I agree, limited resources changes the game dramatically. Making trade and good neighbor relations very important. It won't be like Civ2; that's for sure.

Christantine The Great · August 19, 2001, 19:51

Um, you forgot something, people. Resources run out AND get discovered elsewhere. If you happen to have a uranium hog and you discover some uranium in your territory then you can distribute it to your allies and the enemy won't have a monopoly anymore. Plus if there is a hog and you don't find any of the resource then unleash your army on his X fields and claim them for yourself. Ever war before, people?