Strategic and Bonus Resources -- Wha't the difference?

Jason Beaudoin · October 7, 2001, 13:23

What is the difference between strategic and bonus resources? Anyone?

JellyDonut · October 7, 2001, 13:26

Bonus resources do what resources did in Civ II. They give +1 food, or +1 production or something to the city. Strategic resources are resources you need to build things, i.e. you need steel and rubber to build a tank and uranium to build a nuclear weapon. Hope that helps.

ixnay · October 7, 2001, 13:27

Strategic resources are the ones that are used to build units and such (iron, uranium). Bonus resources are the ones that give you bonuses like extra food or production. Luxury resources are ones that help you to make your people happy.

Gramphos · October 7, 2001, 13:28

strategic resources are needed to build stuff and can be traded
luxuries make your people happy and can be traded
bonus resources are as all resources in Civ2 is just giving a bonus when working on that tile. Other resources also give bonus.

Jason Beaudoin · October 7, 2001, 13:41

Thanks everyone!

Nice of you to help me out on that one.

Boy... I can't wait to monopolize a resource!

Akron · October 7, 2001, 14:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Jason Beaudoin
Thanks everyone!

Nice of you to help me out on that one.

Boy... I can't wait to monopolize a resource!

Monopolizing will probably be bad b/c you'll need to have all the resources to really be powerful. If you monopolize a resource, then unless your empire is especially large, you won't have enough other resources to trade for other necessary items. Also, you only need 1 resource for your entire empire, so the extras aren't gonna help you. But you can decide where your stuff goes and even better, make embargos. That should be cool.

Skanky Burns · October 7, 2001, 20:25

I think getting all the luxury resources will help your civ. Each luxury will make an unhappy person content/happy

But i guess that wouldnt be too useful to monopolise, as the other civs would still be able to have a military.

d_dudy · October 7, 2001, 22:26

does anyone know if strategic resources will give any bonuses?

iron helping production as well as being needed for legions?

dainbramaged13 · October 7, 2001, 22:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Akron

Monopolizing will probably be bad b/c you'll need to have all the resources to really be powerful. If you monopolize a resource, then unless your empire is especially large, you won't have enough other resources to trade for other necessary items. Also, you only need 1 resource for your entire empire, so the extras aren't gonna help you. But you can decide where your stuff goes and even better, make embargos. That should be cool.

actually (this is old info, but i started the thread which got 3 responses from dan on it, so i would know that its true

) the resources will be depletable, depending on how much you use them. So if you only hvae one iron resource, you will only be able to make a certain number of legions before your resource is used up.

I think monopolizing a resource could be very powerful, because in order for the other civs to have that resources, they are absolut++++FORCED to deal with you, so they will cede much higher demands than normal.

Akron · October 8, 2001, 08:40

Quote:

Originally posted by d_dudy
does anyone know if strategic resources will give any bonuses?

iron helping production as well as being needed for legions?

Strategic resources may give bonuses. For example, rubber is a strategic resource that will also give +2 trade. So it seems that all or most resource squares will give bonuses.

If you are the only person able to aquire a certain crucial resource, then you'll be the power broker in the game. Now that would be cool.

Jason Beaudoin · October 8, 2001, 11:45

I doubt that on a large map, we will be able to monopolize a resource. Just think of how difficult it would be to do that!

Doesn't mean I won't try though.

SteveJH · October 8, 2001, 11:56

Even on a large map I would hope uranium and oil should be somewhat hard to come by.

Jason Beaudoin · October 8, 2001, 12:03

Uranium, maybe, but not oil. So many units depend on oil, that you wouldn't want it to be too scarce.

Then again, maybe it wouldn't be good for uranium either. After all, how would you be able to build a nuclear powered submarine or carrier?...

We'll probably need uranium for that one. Cool!

SteveJH · October 8, 2001, 12:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Jason Beaudoin
Uranium, maybe, but not oil. So many units depend on oil, that you wouldn't want it to be too scarce.

Then again, maybe it wouldn't be good for uranium either. After all, how would you be able to build a nuclear powered submarine or carrier?...

We'll probably need uranium for that one. Cool!

That's true, I just figured it would be fun if it was scarce and I conquered wherever it's at. Then everybody would get to beg to trade with me

old dog · October 8, 2001, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
I think monopolizing a resource could be very powerful, because in order for the other civs to have that resources, they are absolut++++FORCED to deal with you, so they will cede much higher demands than normal.

Another case where AI will be everything. I really hope that the AI makes intelligent decisions in this case, when to give in to high demands and when to try to take it by force... and that this works well among AI civs too.

Akron · October 8, 2001, 14:39

I wonder whether you can trade resources that you've gotten from someone else.

Gramphos · October 8, 2001, 15:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Akron
I wonder whether you can trade resources that you've gotten from someone else.

I sure hope so, having a strong culture would make it possible for you to earn a lot of cash of that deal.