View Full Version : Strategic resource trading?


Valdyr
Sep 17, 2010, 07:11 PM
Given that strategic resources are even more important in Civ5 than Civ4, will there be any reason at all to ever agree to AI trade requests for them? I dunno about anyone else, but I always ignored people in Civ4 asking me to give them Iron/Horses/Bronze/etc. It became even more pronounced in the industrial/modern era--why would I ever give an AI civ oil for tanks, aluminum for planes or uranium for nukes?

I just hope that with the new diplomacy system, other civs won't get too mad when I refuse their request to trade them some of my Oil for their Incense. :lol: I feel like they should take into account the fact that no one is ever going to agree to trades to give the AI resources that let them build military units and not have the AI get upset when you say no... unless there's a good reason to accept these trades I haven't thought of?

warpstorm
Sep 17, 2010, 07:16 PM
Well, you could get cash or luxuries for the resources you don't need right now. If they go to war with you I assume that you will cut off their supply of oil.

Volar
Sep 17, 2010, 07:16 PM
Because they gave you one of those resources that you were lacking in exchange. You're Russia, you have double uranium. Trade a resource to the Arabians for oil.

King Jason
Sep 17, 2010, 07:19 PM
Given that strategic resources are even more important in Civ5 than Civ4, will there be any reason at all to ever agree to AI trade requests for them? I dunno about anyone else, but I always ignored people in Civ4 asking me to give them Iron/Horses/Bronze/etc. It became even more pronounced in the industrial/modern era--why would I ever give an AI civ oil for tanks, aluminum for planes or uranium for nukes?

To make money or get luxuries?

Considering the uses of gold in this game, trading strategics will likely be the best way to produce profits in trade due to their value. Obviously this would take thought on your part;

Do you have a decent surplus of the resource?
Do you need(want) the gold that badly?
Are you trading with a friend or a potential threat?
How much more powerful than them are you?
Etc..

If I have 12 Iron to my opponent's 8, and there's a measly backwards civ at both of our borders... I have two options ~ I can field a bigger army than my opponent, or, I can sell off some extra to the non-threat for profits. This could be down in any ratio. I could sell all 4 surplus iron, or just 1... still giving me more units than my opponent.

Lastly, you can cancel the deal at any time, at which point if they've constructed any units with your iron, it now incurs a bigger maintanence cost. So not only did they pay out to build the unit, they pay out to field it until they find a permanent source of iron to supply it with.

Alsark
Sep 17, 2010, 07:23 PM
Here's a few reasons:

1) You have a gold-intensive strategy (upgrading a lot of units, bribing city-states, rush-buying, etc.) and need a lot of gold-per-turn.

2) A weaker civilization is fighting against a dominant civilization, yet you cannot directly help in the war (either because you're busy or for diplomatic reasons). To help the weaker civilization have a fighting chance, you provide the weaker civilization with resources.

3) You need another strategic resource in turn.

4) Your empire is unhappy and you need a lot of luxury resources. Chances are, the AI will trade two or three luxury resources for a strategic resource.

Valdyr
Sep 17, 2010, 07:34 PM
Some good ideas here. Now that I rethink, it's actually going to be better in Civ5, now that 1 unit of resource doesn't equal infinite military units... I could scam some poor little civ out of their gold or a nice luxury resource for a measly 1 or 2 Iron that they'll never be able to use to do more than annoy me a bit. :devil:

DalekDavros
Sep 18, 2010, 05:15 PM
Lastly, you can cancel the deal at any time,

Don't think so. Per the manual, "You can trade Strategic and Luxury resources with another civ. The other civ gets all of the benefits of the resource for the duration of the trade (30 turns)."

at which point if they've constructed any units with your iron, it now incurs a bigger maintanence cost.
I haven't seen this anywhere. Do you have a source? Manual says "Some units also require that your civ have access to certain resources to construct them (Swordsmen require Iron, for instance)" but doesn't seem to mention what happens if you lose access to the strategic resource.

King Jason
Sep 18, 2010, 05:46 PM
Don't think so. Per the manual, "You can trade Strategic and Luxury resources with another civ. The other civ gets all of the benefits of the resource for the duration of the trade (30 turns)."


I haven't seen this anywhere. Do you have a source? Manual says "Some units also require that your civ have access to certain resources to construct them (Swordsmen require Iron, for instance)" but doesn't seem to mention what happens if you lose access to the strategic resource.

To the first part... While possible, I sort of doubt the benefits of the trade are still active if I declare war at turn 22 out of 30... Still it's possible.

As to the second part, earlier previews and questioning... I believe greg even said it somewhere, it was quite a bit ago. It could possibly no longer be the case but I imagine there's a ramification.

The Leviathan
Sep 18, 2010, 11:59 PM
plus i heard something about Civilizations' units fights at 50% power if that resource that is required to build them is cut.

can someone confirm?