No oil, no aluminum
- Thread starter Hambil
- Start date
therottweiler
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 89
Trade for them? Or try a Strategic Balance start next time?
Talcove
Slayer of Spies
Ah yes, the almighty aluminum. Well, as long as you have five cities you should have access to at least ten aluminum without trading, provided that you build a recycling center in all of them.
Ravellion
Prince
Aluminium can be gained easily by building recycling plants. Oil is a tough one. I sometimes steal some from a CS via a Great general.
AlazkanAssassin
Engineer
Am I the only one who is somewhat disapointed when I find I have plenty of coal, oil and aluminum without doing anything?
I find it exciting to have a resource deficiency to overcome. Great excuse for an interesting war or rethinking my city-state priorities.
I find it exciting to have a resource deficiency to overcome. Great excuse for an interesting war or rethinking my city-state priorities.
ense7en
n7
Ally CS with it?
GG citadel bomb to get it from neighbor/CS/nearby area?
And the ultimate answer...be ready to go to war to acquire it.
GG citadel bomb to get it from neighbor/CS/nearby area?
And the ultimate answer...be ready to go to war to acquire it.
Talcove
Slayer of Spies
Ah yes, create the war you need to defend yourself from so that you can get the resource you need to defend yourself with.
I used to be angry, but then I realized that this is how the game and the world work. I was just reading an article in The Atlantic about how Britain, American, and Japan have had to battle for oil resources for a hundred years.
Sometimes, you have to go to war to take the resources you want... or beg, borrow or steal to get them. It creates intrigue and adds another dimension to the game.
The worst one is uranium when going for a science victory. Sometimes it just isn't anywhere... or in very limited quantities.
Sometimes, you have to go to war to take the resources you want... or beg, borrow or steal to get them. It creates intrigue and adds another dimension to the game.
The worst one is uranium when going for a science victory. Sometimes it just isn't anywhere... or in very limited quantities.
whyidie
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Messages
- 1,187
Add me to the list. I find it a nice milestone. The game has reached the stage where I have to re-think priorities for my Civ. Do I build a crap city just for a resource ? Do I stop my isolationist tendencies for "national defense" ?
I think its also a rare opportunity for the balance of the game to shift, especially from an AI perspective. In my last game (think it was large islands) on the surface it seemed like a standard 2 civ runaway scenario. After the game was concluded the replay and resources told the story. Once Iron came online 4 Civs took leaps. Once Oil came online 2 tooks leaps. The ones that had Iron and Oil were the last ones standing. If I would have let the game go on, I'm sure there would have been more fluctuation once Uranium became critical.
Polisurgist
King
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 630
Yeah, the possibility of hitting a resource deficiency or surplus is one of the great points where flexibility and adaptability become worthwhile. I like those times I'm shooting for a science victory, find I've got a ton of oil and suddenly realize that I'm now on a domination path, or vice versa, when I find I've got none.
Koiranputki
Prince
- Joined
- May 9, 2012
- Messages
- 376
Not to forget Deutschland and France.... Oil seems to have a way of being where the power centres of humanity are not...
Though, on second thought, I guess the North Sea oil has been a major windfall for the British....
It seems in some games the "resource shortfalls" just seem to compell you inevitably towards a war with one of you neighbours....sometimes even further off.... just one more reason to keep up your military "prowess" even if you want to play through to a Science Victory....
I kind of like this uncertainty...it can be frustrating, but it adds to the overall fun of the game, I would say....
The problem with oil is it comes so late in the game. You have spent half a day of your valuable vacation/weekend whatever, playing a game only to find out you have no oil. Yes, there are things you can do about it, but it still pisses me off. Especially when it happened twice in a row.Not to forget Deutschland and France.... Oil seems to have a way of being where the power centres of humanity are not...
Though, on second thought, I guess the North Sea oil has been a major windfall for the British....
It seems in some games the "resource shortfalls" just seem to compell you inevitably towards a war with one of you neighbours....sometimes even further off.... just one more reason to keep up your military "prowess" even if you want to play through to a Science Victory....
I kind of like this uncertainty...it can be frustrating, but it adds to the overall fun of the game, I would say....
Light Cleric
ElCee/LC/El Cid
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2011
- Messages
- 3,225
The only strategic resource I despise not having is Oil because of how over-centric Planes are. The only real counter is Triplanes until you get all the way to Ballistics which takes Flight AND the Railroad routes to get to AA gun. This kind of seems stupid to me when a lot of other "counters" are available at the same time or slightly before/aterafter the unit it counters appears, i.e. Spears/Horsemen, Pikes/Knights, Landships/Anti-Tank Guns/Tanks, etc. but if you want an aircraft counter you have to dig all the way down the bottom/military part of the tech tree that the Flight user skipped AND go Flight AND get to Ballistics for AA Guns which then have to be hard built. Combine that with the fact that AIs rarely go for Artillery and just push Flight and you have a stale mid late-game...
Uranium can be annoying to lack, too, but it's less of an issue since nukes don't have counters anyway
Uranium can be annoying to lack, too, but it's less of an issue since nukes don't have counters anyway
Other nukes, and bombshelters, in theory. Though the AI seems content to start WWIII and burn down the world more often than not so they don't really work very well as counters.Uranium can be annoying to lack, too, but it's less of an issue since nukes don't have counters anyway
Light Cleric
ElCee/LC/El Cid
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2011
- Messages
- 3,225
Vintage Port
Backstab this!
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2013
- Messages
- 243
Unless something changed I believe strategic balance is only for iron and horses.
apocalypse105
Deity
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 2,705
Civ 5 indeas has a problem with resource placement :
There is only a few coal in the world and mostly only city states have them or only 1 player.
All iron is at 1 area which means only one player or 2 have acces to it.
there isn't much oil to be founded.
Alluminium uranium what is that? its extremely rare.
Solution play with abundant resource setttings.
There is only a few coal in the world and mostly only city states have them or only 1 player.
All iron is at 1 area which means only one player or 2 have acces to it.
there isn't much oil to be founded.
Alluminium uranium what is that? its extremely rare.
Solution play with abundant resource setttings.
Lorf Yimzo
Atheist
But often times I play on that setting and it still feels like resources are uncommon. Not a single CS in my last game had coal, and I had to use a GG citadel. Of course, there was only a 1:1 ratio of CS to civs but still.
apocalypse105
Deity
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 2,705
Yeah coal is a real issue really don't know why they didn't fixed on the other hand YOu can usally trade with the AI for it you only need it for about +/-10 turns to built you're factories
