Resourceless Game (what a waste)

[antisocialgeek]

What do you do when you have the majority of the land area in your game yet lack the necessary resources. In a past game I had been waiting for years for the "We have discovered" to pop up. I had no oil, coal, iron, uranium throughout the end of the game. Other countries had but it appeared they had no left over to trade. I couldn't build certain things and city improvements. I spent so much time building this large empire only to find it void of resources. Everything was good. Corruption was low, production was high, people were happy and yet I couldn't build a strong military. I felt as if the other civilizations were laughing at me. I gave up when I found other civilizations building nukes. I was totally defenseless.

 

[MuddyOne]

Your options:

1) Take the resources by force. Aluminium and rubber you had?
ie. infantry and modern armor. The 3 movement of modern armor would help with the lack of railroads.

2) Go for a different victory condition (Most of which involve fighting, though you can build good terms with civilizations, so that when someone builds the UN you can win the vote.)

I do have to ask though, while building your empire- did you pick all the best grassland places? A lot of resources appear in less favorable terrain.

 

[friedmad]

mod armor also requires oil

 

[antisocialgeek]

I usually play an achipelago (sp?) map. I guess I did have good areas, that's why my population was growing well and I was successful. I had an entire island to myself, and it was large one at that, but it was void of any significant resources.

 

[Stenchilada]

Can't say I've gone completely "resourceless" in any of my games.

Something that HAS happened a couple of times, always seems to involve coal. I'll master Steam Engine... have a pretty hefty chunk of the land mass... and maybe share it with a sporadically placed nemesis.

I put cities in and around his/hers... preventing their cultural growth.... but be darned if that coal resource doesn't end up in their sphere of influence.

That's easily rectified with the war gauntlet thrown down... but still.... throw me a bone here with the coal.

 

[Zouave]

Come on, you have to Edit.

If you use the incredibly artifical and low resource values that Firaxis gave us you may well indeed end up on a continent with no iron or coal. You may well be forced to start war after war to secure resources. I can't think of a single war in history that started over a coal or iron supply. They were never that rare in reality.


I find iron works best at 177 and coal at 171. Rare, but not insanely so.

 

[Sullla]

Originally posted by Zouave
If you use the incredibly artifical and low resource values that Firaxis gave us you may well indeed end up on a continent with no iron or coal. You may well be forced to start war after war to secure resources. I can't think of a single war in history that started over a coal or iron supply. They were never that rare in reality.

Oh, no! Two civilizations fighting over a resource of some kind that only one has? Surely THAT has never happened before in world history!

More seriously though, if the other civs will not trade you a resource and you possess none of it yourself, you will have to go to war to get it. That is, as long as there is no source of it somewhere else in the world on a tiny island or something like that. Civ3 was designed so that there would be conflict over resources, which I feel is realistic and adds an interesting twist to the game. It would be nice though if there was a way to turn off the need for strategic resources for players who do not like them.

 

[Stenchilada]

Originally posted by Sullla


Oh, no! Two civilizations fighting over a resource of some kind that only one has? Surely THAT has never happened before in world history!

You mean like the great Skittles War of 1462!? Oh, the horror! THE HORROR!!