Crazy Jerome
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2002
- Messages
- 210
Ctrl-Shift M toggles cities, improvements, etc. Makes it much easier to find resources, especially under improved mines or under cities.
Saltpeterless Yet Again
- Thread starter Old&Slow
- Start date
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
I'm still absolutely convinced that there HAS to be at least one of every resource on the map somewhere. In fact I'm sure the absolute minimum is one of each resource per civ. Maybe someone can correct me but I'm 95% sure.
bru
Prince
The game I referred to above on a huge map has one Saltpeter for two large Continents and only one Iron on my Continent. I do not mind scarce resources but to my mind that is a bit thin. I am in contact with all nations and there is not a Saltpeter or Iron for trade on either Continent!
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
Additionally, in the map preferences you may switch on "boundaries" so that you may see who of your opponent's has at least the potential of getting a given ressource.
Personally, for the moment being I am fine with the scarceness of the ressources. You really have to adopt your playing style to it, depending on you being on the bright side of life or not
Dragonlord
Fantasy Warlord
In Conquests (I'm playing with the newest patch 1.13) the 1 resource per starting civ is definitely no longer valid.
In my current game (large map, 6 starting civs) there are definitely only 3 coal on the entire map - wouldn't you know that they are all on the other continent?
I had to change my whole strategy on seeing that and managed to build a coastal city with access to a coal colony there, after the AI conveniently razed a prior city in a war between AI civs... 
BTW, looking for resources works best using the 'clean map' option which can be configured through the main menu.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
Are you playing with a low number of AI civs? The more computer opponents you have the more resources will appear.
TheNiceOne
Emperor
I can correct you. I don't own C3C yet, but in vanilla and PTW, there could be less of a resource than number of civs.
I never encountered zero resources of a type, but most games had a resources type or two where the number were less than the number of civs.
So there were certainly no absolute low limit, expect maybe 1, since I've never seen a single resource totally missing.
The number of resources in C3C is less than in vanilla/PTW, so it wouldn't surprise me if there can be zero as well of a type.
Padma reported in another thread that there is a c3c issue with resources which is being looked into.
Out of 6 epic games so far I have had iron at the start in only 1 game. Sure makes the game more fun.
If they fix the problem I may even reduce the ratio in the editor...
Out of 6 epic games so far I have had iron at the start in only 1 game. Sure makes the game more fun.
If they fix the problem I may even reduce the ratio in the editor...
According to someone posting under the sticky Patch 1.13 thread, the resource issue is a bug introduced with C3C. Apparently, the bug stems from the implementation of new terrain types. Firaxis is looking into the issue.
As I've said elsewhere, for me the issue isn't too few resources for the human player. It's too few for the AI. The AI simply can't compensate for not having Iron throughout the Ancient and Middle eras. As a result, you end up with militarily backwards AIs that cave before you Medieval Infantry and Knights.
As I've said elsewhere, for me the issue isn't too few resources for the human player. It's too few for the AI. The AI simply can't compensate for not having Iron throughout the Ancient and Middle eras. As a result, you end up with militarily backwards AIs that cave before you Medieval Infantry and Knights.
In the game that I am currently playing (standard size world) - I ended up on a long skinny (pole to pole) continent by myself somehow. But in spite of the large landmass, I had NO HORSES and NO COAL on the entire continent!
I was able to trade with the Zulus for horses and promptly used my newly made Cavalry units to attack an isolated Zulu city to get coal
(thanks Shaka!)
...this game is probably more 'enjoyable' because of this...
- makes you use trade and your military instead of having everything 'handed' to you.
BTW - I have cleared the map (ctrl-shift-M) also to expose resources that lie on my opponents' city squares!
I was able to trade with the Zulus for horses and promptly used my newly made Cavalry units to attack an isolated Zulu city to get coal
(thanks Shaka!)...this game is probably more 'enjoyable' because of this...
- makes you use trade and your military instead of having everything 'handed' to you.
BTW - I have cleared the map (ctrl-shift-M) also to expose resources that lie on my opponents' city squares!
You should focus on playing the Conquest-Scenarios.
The issue that has been mentioned has not been fixed, and as someone already said, the AIs will have more problems than you with that.
Well -> Civ3 Conquests was praised with high ratings, sure, it is a great game.
Bug introducing an expansion that messes up corruption and ressources and so on is not the way to go!
There are beta patches that fix at least corruption, but it is still not the final solution which is said to be in some month... in
JUNE!
Ugh. Now tell me that this should not be a valid reasons to give Civ 3 Conquests in its current state WORSE ratings instead of really great ones in the games mags, e.g. Gamespot and so on.
The issue that has been mentioned has not been fixed, and as someone already said, the AIs will have more problems than you with that.
Well -> Civ3 Conquests was praised with high ratings, sure, it is a great game.
Bug introducing an expansion that messes up corruption and ressources and so on is not the way to go!
There are beta patches that fix at least corruption, but it is still not the final solution which is said to be in some month... in
JUNE!
Ugh. Now tell me that this should not be a valid reasons to give Civ 3 Conquests in its current state WORSE ratings instead of really great ones in the games mags, e.g. Gamespot and so on.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
That is, as long you don't fight them
=> 
=> 
=> 
=> 
=> 
=> 
joycem10
Deity
try playing a wet/warm world some time. your odds of having oil on the map are around 35-40%.
Ivan the Kulak
King
I wonder exactly how the game calculates for luxury resources depending upon number of civs on the map. It seems that all 8 types are always available (at least in the few experiments I have done) but amounts decrease with fewer civs.
I really hope they take a fundamentally different resource approach in civ4. Just having stuff not available period is unrealistic. Historically nations have been affected, and sometimes wars decided, by a lack of certain critical resources. But before the onset of hostilities these countries were always able to obtain things they needed through trade. Most superior civs were the way they were because of tech knowledge, not because of a monopoly of resources. There was plenty of iron about in the ancient age, for example, but for a long time only the Hittites knew how to work it, and kept the secret to themselves. It's not as if they possessed the only iron mine on the Eurasian landmass. The Japanese lost WWII largely because of a lack of oil, yet before the war they had sufficient access to build up a world class military. Having your game crunched because of total lack of saltpeter, iron or what have you is something that takes the fun right out of it. It is a totally arbitrary factor, and it adds nothing to gameplay. You may as well take a pair of dice and shoot craps if this is what appeals to you. It will also save you time, as you will not have to play for three hours to see if the roll comes up snake eyes.
I really hope they take a fundamentally different resource approach in civ4. Just having stuff not available period is unrealistic. Historically nations have been affected, and sometimes wars decided, by a lack of certain critical resources. But before the onset of hostilities these countries were always able to obtain things they needed through trade. Most superior civs were the way they were because of tech knowledge, not because of a monopoly of resources. There was plenty of iron about in the ancient age, for example, but for a long time only the Hittites knew how to work it, and kept the secret to themselves. It's not as if they possessed the only iron mine on the Eurasian landmass. The Japanese lost WWII largely because of a lack of oil, yet before the war they had sufficient access to build up a world class military. Having your game crunched because of total lack of saltpeter, iron or what have you is something that takes the fun right out of it. It is a totally arbitrary factor, and it adds nothing to gameplay. You may as well take a pair of dice and shoot craps if this is what appeals to you. It will also save you time, as you will not have to play for three hours to see if the roll comes up snake eyes.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
With no arbitrary factor there would be no fun at all.
I think those of you really struggling with resources should try playing around with your world settings. My current world has about 2-3 Iron per civ on my continent alone (all within Zulu territory until I made a few revisions to the map). I'd say only about 1 game in ten is really made worse due to lack of resources, which isn't a great deal worse than vanilla. Not to mention the fact that a similar proportion of games are made much more fun by having to adapt to the lack of a particular resource.
If you start on a continent alone you're going to have problems no matter how big the continent is.
I think those of you really struggling with resources should try playing around with your world settings. My current world has about 2-3 Iron per civ on my continent alone (all within Zulu territory until I made a few revisions to the map). I'd say only about 1 game in ten is really made worse due to lack of resources, which isn't a great deal worse than vanilla. Not to mention the fact that a similar proportion of games are made much more fun by having to adapt to the lack of a particular resource.
If you start on a continent alone you're going to have problems no matter how big the continent is.
Ivan the Kulak
King
You make a good point, Enkidu, but there are different degrees of arbitrary acceptability. The real solution, I think, is what is being discussed in the "New resource system" thread also on this forum, in which you and I have both posted. But it will have to wait until civ4.
With all due respect making the default C3C game, either through a Bug or a design decision Harder does not necessarly make it more Fun.
My ratio of resource problems, on large maps, as well as others who posted, seem more like 1 in 2, and not only are they much more infrequent, they are badly placed, which forces you into early wars or silly extended City placements, with long roads back to your Core Cities, to use them.
As soon as I figure how to do it I intend to add resources and increase their frequency in my Games, but I really shouldn`t have to do that IMO.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
I'm not trying to be the cheerleader for Atari or anything, just that people seem to be having problems far beyond what I've experienced. At the end of the day it's a matter of preference. You shouldn't have to mod the game to change this sort of thing but we can be glad that it is possible without too much hassle.
BTW, what are you defining as a resource problem. I was meaning a game in which I felt that I had to quit because of resources making the game no fun, not just that I had to go to unusual lengths to acquire them. I know some people don't like having to dump everything and go on a holy war for coal, but for me this can be entertaining.
Ivan the Kulak
King
Depending on how much the resource factor is balanced against you, you may not be in a position to conquer ANY resources. For example, in one game, I started by myself on an island (a fairly good sized island, mind you). As it turned out, I had 1 iron. That's it. Everyone else had completely settled all nearby continental land by the time I was able to make contact. Well, I thought, I'd better pursue a peaceful game this time, as my army consisted of pikemen, archers, and swordsmen, while everyone else was building knights, cavalry, musketmen, what have you. Even had I landed an invasion force and by luck managed to grab a city, I don't think I would have held onto it. When the time came around to build RR - you guessed it, no coal. And here's the kicker - there just wasn't enough to go around. I COULDN'T trade for it, no matter what. Your chances of getting enough science and production without the food and shield bonus given by RR to pursue the diplomatic or spaceship victories are slim to none, if you are behind in tech, without the gold or luxuries to trade for more techs (I had one extra incense). Culture was ok, but not enough to win.
