The lamest resource

[bestbrian]

According to Venn Diagram calculation the "weakest" resources are

Cow, Sheep, and Pig.


+1
+1 Pasture
+1 Supermarket

Supermarket? thats like at the end of the game.

More telling however is that the programmers have unconsciously created a bias against cattlemen, sheep herders, and swine lords, who you can beat in a war if you have Silver, Beaver, etc.

Whale , the resources revealed by Hunting and Mining and Wine are the superior.

Funny that you should mention that, Troy, as Wine and Beaver are the known natural enemies of the Cattleman, Sheep Herder, and Swine Lord. And kryptonite to me as well.

 

[offworld]

What about coal? Ever since BTSs diesel locomotives, coal doesnt have much of an impact anymore. Before it was all-important, now it grants you: the ironclad...

 

[Flying Pig]

Big yields and power.

 

[UWHabs]

Coal gets you coal plants, which can come a lot sooner than any other power source.

As for the poster above who never went to war over silver, I have I had mining inc, and got the "Corporate Greed" quest. Okay, I already had about 40% of the world's landmass and population, was going to just go for an easy space win (especially since mining was giving me 20+ hammers), so I had a bunch of cities with nothing to build. I built a bunch of galleons, frigates, destroyers, and transports, and lots of marines and infantry and eventually tanks (I had to delay since my vassal actually refused to donate a resource to me, so I had to take him out), but yeah, I went to war over silver.

That said, definitely the weakest resources for me would be furs and whales. Both good, but they're both usually only in the arctic, so crappy city sites. Deer would also somewhat count in this, but since it gives half-decent food yields, 2 deer and something else (either a fish/clam/crab, or a fur or whale) is enough to legitimately build a city. Whereas even if a city can get 6 beavers in its BFC, usually that city is otherwise useless.

 

[bestbrian]

Six Beavers in my Big Fat Cross and I'd be pretty useless too.

 

[Flying Pig]

So the consensus seems to be that the arctic luxury resources are the worst. How much do people value Hit Movies?

 

[nbcman]

Hit movies are good as late game trade bait-plus they can be useful to replace the resources that go obsolete in the modern era (like whale and ivory).

 

[Flying Pig]

Are they worth the work to get them though?

 

[Airefuego]

Probably not always worth it alone, but the DENIAL value (stopping the others from getting them) is also worth considering

 

[6K Man]

As for the poster above who never went to war over silver, I have I had mining inc, and got the "Corporate Greed" quest. Okay, I already had about 40% of the world's landmass and population, was going to just go for an easy space win (especially since mining was giving me 20+ hammers), so I had a bunch of cities with nothing to build. I built a bunch of galleons, frigates, destroyers, and transports, and lots of marines and infantry and eventually tanks (I had to delay since my vassal actually refused to donate a resource to me, so I had to take him out), but yeah, I went to war over silver.

Sounds more like you went to war because you were bored

I have never seen an awesome city site with 2+ Silver resources that made me say, "OMG, I gotta pry that burg from Ragnar's cold, dead hands!". Mainly because Silver cities are usually in crappy places, and the Silver doesn't do a good enough job mitigating that to make them worth fighting over, in and of themselves.

Gold, or Gems, on the other hand...

 

[Tephros]

Sounds more like you went to war because you were bored

I have never seen an awesome city site with 2+ Silver resources that made me say, "OMG, I gotta pry that burg from Ragnar's cold, dead hands!". Mainly because Silver cities are usually in crappy places, and the Silver doesn't do a good enough job mitigating that to make them worth fighting over, in and of themselves.

Gold, or Gems, on the other hand...

Silver with sufficient deer to support it is better than gold that isn't near food. Frankly, all of the metal luxuries are better than the other luxuries because the yields are good, they don't go obsolete, they're available early, and they add happiness with the most ubiquitous happiness-boosting building, the forge.

Are they worth the work to get them though?

Yes. You need something to replace all of those obsolete resources (fur, ivory, whale... ouch). Of course it's often more efficient to capture it than to build it yourself. In either case you get several extra resource you have a monopoly on to trade for gpt or resources, which makes it pretty potent. America in particular gets some pretty ridiculous happiness yields out of it.

 

[Ramesses]

Six Beavers in my Big Fat Cross and I'd be pretty useless too.

Sounds hot.

 

[oilnwater]

consensus should be that incense is worst. especially the average desert incense.

don't you need coal for railroading terrain? that's pretty important.

 

[6K Man]

Silver with sufficient deer to support it is better than gold that isn't near food.

Alas, in my experience there is no such thing. Gold, on the other hand, seems to pop up around floodplain a lot, in my games anyway.

 

[Tephros]

consensus should be that incense is worst. especially the average desert incense.

don't you need coal for railroading terrain? that's pretty important.

That's a good point. I once tried to get rid of my coal while I was Japan and I was like... WTH why can't I build railroads?! lol You can do it with oil instead though, IIRC.

Not so sure on the incense. I see them on plains sometimes, and the yields are better than silk or dye in that case. I hate silk the most I think.

Alas, in my experience there is no such thing. Gold, on the other hand, seems to pop up around floodplain a lot, in my games anyway.

Gold and corn FTW. That's my favorite combo. My silver cities arent usually big but there's usually a food resource within range. Fish, crab, or deer. More often I run into the problem where the ****** AI builds a silver city that isn't within range of the food resource and I have to decide whether it's worth it to raze and resettle. Often there's no choice anyway since the city never grows. Ice is a nice place for ruins I guess. I love it when I find info buried in the ruins.

 

[Lord Parkin]

That's a good point. I once tried to get rid of my coal while I was Japan and I was like... WTH why can't I build railroads?! lol You can do it with oil instead though, IIRC.

Just curious, why would you want to get rid of Coal? I can sort of understand the unhealthiness issue (although usually I manage alright there). But you're cutting off a +50% bonus for your Iron Works city by removing Coal from your empire! (Or had you not built the Iron Works? In which case, why didn't you?)

 

[Flying Pig]

Probably not always worth it alone, but the DENIAL value (stopping the others from getting them) is also worth considering

Good point - they are valuable in trade, and you can keep 7 off your enemies by refusing to trade them - or keeping them happy with your resources and then causing riots by withdrawing them!

 

[Lord Parkin]

Good point - they are valuable in trade, and you can keep 7 off your enemies by refusing to trade them - or keeping them happy with your resources and then causing riots by withdrawing them!

Just a quick note in case anyone doesn't realise - the number of resources you get from Broadway/Hollywood/Rock n Roll varies depending on the map size, so it won't always be set at 7. From memory, I think it varies somewhere from 2 (duel/tiny size) to 7 (huge), but I'd have to check in the game to be sure.

 

[Krill]

I think much of this comes down to balance. Probably, the game worked best with three seafood resources and crabs was the third one they came up with, while 3 crops was best, so they didn't need to add potatoes.

I'm sure we could easily come up with a dozen more resources, but it probably wouldn't make the game better.

Actually, I'd appreciate it if there were more variaty in the amount of resource types the larger the map was, so long as there were limits on the amount of resources of each type you could use for health and happy boni.

eg, 3 precious metals on standard, 5 on large, 7 on huge, but you can never use more than 3 for happiness.

No real advantages of doing it, of course, but then again only downside is the extra coding and art work necesarry for a little more flavour in the game, so really it's a win-win in a game where people always want mroe and more realism but the devs can't cut out the gameplay.

 

[6K Man]

There are lots of ways you could improve the resource system. More (in number and in type) of resources. Resources that can be exhausted, or that only provide a benefit to X number of cities.

For example, Gold mines can be exhausted - but it's also possible for Silver and Uranium to be found after the Gold is gone, for example.

Renewable resources like corn or Wheat probably would never get exhausted. Fish might. Whales certainly could be. Etc.