Trade resources for gold or not?

[AnotherPacifist]

Wine to China for 6gpt
Marble to Ethiopia for 2gpt
Cancel deals with Arabia (vassal) and then demand Sheep and Incense (Arabia has 2) from them.
Iron to Arabia for 2gpt
Wheat to Khmer for 4gpt
Cancel deals with Germany and then demand just their surplus resources (2x Cow, 2x Fish, Pig, Sheep)
Sheep to Germany for 5gpt

Now I'm no trading expert like blizzrd, but I've never understood the reason to trade a vital resource like marble for 2 gpt. Granted, 10 turns later, you get 20 gold (or maybe I'm missing the point that those 2gpt get multiplied by whatever economic buildings?) but the hammers from the marble should outweigh any economic benefit from those 2 gold.

I will trade seafood for money but never wheat or rice (food is good, right?).

 

[blizzrd]

I trade production resources for gpt from an AI civ unless:

- the resource enables the AI civ to build a military unit that I don't want them to have; or
- the resource enables the AI civ to speed up the produciton of a World Wonder that I am trying to build.

I also usually give my spare production resources to my vassals, even if they don't want to or can't give me any gpt in exchange.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

But if you really want that gold, wouldn't it be better just to devote 1 turn of 1 city to gold or research (with the marble turning into 1 gold multiplied by a forge and other production buildings)? Why give the AI the benefit of that hammer (multiplied by whatever production buildings they have)?

Two exceptions to this is aluminum, which I do trade away (usually for happiness resources + gold) because the AI values it so much, and I'm usually the first to get industrialization to get it. The only other one is I'll trade horses to the civs that don't have it if they are my vassals, because they value it so highly they often give me a good trade, and by that time I'm building tanks rather than cavalry and need more money and happiness resources rather than production.

One thing I hate is that whenever I try to trade health resources away, inevitably plague comes up and I can't cancel that trade. That's why I've never traded away wheat or corn, and only spare sheep if I don't have too many pastures around. I never trade cows away (hammers are good!!).

 

[blizzrd]

Now I'm no trading expert like blizzrd, but I've never understood the reason to trade a vital resource like marble for 2 gpt. Granted, 10 turns later, you get 20 gold (or maybe I'm missing the point that those 2gpt get multiplied by whatever economic buildings?) but the hammers from the marble should outweigh any economic benefit from those 2 gold.

I will trade seafood for money but never wheat or rice (food is good, right?).

It depends on how many cities the AI civ has. If they are a large civ with lots of cities, trading them marble will give them a larger proportion of extra hammers (one for each city). But if they are a dinky civ like Ethiopia, it isn't going to make that much difference.

The benefit to you of getting 2 gpt for say 100 turns is way more beneficial than the extra hammers that Ethiopia gets are to them.

 

[Virdrago]

I usually only sell resources for 5gpt or more, but I'm starting to understand your line of thinking, blizzrd.

Are there certain resources you wouldn't sell, ever (besides uranium)?

 

[blizzrd]

I usually only sell resources for 5gpt or more, but I'm starting to understand your line of thinking, blizzrd.

Are there certain resources you wouldn't sell, ever (besides uranium)?

Oil and Coal.

 

[blizzrd]

I don't know the code well enough, but I understand that trading resources to AI civs improves your stability (economy). I think that there is a base economy stability penalty for your civ which is mitigated by either trading the right quantity of resources or by adopting the Commonwealth civic.

But it would be nice to hear a clearer definition from Rhye.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Coal is bad for health once you have coal plants and factories, and to build airports, I routinely export it to my vassals (only) for their health resources. By late game I usually have so much production that I am glad to get rid of a few coals, marbles and horses. Never oil or uranium though.

 

[Crossphazer]

I'll trade anything but stone, marble, iron, copper, horses, aluminium, uranium, oil and coal, basically ressources need to build/speed up something, though I loosen up on the stone and marble past the Taj.

 

[Metal Alloy Man]

I generally tend to trade my surplus resources, but only if I feel it doesn't benefit the AI too much. Otherwise I tend to just give them to my vassals.

 

[JujuLautre]

But if you really want that gold, wouldn't it be better just to devote 1 turn of 1 city to gold or research (with the marble turning into 1 gold multiplied by a forge and other production buildings)? Why give the AI the benefit of that hammer (multiplied by whatever production buildings they have)?

Unless you're building a marble wonder, having marble in a city does not increase your production. If you speak of this "+1 " you see on the screen, it is misleading.

 

[blizzrd]

Unless you're building a marble wonder, having marble in a city does not increase your production. If you speak of this "+1 " you see on the screen, it is misleading.

I've thought as much, it seems you have confirmed my suspicion.

When trying to build the my first workboat as Greece, I counted the number of hammers being produced in Athens, and it was exactly equal to the tiles worked and didn't seem to have anything extra for hooking up the marble resource.

So I've been right to trade away production resources, but I was slightly wrong about the math behind my decision.

 

[Soda]

I don't know the code well enough, but I understand that trading resources to AI civs improves your stability (economy). I think that there is a base economy stability penalty for your civ which is mitigated by either trading the right quantity of resources or by adopting the Commonwealth civic.

But it would be nice to hear a clearer definition from Rhye.

I'm pretty sure that it does not. The imports/exports that the stability wiki refers to is the trade route commerce that you see in the demographics.

 

[Deego3]

The hammer from marble is only from the city that gets it.

However, the health, happy and angry bonus is shared in every city

 

[sennomulo]

Yes, I do.

Speaking of which, I find it funny that you can trade a gold resource for gold per turn.

 

[kbk]

Frankly, it depends on the resource, whether they can make good use of it, whether they are a vassal or an ally, or a direct rival. Most times I don't micromanage that much, but if its 5 or more gold per turn, I usually try to do it.

I almost never demand resources in tribute from a vassal, but if I need a resource, I'll trade them for it (even if its the only one they have).

 

[say1988]

Speaking of which, I find it funny that you can trade a gold resource for gold per turn.

That is historically accurate, and a very reasonable thing. I trade you gold ore straight from the hill, and you send me refined gold that I can more easily spent on other things.

If you have more than 1 of a resource, or it is an unneeded resource, I will trade it, unless it gives the receiver a large benefit directly against me (i.e. giving my neighbour, especially one i plan to invade, iron when knights dominate the battlefield), or if I am in a tech race with someone, giving them resources that will allow them bigger cities. Some backwards civ, say a very weak Ethiopia, I will normally trade anything and everything (who cares if they can build tanks if they are no threat to me).
And 2gpt (and relations boosts) is much better than nothing from having a resource sitting around doing nothing, so long as it isn't used against me, plus I had thought it benefited stability [most of this goes for normal civ IV as well as RFC]. Uranium is the only thing I will hold back, unless the UN has banned nukes, since anyone can hurt me with them.

 

[onedreamer]

Now I'm no trading expert like blizzrd, but I've never understood the reason to trade a vital resource like marble for 2 gpt. Granted, 10 turns later, you get 20 gold (or maybe I'm missing the point that those 2gpt get multiplied by whatever economic buildings?) but the hammers from the marble should outweigh any economic benefit from those 2 gold.

I will trade seafood for money but never wheat or rice (food is good, right?).

well, when you trade a resource you trade its STRATEGIC bonus and not its production bonus. Hence if you have 2 marbles (or wheats) the second is totally useless and unproductive as a strategic bonus unless you trade it away. Also, marble is worth well more than 2 gpt... I would only not trade a strategic resource if it helps speed up a wonder that I intend to build. But normally I do it if I already completed half of it, or I simply look for a civ that can't build that wonder, if possible.

 

[Riker]

It makes no sense to keep surplus resources. I always trade everything which is not uranium, oil and coal. Marble and stone only when it would do me no harm. Coal can be given to whom you want to invade later, to let him build railroads for you.