 |
| |
|
|
a2b2c3
|
|
Wisconsin
Nov 2001
time: 23:16
|
|
only most, it still sucks when you don't have some of the resources and they are all bunched up by one ai... but there are sometimes good moments... story time...
i'm pretty sure i was having my best civ3 game ever. i was expanding well, i was getting some key wonders, i was technologically advanced, all my cites had defensive guys and walls.... next thing i know rome starts sending legions into my territory... ask them to leave, rome has a polite manner to me, they say ok...
next turn they are still advancing, oh **** i think. move some spearmen around. ask em to leave again, bam! war is declared. ok so it's time to mobalize my troops. i start pumping out swordsmen. bybthos, or whatever it's name is was taken by the romans. they have too many legions. i start pumping out swordsman tring to hold em off. pretty soon i realize swm arn't going to help, they are made too slow.
I remember a trick the computer used on me. the aztec's jaguar warrior with it's withdraw abilty was pretty efficient. so i look at what i have that moble. horsemen or war chariots. the war chariots were less costly so i started building them. they are doing a pretty good job of slowing the roman invasion, but i'm running out of swordmen.
So i start producing some more swm hping to still defeat the romans. by this time i'm no longer advancing as fast due to this damn war. anyways i start maniging some of my cities between buildings and units. then i realize something, rome only has one source of iron, the only other source is outside their culture, i prepared a galley and 2 swm only to have the galley lost because i pushed the move arrow too fast and it fought with another roman galley. so i work again to make another, only this time i've discovered feudalism so i use 1 pikeman and 1 swm.
by this time rome is getting a little lighter on their legions, the original city they captured has defected back to my side to i move all my troops there. my galley has successfully landed it's cargo. the pikeman has defended itself againt a few of rome's legions and now is gaurding the iron. the swm is still sitting tight after taking out the road. One of rome's cities Veii has been destroyed rather than trying to hold on to it. it looks like this war has turned. i only wish i had more time to kill these romans for making me fight this war. Also they seem to have sold large amount of tech to the other 6 civs who were very, very inferior. i don't know why they did it. we had a huge lead and now eveything has gone to hell!! damn cesair or however his name is spelled... he made my perfect game hard again!!!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Badtz Maru
|
|
What I love about strategic resources is that they often force you into an offensive war, which would be too easy to avoid otherwise.
You know the situation - you've got a technological lead on the other civilizations, good relations with almost all of them, and the best defensive units you can build guarding all your cities. You are in the perfect situation to just sit there and build up your empire, victory is assured, whether it is cultural, diplomatic, or space.
Then you make an advance that opens up a new resouce that's needed for your nifty new units and realize you don't have any. You still have your lead, but you know eventually the AI is going to get to your point and start building stuff that you can't. And what do you know, there's a nice big patch of saltpeter/coal/oil/aluminum/uranium not too far from your borders. What are you going to do? You can give the tech needed to be aware of that resource to your neighbor and then try to buy some (if they have more than one), but you know in five turns everybody in the world is going to have the secrets of Gunpowder/Steam Power/Refining/Rocketry/Fission and THEY aren't reliant on trade to use it.
Makes the game a lot more interesting to have strategic resources.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Redstar
|
|
ques: You can deprive your enemies of a strategic resource just by destroying railroad/roads on that resource --is that right?
Yup, i love this concept also.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Libertarian
|
|
Someone in the strategy forum mentioned this. He likes going straight to the enemy's capital, and rather than launching an immediate attack, surrounding it instead, and pillaging its roads. Instantly, the entire empire loses its resources. This can send large cities into disorder very quickly, and effectively cripple any attempt by the enemy to mount a counterattack.
It's an especially good tactic for an industrious tribe with workers at the ready.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Patient English
|
 |
Sussex, England
Dec 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
Libertarian said:
quote:
Someone in the strategy forum mentioned this. He likes going straight to the enemy's capital, and rather than launching an immediate attack, surrounding it instead, and pillaging its roads. Instantly, the entire empire loses its resources. This can send large cities into disorder very quickly, and effectively cripple any attempt by the enemy to mount a counterattack. |
Nice strategy. A real killer. But how does this map to anything that might have happened in "The Real World"? Of course, Civ III is only a game, but I like to try and convince myself that things that happen in Civ could have happened for real. This seems like just another exploit to me. Another example of clever gamesmanship spoiling the "feel" of the thing.
The resource model is a nice idea (if a bit flakily implemented) but the idea of resources only being usable to an Empire if a road leads from them back to whichever city happened to contain the Emperor's Palace at that time - well, that forces supsension of disbelief a bit too far for me. You can build swordsmen all over your Empire, then a road to Rome is pillaged and suddenly you can't?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
xane
|
|
I didn't think the palace had anything to do with it. You can only build the appropriate units in those cities which had access to the resource, regardless of the capital.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kekkonen
|
|
Turku, Finland
Nov 2001
time: 07:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by xane
I managed to get one to agree a deal on Rubber, but I declined for the moment as it would have tekn all my spare cash, so I built up reserves and established MPPs with everyone to curry favour, even gaining a few techs that everyone wanted.
Could I get anyone to give me Oil or Rubber ? No "deal possible" everywhere - argh !
|
The "no deal" that other civs give you initially doesn't necessarily mean that they won't sell you the resource. Sometimes they just don't want to give you offers, but may go for something you cook up yourself. Be prepared to pay through the nose, though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Redstar
|
|
what i said is true..and you do have to blow the airport/harbour also.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
xane
|
|
For non-traded resources, I assume you are restricted to building the appropriate units only in those cities that have access to the resource, I always thought you did not need the capital involved in this (unless you wanted to build the unit in the captial itself).
How about non-unit resource restrictions ? Like building railways needs a coal resource, does this mean you can connect ANY city to the coal resource, or does the actual square you are building the railroad in have to have access ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gunter
|
|
Hours and hours of deep strategy vanished from lucky civ that can win only with their coal or oil?No way!!!!Lets increase appereance ratio what is necessary to simulate a real world otherwise lets play Casino Roulette Royale.
Cheers
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gachnar
|
 |
Arlington, VA
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Libertarian
Someone in the strategy forum mentioned this. He likes going straight to the enemy's capital, and rather than launching an immediate attack, surrounding it instead, and pillaging its roads. Instantly, the entire empire loses its resources. This can send large cities into disorder very quickly, and effectively cripple any attempt by the enemy to mount a counterattack.
It's an especially good tactic for an industrious tribe with workers at the ready. |
Not to jump on you too bad, but why do people keep repeating this rumour? If you take out the roads to the capital, then you have only stopped external goods from coming into the capital. If they have saltpeter in another city (its hardly ever their capital) then that city, and all the cities its connected to can use the Saltpeter.
What you should do is send a force to sit on the Saltpeter, and pillage the roads around it. So even if the force falls, they have to spend the time rebuilding the roads to get it, during which time you should be sending another force.
Now, if their source of saltpeter is an external civilization, then officially their capital becomes the source. So in this case, yes, surround and pillage the capital.
How could the "capital-road-needed-to-distribute" be true? The game clearly says when you first connect a luxury item to a town, that the town will be happier? It says this even if you are a continent away from the capital.
Now, the best strategy really, is to jump on the resource (saltpeter, oil, horses...) and then surround-pillage the capital. Now that is a method that will prevent the civ from building things.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gachnar
|
|
Arlington, VA
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gunter
Hours and hours of deep strategy vanished from lucky civ that can win only with their coal or oil?No way!!!!Lets increase appereance ratio what is necessary to simulate a real world otherwise lets play Casino Roulette Royale.
Cheers |
Wow. Um. Translated:
quote:
Originally posted by Gunter (Translated by gachnar
So we have traded hour and hours of deep strategy for a game of luck? Well, lets increase the appearance ratio to make it more realistic and less like casino roulette.
Cheers |
Actually I find that the "luck" of the civ placement is very realistic. Every industrialized country now depends on oil. Not all of them have it. And outside the Middle East, the few that do, want more than they can produce. We have a much more peaceful world than move Civ3 versions of it, and people can trade for oil easily. But there are still nations that have to struggle to get the resources they want.
The UK is probably the best at this game. Britain's not very big, but they know how to make friends and get what they want. The US fought wars some of its land, bought some more, and just kinda took the rest. We have lots of resources cuz we grabbed lots of land.
Plus, if you increase the appearance ratio, you essentially remove resources from the game. There is a check box for that...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gunter
|
|
Hmmmm..Hi,
I was playing a large map with 5 other civs,I had more or less 50 cities with different tipes of terrain..I mean ....when came the coal only 1 civ had it in only 2 squares of entire map (2 coal under a city,so it was impossible for me to see where).
I waited for the oil and after few turns the same civ had it and it was the only civ.(always under a built city,no way to see which city)
I usually play at level 3 and in this level he (Americans) didn't want to share it,and Lincoln was the only to have rail,units,etc...I can swear,it's very hard to defeat him with my cavalry Vs infantry,tank and bombers,really impossible.
I suggest only to increase a little bit (40% more) ratio,in this way it's not sure everyone had resorces but it is more realistic.
In the real world it's not true that only kuwait has 500 box of oil,I know that some oil is present in Russia,Texas,north pole etc...
Hello!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Libertarian
|
|
I apologize for propogating wrong information. Thanks for setting the record straight!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Badtz Maru
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by senowen
Just one small nitpicky thing there Redstar. A resourse does not have to be within 2 squares of a city to use. It only has to be inside your borders or a colony outside your borders and connected by a road to a city to be in that cities resource or trade network. Any city that city is connected to also gets to use that resource for trade or building units, etc. |
For the longest time I thought that the resource had to be within two squares of your city (in the 'fat X' that your laborers can use) and build unnecessary cities within my own borders near resources I wanted. I thought it was a dumb design decision for colonies to disappear when they were encompassed by your borders because of this, and then I figured out why that was. Now cultural border expansion is even more important to me - I will sometimes build a city three tiles or more from a resource that I already have but want a backup supply of (for trading or in case my other source runs out) because I know the way I like to build cultural buildings I will eventually have it in my borders.
Yes, only cities with access to a resource via road/rail, port, or airport can create units with it. Of course, with a good network that combines lots of roads and ports there is usually several ways your cities can connect to said resource - you may have the road that leads directly to the resource from a city you want to build in pillaged, but if there is a road from that resource to a city that has a port, and there is another port with a road to the city you want to build in (and neither port is blockaded), you can still build it.
Is there a way to tell what resources the AI is trading for with other civilizations? If you knew that they were reliant on a second AI civ for a strategic resource you would not have to cut off all the roads to their capital to prevent them from building, just make sure that there is no connection between the capital of the civ they are trading with and their own capital. If their only connection is via sea, you could blockade the other civ's ports, you might even be able to do this without bringing a third party into the war if you have a RoP with them (not sure if blockade works with RoP, it shouldn't but it just might). You can also pillage roads outside of a civs borders without it being a hostile act, I have done this a lot of times when the AI has built a long road to a colony far from their borders.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chronus
|
|
quote:
(2 coal under a city,so it was impossible for me to see where). |
Shift+Ctrl+M clears the map so you can see the resources more easily . . . even the ones underneath a city.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gunter
|
|
I missed this info,thanks and this evening i'll give it a try...........
Thanks
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TrainWreck20
|
|
Austin, TX
Jul 1999
time: 05:16
|
|
I think the 'cutting the capitol' is supposed to stop imported goods from being distributed. So if Civ A traded to get Iron from Civ B, the computer treats the Civ A capitol as if it was sitting on an Iron resource as long as the trade is in effect and the Civ A capitol can trace a path to Civ B.
SO, if you cut off the capitol, even the other cities connected still to Civ B do not get Iron.
I have not tried this, but sounds resonable. Does it work this way, anybody know for sure? I understand that local resources do not need to go through the capitol.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spodbox
|
|
Berkeley, CA
Dec 2001
time: 21:16
|
|
I have found nuking the capital to be a quick, easy way to cut off trade. I often wondered why some other civs would ignore my nuking a few cities and then declare war against for when I nuked another civ's capital. They must have had a trade going on that I rudely interrupted.
I've got a rough game ahead of me tonight. I'm trying for a cultural victory on emperor. That means an almost-conquer victory. I've got to take out the Indians, who have several of the big-culture wonders (like Shakespeare's Theater and the Great Library). I'll be an intense round of ICBM exchanges. Wee!
Spodbox
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-12-2001 08:53
And by that time the world was so set in Democracies and cuddly MPPs that it would have been madness to try and get some by force.
|