Arabia Unique Ability!! (Very Important Change)

[GeneralY7]

According to previous information, it was said that Arabia's unique ability was:

+1 gold from each trade route, Oil resources provide double quantity

However according to the released game manual on the Civ5 site it now is:

+2 gold from each trade route

Notice NO MORE DOUBLE OIL!!!!!

How do you all feel about this!

[Compy386]

I feel like the manual could have been written at any time. We won't know what made it into the game until 22hrs and 40 minutes from now.

Also, i think these civ traits will be the first thing they will look at balance wise

[GeneralY7]

I feel like the manual could have been written at any time. We won't know what made it into the game until 22hrs and 40 minutes from now.

Also, i think these civ traits will be the first thing they will look at balance wise

I get what your saying, its just their are a group of people out there who were planning their strategy around the Arabian double oil ability, but now there is a chance it doesn't exist anymore. I just think they should now that. After all, the manual is an official source so it has a better chance of been right!

[Procylon]

There have been numerous other cases where the game manual has not matched up with gameplay videos and previews that took place mere days ago. This "Arabia with no double oil" is one of them.

[GeneralY7]

There have been numerous other cases where the game manual has not matched up with gameplay videos and previews that took place mere days ago. This "Arabia with no double oil" is one of them.

Actually I think Arabia with no double oil helps bring balance to the game since the Bazaar already gives them double luxury resources, so I think it keeps them from been overpowered

[Procylon]

Actually I think Arabia with no double oil helps bring balance to the game since the Bazaar already gives them double luxury resources, so I think it keeps them from been overpowered

Double luxuries isn't quite as good as it sounds. Most resources, especially luxuries, come in groups anyway. One 1 luxury does you any good, the rest you have to trade away.

[McDaniels92]

I think its better with +2 and dropping the oil. If you think about it the oil double would maybe provide you with 2-4 extra units in the later ages, but you have to be at war to benefit from that. What if you're going to a different kind of victory? In that case the oil could be nearly useless.

The trade route bonus is going to effect you throughout the whole game and gold is always useful no matter what victory you have in mind.

[Stuie]

Double oil was fine as long as it could be trader for military units.

[GeneralY7]

Double luxuries isn't quite as good as it sounds. Most resources, especially luxuries, come in groups anyway. One 1 luxury does you any good, the rest you have to trade away.

Yes, but the point is to trade away the extra resources for gold. Do you seriously think a player (specially in multiplayer game) is going to trade his oil away so easily, probably not, they're gonna spam a large army of tanks at blitz all the nearby civilizations!

[King Jason]

I think its better with +2 and dropping the oil. If you think about it the oil double would maybe provide you with 2-4 extra units in the later ages, but you have to be at war to benefit from that. What if you're going to a different kind of victory? In that case the oil could be nearly useless.

The trade route bonus is going to effect you throughout the whole game and gold is always useful no matter what victory you have in mind.

In the modern era only 2 of the 5 ships require aluminum which would allow Arabia to field the largest navy in the world. Furthermore, a 100% percent increase need not equate to a 100% larger military at all times... Excess oil could've been traded off for economic gains via gold and luxury resources.

Seeing this aspect of the UA go is dissapointing, as the only other civ that can employ this unique trade strategy is Russia.


Yes, but the point is to trade away the extra resources for gold. Do you seriously think a player (specially in multiplayer game) is going to trade his oil away so easily, probably not, they're gonna spam a large army of tanks at blitz all the nearby civilizations!

Under any equal circumstance, Arabia could have 100% more resources than an opponent. If you and I both have 10 base oil... I actually have 20, which means you can build 10 units with it and I can build 20... Rather than fielding an army 100% larger, I could instead go with 50% larger... My army of 15 troops is still superior to yours of 10... Now I find a third party that is of little threat for the time being to trade off the excess for what would likely be great amounts of gold and luxury resources. 1 strategic resource could probably equate to 5-15 happiness via luxury trade. Since luxuries don't provide a stacking benefit, players would dump them for strategics, easily.

Russia and Arabia could still field the largest armies of a resource type while having excess to trade. If this trade went to gold instead of resources; they could use the added GPT to increase their army size even further if the limiting factor to size was maintanence at the time.

[Procylon]

Yes, but the point is to trade away the extra resources for gold. Do you seriously think a player (specially in multiplayer game) is going to trade his oil away so easily, probably not, they're gonna spam a large army of tanks at blitz all the nearby civilizations!

I was talking about the luxuries. Of course he isn't trading his oil away, unless to an ally or someone on another continent.

I was just saying that extra luxury resources is only worth so much gold to the other civs. It is situational. And likely that you would have had more than 1 of those resources anyway.

The double oil is solid. The trade route gold is decent, but not huge. (You are looking at 40 extra gold for a 20 city empire, which turns out to be 8-16k gold over the life of your empire? Compared to the tens of thousands of gold I think an empire will generate in it's lifetime, I am not sure it is enough by itself.



Who knows, we find out in 21 hours. :)

[MadDjinn]

Yes, but the point is to trade away the extra resources for gold. Do you seriously think a player (specially in multiplayer game) is going to trade his oil away so easily, probably not, they're gonna spam a large army of tanks at blitz all the nearby civilizations!

Oil is not a luxury item. hence your confusion of his statement.

The bazzar doubles a group of resources that you only need 1 of to get the benefit. After that, either you can trade the extras or you can't.

Oil is a strategic resource. No one should even think of trading it away.

[GeneralY7]

In the modern era only 2 of the 5 ships require aluminum which would allow Arabia to field the largest navy in the world. Furthermore, a 100% percent increase need not equate to a 100% larger military at all times... Excess oil could've been traded off for economic gains via gold and luxury resources.

Seeing this aspect of the UA go is dissapointing, as the only other civ that can employ this unique trade strategy is Russia.

Once again, the Arabians still get double Luxury resources to trade for gold. But come on, really, do you think a human player would so easily trade away their oil in multiplayer, don' t you think they would build plenty of ships and tanks and try to steamroll everyone of the human players!

[GeneralY7]

Oil is not a luxury item. hence your confusion of his statement.

The bazzar doubles a group of resources that you only need 1 of to get the benefit. After that, either you can trade the extras or you can't.

Oil is a strategic resource. No one should even think of trading it away.

That is my point man, no one in this game is going to trade their oil, or for that matter any of the other strategic resources, because your empire really needs them to come out on top!

[King Jason]

Once again, the Arabians still get double Luxury resources to trade for gold. But come on, really, do you think a human player would so easily trade away their oil in multiplayer, don' t you think they would build plenty of ships and tanks and try to steamroll everyone of the human players!

You may have missed my edit:

Under any equal circumstance, Arabia could have 100% more resources than an opponent. If you and I both have 10 base oil... I actually have 20, which means you can build 10 units with it and I can build 20... Rather than fielding an army 100% larger, I could instead go with 50% larger... My army of 15 troops is still superior to yours of 10... Now I find a third party that is of little threat for the time being to trade off the excess for what would likely be great amounts of gold and luxury resources. 1 strategic resource could probably equate to 5-15 happiness via luxury trade. Since luxuries don't provide a stacking benefit, players would dump them for strategics, easily.

Russia and Arabia could still field the largest armies of a resource type while having excess to trade. If this trade went to gold instead of resources; they could use the added GPT to increase their army size even further if the limiting factor to size was maintanence at the time.

Because if my trade partner was say... someone with your opinion on strat resources... I could probably get you to give me a large sum per single resource, giving me both an advantage over my current enemy, and you.

[GeneralY7]

You may have missed my edit:

Under any equal circumstance, Arabia could have 100% more resources than an opponent. If you and I both have 10 base oil... I actually have 20, which means you can build 10 units with it and I can build 20... Rather than fielding an army 100% larger, I could instead go with 50% larger... My army of 15 troops is still superior to yours of 10... Now I find a third party that is of little threat for the time being to trade off the excess for what would likely be great amounts of gold and luxury resources. 1 strategic resource could probably equate to 5-15 happiness via luxury trade. Since luxuries don't provide a stacking benefit, players would dump them for strategics, easily.

Russia and Arabia could still field the largest armies of a resource type while having excess to trade. If this trade went to gold instead of resources; they could use the added GPT to increase their army size even further if the limiting factor to size was maintanence at the time.

Because if my trade partner was say... someone with your opinion on strat resources... I could probably get you to give me a large sum per single resource, giving me both an advantage over my current enemy, and you.

True, by all means I'm for trading resources, even strategic ones. I'm just saying, that playing online, against a warmonger player, they will be making a beeline for domination victory, they will want to keep all the resources they can get to build up a large army to conquer everyone and defend the captured capitals until they win. Russia having lots of iron and horses might also be somewhat overpowered, but the units that Arabians could get with oil are far more dangerous. The Russians having extra Uranium could also prove troublesome, but compared to oil, uranium is usually a rare resource in civ games.

[Bhavv]

They blatantly did this so that Harun wouldnt end up more powerful than Elizabeth in the seas.

Now I long longer have to worry about crushing Arabia before they become a threat to my vast and glorious English Navy!

[danangleland]

I'm with Procylon on this one. I'll bet you anything this is yet another case of the manual containing outdated info. There are a few examples of the manual even contradicting itself, so I think it is safe to say it is in serious need of revision.

[IceCube]

because arabs start in desert they dont need that much oil and because they start in desert they will be weak but rich :)
if u cant produce buy it gl with arabia.
if you notice england was allways economy and reasrch this time around they focus on battlefield good navy good defense (longbows +1 range)
when i want to compare good or bad civs i pick england :)
england was allways in favour of civ team .
all european civs are militaristic good luck with building wonders and culture .
conquest all they way up .

[danangleland]

because arabs start in desert they dont need that much oil and because they start in desert they will be weak but rich :)


This is only true on the Earth maps though Cube, on random maps the Arabs are no more likely than anyone else to start on desert. And desert doesn't guarantee that you will have any oil, it just makes it likely.

[IceCube]

You may have missed my edit:

Under any equal circumstance, Arabia could have 100% more resources than an opponent. If you and I both have 10 base oil... I actually have 20, which means you can build 10 units with it and I can build 20... Rather than fielding an army 100% larger, I could instead go with 50% larger... My army of 15 troops is still superior to yours of 10... Now I find a third party that is of little threat for the time being to trade off the excess for what would likely be great amounts of gold and luxury resources. 1 strategic resource could probably equate to 5-15 happiness via luxury trade. Since luxuries don't provide a stacking benefit, players would dump them for strategics, easily.

Russia and Arabia could still field the largest armies of a resource type while having excess to trade. If this trade went to gold instead of resources; they could use the added GPT to increase their army size even further if the limiting factor to size was maintanence at the time.

Because if my trade partner was say... someone with your opinion on strat resources... I could probably get you to give me a large sum per single resource, giving me both an advantage over my current enemy, and you.

its allways about quality and not quantity .remamber sparta 300?
civ 4 we almost never see industrial in mp why so sure you gonna survive to see industrial ?

[Procylon]

its allways about quality and not quantity .remamber sparta 300?
civ 4 we almost never see industrial in mp why so sure you gonna survive to see industrial ?

Because turtling was never really an option in Civ 4. It now is.

[IceCube]

i didnt see any earth maps on the videos and 1 of the features is that civs will start by regions need to check video again so if you are azteck and start in desert ouch ?
if you are natives and start in desert ouch ?
i believe each civ will start in its own enviroment .

[Procylon]

i didnt see any earth maps on the videos and 1 of the features is that civs will start by regions need to check video again so if you are azteck and start in desert ouch ?
if you are natives and start in desert ouch ?
i believe each civ will start in its own enviroment .

Earth Maps are randomized. There is no mechanic to start civilizations in their preferred territory.

[IceCube]

Because turtling was never really an option in Civ 4. It now is.
gotta love english longbows :) +1 range so thats like 3 tile range no way you can hit english front line without taking any damage no wonder there is a bushido option.
ppl ask why this why that wait once you see battlefiled you will know why :P

[King Jason]

its allways about quality and not quantity .remamber sparta 300?
civ 4 we almost never see industrial in mp why so sure you gonna survive to see industrial ?

Which is precisely why Russia is a beast. Not only could it field a larger military innately... Under the "quality vs quantity" Mantra, it won't necessarily have to. Making my 50% larger logic even more appealing.

Russia gets double horses and iron... so if the average early game army is 5-10... Russia can field a military of 7-15 instead, and then sell off the excess horses and iron to different factions.

Here's a different way to look at it: We'll stick with an equal footing of a single resource for the ease of illustration;

8 opponents in a MP map. You're Russia and you've got one neighbor you're sure to attack. All players have 10 Iron.

What's the Largest amount of Iron units all players can field? 10. you can field? 20. Now obviously such a split immediately translates into the possibility of conducting two wars at once... but I'm not going to go that route for this discussion.

Again, you as russia have one "real" opponent for the time being... the player closest to you (I guess). Rather than tossing 20 units at him... You could instead Toss 15 units at him, and contact each of the other civs and make (At the least) a 1:1 trade of a strategic resource for a luxury one. In the end resulting in you havine having 15 units, your enemy 10, and the rest of the world 11 at most.

So you maintained a larger army in relation to your enemy and gained 5 luxury resources, which means 25 happiness. Which means you can annex more cities that you take over and go directly to building courthouses so when your trade deals expire and/or are cancelled, your new territory is free of it's war-related unhappy.

Conversely, You could trade off all of those luxuries for GPT instead which can be used to insta-buy units as you lose them on the field, or... at the wars conclusion and the start of a new era, allowing you to upgrade and/or insta-buy some solid infrastructure for your new cities (Likely happiness buildings).

If you spread your resource advantage around, you're still able to remain as one of the larger militaries in the world. Conversely, you could instead just shoot for parity with other civs... which gives you even more resources to trade.

Lastly, the only way Russia will not have at least an equal size military, and thus the option to have a larger one, or sell off a resource for a gold/luxury advantage... is if it's resource count is less than half of all civs.

If you have 10 iron and I have 5... we can field the exact same size army. If You have 10 and I have 6... I could have one more unit than you... or trade that resource to someone else for gold or luxuries and still remain on par with you.

[IceCube]

in the video on gamespot.com they talked about tiles.
north american tile set european asian and african .

[Procylon]

in the video on gamespot.com they talked about tiles.
north american tile set european asian and african .

Correct, different regions and continents will have unique shaded tile sets.

But the earth maps are still randomized. You will have to go into the world builder and place the civs where you want them to start if you want a historical start earth map.

Yeah, we don't understand why they didn't just provide us with randomized earth maps AND historical start earth maps...