 |
Should we have accelerated production?
This poll is closed. |
| No dam it, it sucks! |
   |
15 |
78.95% |
| Yes, of course we should |
   |
4 |
21.05% |
| Total: |
19 voters |
100% |
|
| |
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:26
|
|
no
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
 |
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:26
|
|
Well, it lessens the adavntages of Ind, Agri, and those of any well managed civ.
Take the case of food, with a single bonus food, a not so well managed city grows in 7 turns normally. A well managed city might grow in 4 (with that granery) or 3 with judicious irrigation. Also, the well managed city will alternate tiles to get more shields on turns that the odd food(s) is(are) not needed.
With accelerated production, the gap in growth drops to 4 turns no granery and 2 turns with (even with that irrigated tile). A decrease in the gap of growth of 1 or 2 turns. That is a disadvantage for the thoughtful, builder style and reinforces the brute force war monger style.
Techs, gold, shield production... they all work out similarly. The acceleration aids the brutes to the disadvantage of the more sophisticated planners.
It is good for on line MP, where no one can micro manage the way that PBEM allows and you want a game to progress quickly. It is not so good for PBEM where builder skills can excel.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-01-2004 21:34
|