 |
|
wertguy
|
|
Can anyone tell me what the exact formula for growth is?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wertguy
|
|
Or where I could find it in the code?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
quote:
Food value of tiles from the inner rings are added directly to gross food. A fraction of the outer ring tiles is added based on utilisation ratio. |
What happens if a ring is incomplete?
I've looked at all the major threads and posts on food calculations (FAQs, linked threads, etc.) and they all assume that the rings being worked are complete - usually the first of 8 tiles or the secnd of 12 tiles. I understand that for a complete second ring of 12 tiles, the first worker will get 1/12th of the total resources from ALL 12 tiles; 6 workers gets you 6/12 or half of the resources. When you get to 12 workers on the second ring (18 total city size) then your city radius expands to a third ring.
But what about an incomplete second ring, where two of the 12 tiles are being worked by a pre-existing city. I assume that this means the second ring only has 10 available tiles - otherwise you'd end up double counting the overlapped tiles, and the nice white borders would be irrelevant.
Does each additional worker provide 1/12th of the total value of the incomplete ring - so that you would need 12 workers to get 100% out of the 10 tiles? That would make each worker in the ring substantially less productive - perhaps not even worth working at all! If your city expanded again but only had half of a third ring, you might never develop or use that outer terrain because specialists would be so much more productive in the city.
Or does the ring only require a number of workers = to the number of tiles? So that you'd need only 10 workers to work the second ring? That seems wrong, because that means that instead of reaching 100% efficiency at 18 workers, you'd hit it at 16 workers, with the next two workers forced to become specialists - I don't recall seeing cities expanding early just because their inner rings are overlapped. After expansion, those workers I suppose might then start working whatever third ring tiles are available - but do they have to wait until the city reaches the usual expansion limits?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
quote:
Hey wheatin, long time no see! It's always good to see the old veterans return, they're a rare breed these days. |
Thanks - I dusted off CTP2 because I was curious about the newer mods, but this source code project looks really cool!
I especially like the added transparency to the game stats. For me, one of the drawbacks is that CTP is difficult to understand - while Civ is simplistic, at least most of the numbers are there on the screen. I think the work you guys are doing to the interface to make it clearer is great.
In fact, the more "Details" you can provide in the Empire Manager "details" screen, the better! That's something that will help everyone a LOT. (heck - maybe something similar should go onto every Manager: National, Build, City, etc...)
quote:
But that's the player's own fault then for settling his/her cities so close together |
I can understand that for an overlapping second ring - even in the early game, there's enough room to space your cities far enough apart to get a full second ring. But after that it seems that very few cities will get a full third ring, to say nothing of a fourth ring.
Worse, your city radius expands even if you don't want it to, because you can't go back and reassign tiles between cities to maximize outer-ring utilisation.
That's got a few problems:
1. It means a very nice game-play feature (one that is quite distinct from Civ) is basically broken: unless you get an outer ring of at least 50-75% completion, all outer-ring tiles for that city are wasted.
2. It increases micromanagement: you have to adjust food production very closely to ensure your cities are growing at the right rates and thus expand in the correct order (UGH).
Is there a way to change the city expansion/ tile utilisation routine so that however many tiles are available in the outer-ring, only that number of workers are required in order to reach 100% utilization? Perhaps this could be only for third & fourth ring expansions.
I think this would add a LOT to the game, (especially if combined with an ability to re-allocate tiles between city radii*), if only by reducing frustration:
- you can use all your land
- you can use all your coastline and oceans
- you don't have to be so nit-picky over city-spacing
- you can back-fill cities when you discover new gov'ts with higher city limits
- you don't have to micromanage city food, specialists, or growth rates to prevent "unwanted" expansions
Also, it wouldn't hurt the AI in placing improvements because the effect could be incorporated into the "utilisation" value of the tile.
* however, I suspect that human-player re-allocation would be unbalancing, unless it was totally automatic, perhaps at each change in government? That would reduce the need for difficult new AI routines:
"Congratulations! Your empire has emerged from Anarchy! However, the transitional government took the liberty of re-drawing our provincial boundaries according to our most recent census."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
Related Cradle Bug:
Has anyone noticed that that city size radii in Cradle are screwed up?
The radii for citysize 1 and 2 were fixed, but 3-5 are messed up (the "1 + ..." is for the center city tile).
code:
Citysize Workers Total tiles Add'l wkrs Add'l tiles TpW*
city - 1 1 1 -
size 1 1 - 8 1 + 8 8 8 1.0
size 2 9 - 20 1 + 20 12 12 1.0
size 3 21 - 32 1 + 44 12 24 2.0 !!
size 4 33 - 46 1 + 56 14 12 .86 ?!
size 5 47 - 60 1 + 68 14 12 .86 ?!
size 6 61 - 76 -- citysize is capped at 59 --
*TpW = Tiles per Worker in the outer ring
I am totally confused.
Workers 21-32 are doubly productive! I checked this in the editor by setting a uniform terrain type and tracking the food produced for each additional worker. The rate doubles (or reduces, above size 47)! It holds for commerce and production too - sort of a wierd 'sweet spot' for city expansion.
As I said, I am totally confused. I'd think its a bug, except that modmakers made a point of fixing citysize 1 so that 8 tiles require 8 workers and adjusting citysize 2, from 18 to 20 - did they overlook the higher sizes, or did they make mistakes when adjusting the other values upward?
I suppose it could be on purpose, to reward bigger cities, or to offset the problems of outer-ring overlap - but then why the drop off for the last rings?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
I checked the unmodded original citysize.txt - and it has the same values: the third ring of expansion is worth double resources.
In your modded code, when the AI evaluates whether to use specialists, does it look at the actual gain from an additional worker, (i.e. the double-value workers at size 21+) or just an abstract "ideal" worker?
The best tiles to work are those in the third ring of a city. In a mature empire core, an empire with third-ring cities is 50% more productive than one with only second-ring cities.* The AI (and players, of course) should be settling cities in the early game far enough apart to take advantage of that.
*20 workers on 20 tiles at 100% + 12 workers on 24 tiles at 200%. Average worker efficiency is over 150%, compared to second ring cities at 100%.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
It doesnt matter though, those workers of the 24 tiles on the 3rd ring still have to work each tile at a percentage as the city grows.
Using Cradle, if the city size is say 26, the 1st & 2nd rings worked fully, 8/8 + 12/12 + 1/1 city tile always collecting 100%.
Then the 3rd ring, pop 26, workers 21-26 working on 24 tiles, 6/12, or 1/2 resources collected on each of the 24 tiles.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
quote:
It doesnt matter though, those workers of the 24 tiles on the 3rd ring still have to work each tile at a percentage as the city grows.
...
Then the 3rd ring, pop 26, workers 21-26 working on 24 tiles, 6/12, or 1/2 resources collected on each of the 24 tiles. |
You're forgetting total output per worker, which is twice as high in the third ring. In ring 2, 12 workers work 12 tiles; each worker brings 1/12th of the resources from those 12 tiles. Average resources per worker = one tile. In ring 3, 12 workers work 24 tiles; average resources per worker = two tiles.
Let's do some hard numbers. The good land terrains (plns, grs, for, mtn, hill) all have a base of 25 resources.
code:
Ring Tiles Res Wkrs Res per Wkr
1 8 200 8 25
2 12 300 12 25
3 24 600 12 50
4 12 300 14 21.4
It matters a LOT. Among other things, it means NEVER use specialists for third-ring cities (unless you are missing more than half of the third ring).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
Im not sure I get you, what do you mean by "total output per worker"? I thought every single tile on each ring was worked by a percetage of current workers available to total workers available on a ring, regardless of number of tiles.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
You're right - but the number of tiles on the ring determines total output.
In ring 1, there are 8 tiles, worked by 8 workers: one tile per worker. In ring 2, there are 12 tiles, worked by 12 workers: one tile per worker. In ring three, there are 24 tiles, worked by 12 workers: it is as if each worker were working two tiles as opposed to one. Each worker in ring 3 is twice as productive as the workers in rings 1 and 2.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by J Bytheway
Yes, but the important part there is the fact that it's "to total workers available". If you decrease the "total workers available" for the ring, then you increase the output of each worker. |
Im aware of that, it was the words "tiles per worker" that confused me to his point.
quote:
You're right - but the number of tiles on the ring determines total output.
In ring 1, there are 8 tiles, worked by 8 workers: one tile per worker. In ring 2, there are 12 tiles, worked by 12 workers: one tile per worker. In ring three, there are 24 tiles, worked by 12 workers: it is as if each worker were working two tiles as opposed to one. Each worker in ring 3 is twice as productive as the workers in rings 1 and 2. |
Well now I see your point.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
quote:
If anyone is interested, I can post a chart for alternate ring spacings... |
Of course.
What you suggested earlier, because cities begin to overlap mostly on the 3rd ring, is weak but perhaps the reason, so whether they overlap on the 4th and after is not an issue, so they only addressed the 3rd ring. Plus all other civ games have 2 rings, it wouldnt surprise me if their ideas for expanding rings werent completed or not playtested enough.
Ill always play for only 2 rings on the unmodded gigantic map, 3 or more rings and you waste early space and time moving, only small maps or a small island ill play for 1 ring space.
Bigger default maps and earlier ring expansions would help balance this, so larger city spacing is a must, but then you likely cant have equal workers to tiles in all rings, unless you significantly increase growth rates instead, but I think growth is already too fast.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
Here's a city radius chart. The numbers are the SquareRadius values in the CitySizeX.txt files. It's just x^2 + y^2 = r^2 (circle! - thanks Euclid!) The colors correspond to the Cradle city-size rings. The outer yellow ring is at R=30, which could be a new fifth ring if the existing fourth and fifth rings were combined.
 Attachment: cradlecitysize.jpg
This has been downloaded 44 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
Here's that larger layout. The chart with this one includes intervals of 10 pop for each level - longer initial expansion, but very productive outer rings at the end. You'd want a very high limit in the final ring, like 100+ to get all your specialists.
Vision is the square of the VisionRadius value in the .txt file, to make it easier to see where the vision boundaries would be. In this example, the vision radius stays one level wider than the city radius.
Attachment: altcitysize1.jpg
This has been downloaded 43 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
Here's one more, more like the original and Cradle sizes, but a little more regular in progression. This one might also benefit from more rapid expansion - perhaps only 8 workers per ring. That would make a size 40 city VERY large, with VERY rapid growth.
It would also let coastal cities grab more ocean tiles on water maps - having efficiencies up around 200-300% means that even if half or two-thirds of an outer-ring is blocked by other cities (friendly or hostile), that outer ring is still worth developing because it'll probably be worth more than specialists.
Attachment: altcitysize2.jpg
This has been downloaded 42 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wheathin
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
Even with redesigning the cycles the problem of incomplete rings stays. |
Agreed. My goal was two-fold:
1. To "fix" the city radii so that the resources per ring made sense (i.e. were more uniform), instead of progressing to a hugely powerful third ring and then woefully inadequate fourth and fifth rings.
2. To make the outer rings more productive, thus offsetting some of the impact of incomplete rings. A complete outer ring is always better than an incomplete outer ring. But a 50% incomplete outer ring does not have to be worse than specialists.
quote:
it would be a good idea to make it so that you need for a tile one worker or an certain amount of workers you can adjust in the CitySize.txts. So that you just need 6 workers for 6 tiles and not 8 to get the full utilization if your ring has only 6 tiles.
-Martin |
If there's a way to adjust the city sizes (or workers-per-ring) so that each city (and each ring thereof?) has a different value equal to the number of tiles in the ring, that'd be great.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2005 08:34
Espeacilly all those estimation stuff. And of course for the player it seems more logical.
|
