 |
| |
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:27
|
|
I use the slider throughout the game. In the early going, it's just to keep my cities from rioting. Later, it's to get my cities into "We Love the President Day."
The luxury slider allows you to grow your cities bigger, and even if you're just breaking even in commerce gain, you are definitely gaining shields.
Say your capitol is on a river. You're playing on Monarch, and the city hits size 3, with no units in it (EXPLORE, EXPLORE, EXPLORE!). It will riot next turn, unless you turn luxuries up to 10%. By doing that, you allow the city to continue growing at full speed, and probably bring in more shields/turn. Plus, the new tile you will work probably brings in 2 commerce/turn, meaning that even though you're spending 1 commerce/turn on luxuries, you still gain 1/turn over that.
So using the slider allows bigger cities sooner, and at least tends to break even on commerce, while increasing your growth and shield output - meaning better REXing in the early game and better improvement & wonder building after that.
And, if you care about score, happy citizens are worth more.
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
|
|
vulture
|
 |
Leeds, UK
Jun 2001
time: 05:27
|
|
The main points, as I see it.
First point: Assume you can have a size 3 city without touching the luxury slider (due to military police and/or luxuries (and difficulty level)). Is it better to keep it stable at size 3 so there are no happiness problems, or let it grow to size 4, where there is an unhappy citizen that needs to be dealt with? Do you deal with him by making him a specialist, or by making him content (or happy)?
If you stay stable at size 3, you produce, say A gold per turn and B shields per turn in that city. If you grow to size 4, and make the extra citizen a specialist (you can make him/her a taxman or a scientist and still avoid unhappiness) you can get A+1 gpt and B spt. You could build a temple, costing 1 gpt, and have the citizen work an extra tile. If your tile is producing 1 gold and no shields (road on normal grassland, no mining) then you end up with A gpt, B spt (the 1 gain from working the tile is offset by the temple maintenance). If it produces 2 gold (road/river) you get A+1,B. If it produces 1 gold, 1 shield (road, bonus grassland or mined normal grassland) you get A, B+1, and the bext case of a mined, bonus grassland next to a river (2 gold, 2 shields) gives you A+1, B+2. So despite the extra cost of the temple, it is usually better to build it and have a larger city - as long as you are producing at least 1 gold from the extra tile. And the added bonus is that when you get a cathedral built, or trade for more luxuries, you are already a size 4 city, and don't have to wait for your size 3 city to grow, giving you a few turns advantage over the person who lets their city stay at size 3. The luxury slider works pretty much the same as a temple (but without the culture obviously). You pay 1 gpt, you get 1 happy person, offsetting 1 unhappy person. As long as you have roads on the extra tiles you will be using (and if you haven't, build more workers first) then the worst you can do is break even in money, with the bonus of having a larger city ready and waiting when you get more happiness improvements or luxury deals.
To illustrate the last point, consider the silly example chosing between a size 3 city, producing A,B (as before) or a badly developed size 6 city, producing A,B (the extra commerce from the 3 extra tiles being worked are being spent on keeping the workers happy, and there are no extra shields). then you build JS Bach's cathderal, and can be happy at size 6. The size 6 city instantly gets the advantage of the extra citizens, while the size 3 city probably has to wait 20-30 turns to reach the same size, and get the same production.
In real game, you will generally be getting at least 1 gold and 1 shield from each tile, so at the very least you end up with A gpt, but more than B spt, which is obviously an improvement over staying at size 3 with A, B
Second point: using the luxury slider often puts luxuries where they are needed. Real empires have more than one city, and in the ancient era, I tend to have a few large core cities and smaller cities around them pumping out settlers. Large cities produce lots of gold, but need luxuries to keep them out of disorder. Small ones dont. A luxury resource (bought or traded for) gives you happy people in every city the same (ignoring marketplaces), including in the small cities where you don't need them (nut they drive up the cost of the luxury if you trade for it). Broadly speaking, large cities have more unhappy people, but also produce more gold. Setting the luxury slider to 10% will often give no luxuries in small cities (which don't need them anyway) and 2 or 3 in large cities (which need 2 or 3 to keep them happy). Often you can juggle units for military police effects such that each city has exactly the luxury production it needs to keep it happy, so you are keeping your empire happy in the most efficient way (you are spending the minimum gpt possible to keep your empire happy). You can also use specialists where necessary to balance things up.
Basically, I can't see any down-side to letting cities grow free and using the luxury slider. The OCC games are a case in point. Plant the city on a river, let it grow to size 12, and you can beat the AI to the majority of wonders with no trouble because your production in that city is huge, even if you need 20% or 30% luxuries to keep you happy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
vulture
|
|
Leeds, UK
Jun 2001
time: 05:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
Interesting. So, basically, you are bypassing some revenue (gold) in the ancient era in order to have larger cities that are happy? Sounds like a good idea... I guess I just had no idea that 10% could make such a difference so early in the game (I always assumed you'd need 20% or more to make one citizen happy, but then again, I'm real hazy on the math and mechanics of Civ) |
But you're not really bypassing any revenue at all, at least, not if you have been building enough roads. The extra 3 gpt you spend on luxuries are offset by the 3 gpt you get from your three extra citizens working tiles. And often you end up making more money with size 6 cities, luxury slider at 20% than with size 3 cities, luxury slider at 0% (as well as more shields). Which ever way you look at it, you win. If you have time, run two games from the same start for the duration of the ancient era, say. In one, play your normal style of not using the luxury slider. In the other one, make a deliberate effort to let your cities grow and use the luxury slider to keep them happy. See which does better.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
Hmm... it depends on available luxury resoueces. I think most players would rather have these than adjusting the slider. I've seen start positions with none though, which would make it mandatory. (I never play 'em.)
On the other hand, it really can make a big difference if you haven't quite got enough happy faces. It certainly makes a big difference to score, but no, I don't care about score at all - I spend most of the game in 5th or lower position anyway, but I just have to play the tough level.
Maybe I'm just a mean ruler?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Actually it's not a bad idea, since it would make building the happiness improvements a lot more necessary (including Colisseums!). I believe many players here (Arrian comes to mind) rely on warmongering to keep their populace happy.
Maybe it's not so good to make this idea a focus for an entire AU course, but it would defnitely be interesting to incorporate into some future scenario.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arrian
I build temples, cathedrals & colosseums in just about every city, so no, I don't really rely on warmongering to keep my people happy. I do gain luxuries in my conquests, so it certainly helps, no doubt.
|
I'm thinking of the years before Theology (or the years before cities actually end up completing Cathedrals). In a game where you would not have access to a single Luxury in the Ancient age, I believe you (and everyone else here, no doubt) would notice a significant change.
Colosseums, really?
quote:
I think, however, that the AI would be crippled without luxuries.
|
True, without the Luxury slider, a Luxury-less game would be quite difficult.
Dominae
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-04-2003 19:12
...just wondering.
and also to adjust for lower number of surviving civs. For a dramatic affect, I would recomment lower numbers (say 200 & 100). For testing such a mod, 50 & 25.
I do often build them kinda late (late medieval/industrial age).
|