Cottage/farms combo vs pure cottages

[Yosho]

If healthy/happy cap is high, then a city with 2 farms and all the rest cottages (and therefore a +4 food surplus instead of a +2) will grow much faster then a city with all cottages, and will generally get to be size 6 or 7 when the smaller city is still size 4 or 5; from that point on, the city with the farms will actually be working more cottages then the city with just cottages.

[Generaldoktor]

I started out growing farms on all river grasslands and cottages on everything else, except hills, where I'd start with mines and shift to windmills as they became available; and as food needs grew. I also left heavy forests. My cities got very large this way and GPP was good, though not controlled. The guy who said he couldn't grow a city to 20 here, really surprises me.

About three months after the game came out, I started reading other strategies, mostly on the strategy thread, but also elsewhere. (This game is radically different IMO than Civ3, I've carried over very little strategy from there.) We had a good discussion on GPP on a thread somebody else started (Coeurdelion? Sorry its been some months.) I also heard about "pop and chop" and a number of people asserted river grass was better for cottages than farms because the guaranteed 2 food "paid their way" and the river gave an extra commerce point I also began using workshops more on lowland cities' grassland, where that overlapped the enemy or where I otherwise felt I absolutely had to have production. I started chopping aplenty; Wonders, workers and settlers; among other stuff, but mostly buildings.

Lately, I'm cottaging the river grass and flood plains, unless its a specialized GPP city. I'm specializing a lot more. Plains river and grass with no river (when I can chain) get the farms. I'm chopping aplenty and any grass that shows up after a chop follows the above rules. I try to leave the 3 forests to get the health point, but by mid-game, at least, the rest can go. I'm still mining hills till windmills, but convert most of them after to get the extra pop. I don't burn slaves on "pop-burns" a lot, but will probably start doing it more. People who are whining about extra pop really bother me. It is obvious a lot haven't read that big thread we did on GPP and still don't "get" GPP, or "pop and chop." Sad.

Overall, my modifications, based on what I've learned in the forums, has worked out. My cities are a little smaller, but still getting to 20-25 by mid-game. I don't play above Noble, so I guess that's part of it, as I hear there's health penalities at higher, besides the tech gifts to the blasted AI that I, as "builder type" don't like. Still, the guys that taught me this stuff were playing at higher levels so it ought to work, to some extent, anytime and anywhere.

[samspock]

If the city has no food specials but does have flood plains, I farm the flood plains. If they do have specials then I try and cottage as many as possible. The trick is to get enough food to afford to work the cotteges.

[Yosho]

Originally posted by samspock
If the city has no food specials but does have flood plains, I farm the flood plains. If they do have specials then I try and cottage as many as possible. The trick is to get enough food to afford to work the cotteges.

I tend to think that the max population size ("enough food to work everything") is not nearly as important for most of the game as the rate of populationg growth, so long as you have enough happy to support it. It dosn't matter what your max population size is; if you've only got a +1 per turn food surplus, you won't get there until very late in the game. It's much better to have extra people working the land earlier.

[cynyck]

I try to leave the 3 forests to get the health point, but by mid-game, at least, the rest can go.

Generaldoktor -

I thought it was changed from 1/3 health point per forest square to 1/2 per forest square, meaning two forests give you the health point. It also seems that there is no rounding up, so if I am correct, you may be leaving one forest for no reason.

If I am mistaken, perhaps someone can enlighten me.

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Yosho


I tend to think that the max population size ("enough food to work everything") is not nearly as important for most of the game as the rate of populationg growth, so long as you have enough happy to support it. It dosn't matter what your max population size is; if you've only got a +1 per turn food surplus, you won't get there until very late in the game. It's much better to have extra people working the land earlier.

I guess the level your playing at makes a difference here. At Monarch and above, I find that the main factors preventing city growth are health and happiness rather than food surplus. With a granary, you can usually grow to the next size reasonably quickly, although it may be worth redistributing your population while you do.

RJM at Sleeper's

[Aeson]

For each turn spent working each Farm, you lose the Commerce from the Cottage you otherwise could be working that turn. You also lose 1 Commerce for each new level the Cottage reaches. (1 more if FIN.) If you can switch to Universal Suffrage before the Cottage is a Town, each turn costs 1 Production. If you can switch to Free Speech before the Cottage is a Town, each turn costs 2 Production. FS is unlikely. US is possible with the Pyramids, unlikely without it. (Let's ignore FIN and the Pyramids for now.) The (game long) opportunity cost of working a single Farm for a single turn is 4 Commerce. (5 for FIN.)

For each turn longer it takes to grow, you lose the Commerce from the Cottage the new pop could have been working. It also is affected the same way by it's maturation, FIN, and the Civics.

Because of this, we only have to look at the number of turns Cottages are worked to determine which approach generates the most Commerce. (Ignoring indirect costs/benefits of population, like Civic Upkeep and unit Support.) Basically, if working a Farm for a turn by itself cuts off a turn or more of Growth (including future Growth), it is worth it.

The equation for food requirements for each growth is:

foodToGrow[pop] = ((BASE_CITY_GROWTH_THRESHOLD + pop) * CITY_GROWTH_MULTIPLIER)

pop is the low end. That is, if you are growing from size 2 to 3, use 2. I don't have the game, and don't remember the value for the defines. (They are in the XML. Perhaps difficulty and game speed?) If I had to guess, I would assume BASE_CITY_GROWTH_THRESHOLD is 20, and CITY_GROWTH_MULTIPLIER is 1 for Normal. If that's not the case, then all my calcs are off, but the same general principle will apply.

So, given maxFarm use vs noFarm use, all Grasslands, tiles assumed improved as needed, normal speed, Noble(?):

		noFarm

pop	req	food	turns	R	turn
1	22	2	11	0	11
2	24	2	12	0	23
3	26	2	13	0	36
4	28	2	14	0	50
5	30	2	15	0	65
6	32	2	16	0	81
7	34	2	17	0	98
8	36	2	18	0	116
9	38	2	19	0	135
10	40	2	20	0	155
11	42	2	21	0	176
12	44	2	22	0	198
13	46	2	23	0	221
14	48	2	24	0	245
15	50	2	25	0	270

		maxFarm

pop	req	food	turns	food R	turn
1	22	3	8	2	8
2	24	4	6	2	14
3	26	5	5	1	19
4	28	6	5	3	24	
5	30	7	4	1	28
6	32	8	4	1	32
7	34	9	4	3	36
8	36	10	4	7	40
9	38	11	3	2	43
10	40	12	4	10	47
11	42	13	3	7	50
12	44	14	3	5	53
13	46	15	3	4	56
14	48	16	3	4	59
15	50	17	3	5	62

I could do it programmically, but can't figure out how to put it into a mathmatical formula. I can just work it out by hand though:

max 2: 8 turns of 0:1, 3 turns of 2:1. Total 3:8, favors noFarm.

max 3: 11 turns of 0:1, 3 turns of 0:2, 9 turns of 3:2. Total, 9:17, favors noFarm

max 4: 11 turns of 0:1, 8 turns of 0:2, 4 turns of 4:2, 13 turns of 4:3. Total, 21:27, favors noFarm

max 5: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 1 turn of 0:3, 12 turns of 5:3, 14 turns of 5:4. Total 38:38, even.

max 6: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 5 turns of 0:3, 8 turns of 6:3, 14 turns of 6:4, 15 turns of 6:5. Total 67:50

max 7: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 9 turns of 0:3, 4 turns of 7:3, 14 turns of 7:4, 15 turns of 7:5, 16 turns of 7:6. Total 104:62

max 15: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 13 turns of 0:3, 14 turns of 0:4, 12 turns of 0:5, 3 turns of 15:5, 16 turns of 15:6, 17 turns of 15:7, 18 turns of 15:8, 19 turns of 15:9, 20 turns of 15:10, 21 turns of 15:11, 22 turns of 15:12, 23 turns of 15:13, 24 turns of 15:14. Total 870:190

As you can see, the break even point for maxFarm is growing straight to size 5. (Actually a bit in favor of maxFarm, as you can use 3 Cottage turns on the way due to the Food remainder (R).) You'd likely want the Commerce up-front still though, especially if going for an early Religion, or other very early time-critical tech paths. If you can go straight to size 6 or higher, the Farms are going to be favored. The higher the pop limit you can grow to, the bigger the discrepancy. I included size 15 for laughs... (Requires at least 9 Workers to change 9 Farms to Cottages on the turn you hit size 15 though.)

Granaries may change things up somewhat. I think in general cases it may favor noFarm type approaches, but in this specific case (almost no Production!) it may favor maxFarm, due to Slavery options, at least in the midrange population points. Not going to try to wrap my mind around that right now...

[Generaldoktor]

Boy, you guys never fail to dazzle me with the math, which I flunked in school. (Guess that's why I'm not playing Deity-level Pangea MP.)

Do I get out of this that statistical efficiency indicators point to minimizing farms, except for an early pop rush, in areas where its available due to a lot of grass?

Cynyck: I hadn't heard that about forests now = 1/2 health, but it would be great in a lot of cases to chop one more. However, I don't think its the end of the world if I don't; they can be a valuable and varied source of both food and production, unless its needed in a cottage-specialized city for another of those.

[Yosho]

Originally posted by rjmatsleepers


I guess the level your playing at makes a difference here. At Monarch and above, I find that the main factors preventing city growth are health and happiness rather than food surplus. With a granary, you can usually grow to the next size reasonably quickly, although it may be worth redistributing your population while you do.

RJM at Sleeper's

(shrug) I always play at monarch or above. Happiness can be a factor, but once you get out of the early game, there are usually ways to deal with it. If you have to, heredary rule and multiple units sitting in the city works just fine; often that's not even needed. I rarely even have to build building like colesseums and such.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Generaldoktor
Do I get out of this that statistical efficiency indicators point to minimizing farms, except for an early pop rush, in areas where its available due to a lot of grass?

Looking at it from another starting point:

size 4-7: 14 turns of 0:4, 15 turns of 7:5, 16 turns of 7:6. Total 46:54, slightly favors noFarm.

size 4-8: 14 turns of 0:4, 4 turns of 0:5, 11 turns of 8:5, 16 turns of 8:6, 17 turns of 8:7. Total 82:76, slightly favors maxFarm.

size 4-9: 14 turns of 0:4, 8 turns of 0:5, 7 turns of 9:5, 16 turns of 9:6, 17 turns of 9:7, 18 turns of 9:8. Total, 128:96, favors maxFarm.

Those ratios are pretty close to their size 1-X counterparts.

So, going out on a limb here... (all else equal) I'll say that if you can grow 5 more pop, Farms are the way to go. Less, and Cottages will generally be better.

[cynyck]

Originally posted by Generaldoktor
Cynyck: I hadn't heard that about forests now = 1/2 health, but it would be great in a lot of cases to chop one more. However, I don't think its the end of the world if I don't; they can be a valuable and varied source of both food and production, unless its needed in a cottage-specialized city for another of those.

Oh, I was not trying to comment on the positives or negatives of chopping, I was merely responding to your statement about leaving three forests for the health point. IF I am correct, then you at least can make the decision knowing you only need two for each health point.

In fact, I try to leave as many forests in the fat cross as I can unless the city is next to fresh water, which gives me 2+ health, I believe. Of course, all within reason - if all of the tiles within the fat cross are forested, then I will chop out at least half of them. It all depends on the circumstances, nothing is absolute in this game.

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Aeson

...

As you can see, the break even point for maxFarm is growing straight to size 5. (Actually a bit in favor of maxFarm, as you can use 3 Cottage turns on the way due to the Food remainder (R).) You'd likely want the Commerce up-front still though, especially if going for an early Religion, or other very early time-critical tech paths. If you can go straight to size 6 or higher, the Farms are going to be favored. The higher the pop limit you can grow to, the bigger the discrepancy. I included size 15 for laughs... (Requires at least 9 Workers to change 9 Farms to Cottages on the turn you hit size 15 though.)

Granaries may change things up somewhat. I think in general cases it may favor noFarm type approaches, but in this specific case (almost no Production!) it may favor maxFarm, due to Slavery options, at least in the midrange population points. Not going to try to wrap my mind around that right now...

This looks like some very useful analysis, but it will take me a little while to absorb it. Am I right that you based it on the assumption that there are enough existing cottages and farms so that you are looking at whether to work the cottage or the farm?

RJM at Sleeper's

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Aeson
For each turn spent working each Farm, you lose the Commerce from the Cottage you otherwise could be working that turn. You also lose 1 Commerce for each new level the Cottage reaches. (1 more if FIN.) If you can switch to Universal Suffrage before the Cottage is a Town, each turn costs 1 Production. If you can switch to Free Speech before the Cottage is a Town, each turn costs 2 Production. FS is unlikely. US is possible with the Pyramids, unlikely without it. (Let's ignore FIN and the Pyramids for now.) The (game long) opportunity cost of working a single Farm for a single turn is 4 Commerce. (5 for FIN.)

For each turn longer it takes to grow, you lose the Commerce from the Cottage the new pop could have been working. It also is affected the same way by it's maturation, FIN, and the Civics.

Because of this, we only have to look at the number of turns Cottages are worked to determine which approach generates the most Commerce. (Ignoring indirect costs/benefits of population, like Civic Upkeep and unit Support.) Basically, if working a Farm for a turn by itself cuts off a turn or more of Growth (including future Growth), it is worth it.

The equation for food requirements for each growth is:

foodToGrow[pop] = ((BASE_CITY_GROWTH_THRESHOLD + pop) * CITY_GROWTH_MULTIPLIER)

pop is the low end. That is, if you are growing from size 2 to 3, use 2. I don't have the game, and don't remember the value for the defines. (They are in the XML. Perhaps difficulty and game speed?) If I had to guess, I would assume BASE_CITY_GROWTH_THRESHOLD is 20, and CITY_GROWTH_MULTIPLIER is 1 for Normal. If that's not the case, then all my calcs are off, but the same general principle will apply.

So, given maxFarm use vs noFarm use, all Grasslands, tiles assumed improved as needed, normal speed, Noble(?):

		noFarm

pop	req	food	turns	R	turn
1	22	2	11	0	11
2	24	2	12	0	23
3	26	2	13	0	36
4	28	2	14	0	50
5	30	2	15	0	65
6	32	2	16	0	81
7	34	2	17	0	98
8	36	2	18	0	116
9	38	2	19	0	135
10	40	2	20	0	155
11	42	2	21	0	176
12	44	2	22	0	198
13	46	2	23	0	221
14	48	2	24	0	245
15	50	2	25	0	270

		maxFarm

pop	req	food	turns	food R	turn
1	22	3	8	2	8
2	24	4	6	2	14
3	26	5	5	1	19
4	28	6	5	3	24	
5	30	7	4	1	28
6	32	8	4	1	32
7	34	9	4	3	36
8	36	10	4	7	40
9	38	11	3	2	43
10	40	12	4	10	47
11	42	13	3	7	50
12	44	14	3	5	53
13	46	15	3	4	56
14	48	16	3	4	59
15	50	17	3	5	62

I could do it programmically, but can't figure out how to put it into a mathmatical formula. I can just work it out by hand though:

max 2: 8 turns of 0:1, 3 turns of 2:1. Total 3:8, favors noFarm.

max 3: 11 turns of 0:1, 3 turns of 0:2, 9 turns of 3:2. Total, 9:17, favors noFarm

max 4: 11 turns of 0:1, 8 turns of 0:2, 4 turns of 4:2, 13 turns of 4:3. Total, 21:27, favors noFarm

max 5: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 1 turn of 0:3, 12 turns of 5:3, 14 turns of 5:4. Total 38:38, even.

max 6: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 5 turns of 0:3, 8 turns of 6:3, 14 turns of 6:4, 15 turns of 6:5. Total 67:50

max 7: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 9 turns of 0:3, 4 turns of 7:3, 14 turns of 7:4, 15 turns of 7:5, 16 turns of 7:6. Total 104:62

max 15: 11 turns of 0:1, 12 turns of 0:2, 13 turns of 0:3, 14 turns of 0:4, 12 turns of 0:5, 3 turns of 15:5, 16 turns of 15:6, 17 turns of 15:7, 18 turns of 15:8, 19 turns of 15:9, 20 turns of 15:10, 21 turns of 15:11, 22 turns of 15:12, 23 turns of 15:13, 24 turns of 15:14. Total 870:190

As you can see, the break even point for maxFarm is growing straight to size 5. (Actually a bit in favor of maxFarm, as you can use 3 Cottage turns on the way due to the Food remainder (R).) You'd likely want the Commerce up-front still though, especially if going for an early Religion, or other very early time-critical tech paths. If you can go straight to size 6 or higher, the Farms are going to be favored. The higher the pop limit you can grow to, the bigger the discrepancy. I included size 15 for laughs... (Requires at least 9 Workers to change 9 Farms to Cottages on the turn you hit size 15 though.)

Granaries may change things up somewhat. I think in general cases it may favor noFarm type approaches, but in this specific case (almost no Production!) it may favor maxFarm, due to Slavery options, at least in the midrange population points. Not going to try to wrap my mind around that right now...

Perhaps I have misunderstood, but we were talking about farms or cottages on floodplains. At pop 1, a cottage on a flood plain has a food surplus of 3, while a farm has a surplus of 4 (until biology). At pop 2 the figures are 4 and 6. At pop 3, they are 5 and 8 (and so on). I suspect your calculation s looking at farms versus cottages for grassland.

RJM at Sleeper's

[Edit] I've just realised I am getting confused with another thread that was discussing farms versus cottages on floodplains. This thread wasn't specific to floodplains - whoops, sorry [/Edit]

[Qwertqwert]

Originally posted by rjmatsleepers


Once the city reaches 20 ???? Oh for a game in which I had a city that big!

RJM at Sleeper's

I remember a game in which I hit size 32, though that city surrounded by tons of farms, and resources and such, as I remember it there weren't enough specialists spots so some of the specialists were just citizens.

It had the thing that removed all unhappiness by the way.

[drsparnum]

Although not directly related, some other things you may not have considered is the tactical location of these improvements.

If I'm mixing farms and cottages with no other factors to consider, I'll put the inner ring of squares (8 squares) around my city all cottages. Then the outer squares of the fat cross (12 squares) I'll farm, or leave a forest behind for health/lumbermills. I don't like leaving forests next to my cities because of the defensive bonus they grant military units. It makes it easy for the AI to sneak up on you and park there and bombard you. I started taking out the forests around my city right around the same time I started attacking the AI cities only from forested squares. I find that I feel more secure by chopping down the trees and creating this fire ring, double meaning intended.

Secondly, cottages/towns are my least favorite thing to get pillaged, since they take time to regain their former glory, so I want to force the enemy to get right next to my city and risk me popping a mounted unit out to kill the enemy and run back inside my city without retaliation, if they insist on pillaging my cottages.

There's alot of other factors to consider. For example, some cities are just production centers and I don't care about science there and I will always choose a farm there, allowing me to work the maximum mines/windmills/lumbermills possible (unless you're running universal sufferage with gives town production, but I'm not so advanced I've ever planned that far ahead to get production out of a town). In addition, there's of course hills to be reckoned with, rivers/fresh water issues, and variable need to leave forests around for health. Still, for a nice science city you probably want a mix of cottages and farms, and when all else is equal, I'd put the cottage next to the city and the farm on the outskirts.