Okay, let's forget about William and oil!
I've returned to checking test game cities, with Neapolis (63,61) (wildcards hides,salt) doing okay except for a small matter with hides. The demand quotient (192) exceeds the supply quotient (160) in 725 BC, yet hides is placed on the supply list:
725 hides,coal,silk dye,salt,cloth size 2, techs: 22
I think this may be a city size issue, or possibly a # of techs issue, since there were not any changes for the quotients used for the earlier list:
1250 silk,coal,wool dye,salt,beads size 1, techs: 17
In 1250, hides was in the demand roster, and was covered up by the salt wildcard. In 725, hides needs to switch rosters to make it to the #1 spot on the supply list. Since terrain is a constant, I'm betting on city size or tech modifiers, my guess being that demand is not doubled at city size 2.
In regard to spice, I looked at several saves of the giga map game, so I will go back and try and find a good one that illustrates how spice demand came in lower than predicted by the formula.
I've returned to checking test game cities, with Neapolis (63,61) (wildcards hides,salt) doing okay except for a small matter with hides. The demand quotient (192) exceeds the supply quotient (160) in 725 BC, yet hides is placed on the supply list:
725 hides,coal,silk dye,salt,cloth size 2, techs: 22
I think this may be a city size issue, or possibly a # of techs issue, since there were not any changes for the quotients used for the earlier list:
1250 silk,coal,wool dye,salt,beads size 1, techs: 17
In 1250, hides was in the demand roster, and was covered up by the salt wildcard. In 725, hides needs to switch rosters to make it to the #1 spot on the supply list. Since terrain is a constant, I'm betting on city size or tech modifiers, my guess being that demand is not doubled at city size 2.
In regard to spice, I looked at several saves of the giga map game, so I will go back and try and find a good one that illustrates how spice demand came in lower than predicted by the formula.
Comment