Ducki Does C3C at Emperor

[Harovan]

Well put Dominae. I'd like to add, that while you let Madrid float between size 5 and 6 to produce 4 turn settlers (probably producing 7+7+8+8 shields), the same effect is possible with one citizen less, using the fact that the shields of new laborers after city growth are added and with big surplus the laborers will be put on forests, thus producing 6+8+7+9 shields. I'm sure you know it, and in the shown situation with three luxuries connected you certainly can afford it, but in the early stage of the game, when luxuries are still rare, the way with one citizen less can save a lot of money, otherwise spent on luxury.

[Dominae]

Good point, Sir Ralph. I believe I did waste some Commerce early on with the Luxury slider to keep Madrid happy. Madrid completed its Granary at size 4 1/2 (15/20 Food), and it was just very convenient for it to start Settlers right away. Fortunately, I managed to access three Luxuries which, coupled with some Military Police, allowed for a 0% Lux slider for most of the Ancient era.

(Incidentally, Madrid's Shield output was 6+8+8+8, because there were just so many Bonus Grasslands around the capital. Luckily there were lakes and Fish to help avoid waste in both pump cities.)


Dominae

[ducki]

-I notice none of your workers are stacked(well, there's one stack that looks like 2 or three). Is there a specific reason or is it just personal preference? I tend to have stacks of 2-5 settlers (edit: duh, I meant workers) early-mid Ancient and currently I have several stacks of 3, which road in 1 turn and 3 stacks of 6+, which mine in 1 turn and knock out jungle in 3 I think.
I'm not really that good at analysis when playing games, so is one more efficient?

-The whole "+5 food per turn pump" thing evades me, probably because I don't analyze deeply enough. Early on I still tend toward shields, and this seems to be one of my failings, so to speak.

- This:

Luckily there were lakes and Fish to help avoid waste in both pump cities

Huh? This is probably related to the previous "question", but I try to get as many shields and commerce as possible while growing at a rate that doesn't kill my beeline if I'm streaking for Philo, and afterwards, I'll use Lux, but still tend towards shields and commerce.

I knew it was "too easy" to be representative. I also know that I played "well" but not great. I can always trust 'poly to show me the light, even if it doesn't stick the first 10 times.

If you play any further, watch Maya. Somehow, they caught up and passed me - probably going Education while I went Gunpowder. No matter, I currently and raping and pillaging the impudent Aztecs with Knights and Cavalry, grabbed his GLib city, picked up Education for free and am about to open a can of Black-hole-dark on Maya. I've spent the Aztec War years building nothing but Cav from my 4(?) barracks towns and nothing but Musket and Cannon/Treb from my non-barracks towns(between border-holding culture and happiness builds). All this during a Leo's triggered GA - confused me for turns, then I remembered I'd captured Pyramids and Mausollos from Brennus. Duh.

Anyway, this start is a good step up from Monarch - don't _plan_ on any wonders if you're new to Emperor, but hope for them. I'll try to remember to take a screenie and post a current save so Theseus can see how far I've come.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by ducki
-I notice none of your workers are stacked(well, there's one stack that looks like 2 or three). Is there a specific reason or is it just personal preference? I tend to have stacks of 2-5 settlers (edit: duh, I meant workers) early-mid Ancient and currently I have several stacks of 3, which road in 1 turn and 3 stacks of 6+, which mine in 1 turn and knock out jungle in 3 I think.
I'm not really that good at analysis when playing games, so is one more efficient?

You should road with 1 worker only, it's more efficient. Imagine you have three workers. Now look what they do in 4 turns:

a) together: move on tile 1 / road tile 1 / move on tile 2 / road tile 2

b) separate: each moves on his own tile / 1st turn roading / 2nd turn roading / 3rd turn roading

The result is, in case b) you have one more roaded tile. Remember a rule: Try never to move a worker over a tile without roading it. It is a lost move, because you will have to waste another turn when you return.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by ducki
-I notice none of your workers are stacked(well, there's one stack that looks like 2 or three). Is there a specific reason or is it just personal preference? I tend to have stacks of 2-5 settlers (edit: duh, I meant workers) early-mid Ancient and currently I have several stacks of 3, which road in 1 turn and 3 stacks of 6+, which mine in 1 turn and knock out jungle in 3 I think.

Unless there's a Road there already, stacking Workers to improve a given tile is actually less efficient than sending just one to do the job. This is because each Worker "wastes" a turn entering the tile, a turn during which it is not actively working on a tile improvement. A little example (edit: Sir Ralph beat me to it!):

2 Workers are ready to fully improve 2 fresh Bonus Grassland tiles. Method 1 stacks the Workers, improving one tile then the other, while Method 2 sends a Worker to each tile.

Method 1:

12 Worker-turns to Mine 2 Grassland tiles
+ 6 Worker-turns to Road 2 Grassland tiles
+ 4 Worker-turns for both Workers to enter each tile
= 22 Worker-turns

Method 2:

12 as above
+ 6 as above
+ 2 Worker-turns for each Worker to enter its own tile
= 20 Worker-turns

Note, however, than although Method 2 completes the entire job using fewer Worker-turns, Method 1 gets one tile up and ready (that is, fully-improved) earlier.

It is always better for cities to work improved tiles, so although Method 2 is more efficient from a Worker-turn perspective, it is sometimes a necessary evil to use Method 1 in the early stages of the game.

If you want to really micromanage, you can get even fancier by sending Workers to Road a tile first, then send some more Workers to Mine/Irrigate it once the Road is complete (assuming they are within 2 tiles...2 to move, and 1 to begin the improvement). This eliminates the wasted Worker-turns due to Worker movement, but is rather time-consuming. In my screenshot you'll notice that all Worker stacks are on a roaded tile.

For now, my recommendation to you is to look at terraforming not in terms of static stacks of Workers, but in terms of Worker-turns. Stacks should split and merge.

The whole "+5 food per turn pump" thing evades me, probably because I don't analyze deeply enough. Early on I still tend toward shields, and this seems to be one of my failings, so to speak.

The Food box sizes are all multiples of 20 (20 for sizes 1-6, 40 for 7-12, 60 or 80 for 13+). The Food box sizes with a Granary are half each of these numbers, or 10, 20 and 30 or 40 (I'm not sure which right now). These are all multiples of 10, and therefore 5 and 2 as well. If the Food per turn output of a Granary city is any of these numbers, your city will grow without "wasting" any Food (here, 'waste' means "lost overflow"...this is not the same as the game's definition of waste which has to do with Corruption). It's pretty easy to get +2 Food per turn growth in a city; any old Grassland tile will do. It's very rare in Despotism to get +10 Food per turn growth; typically it involves a bunch of Flood Plains and Wheat, which means very low Shield output.

What's left? Yup, it's that magical +5 Food per turn growth. Basically it's the highest growth rate that: 1) does not "waste" any Food, and 2) allows for a decent Shield output from other tiles. Put those two together, and you can create a 4-turn Settler pump, or a 2-turn Worker pump. Why 4-turn and 2-turn? Well, a Settler costs 2 population points, which, for a city under size 6 with a Granary, costs 20 Food...and 20/5 = 4 (for a Worker that costs 1 pop point it's 10/5 = 2)!

You can therefore see why it's always more efficient for your "pump" cities to be under size 6; basically it costs you less Food per Settler or Worker you build. Would you rather your Settlers cost 30 Shields and 20 Food, or 30 Shields and 40 Food?

Huh? This is probably related to the previous "question", but I try to get as many shields and commerce as possible while growing at a rate that doesn't kill my beeline if I'm streaking for Philo, and afterwards, I'll use Lux, but still tend towards shields and commerce.

If a city is meant to be 4-turn Settler pump (as described above), it needs to generate 30 Shields (the cost of a Settler) in 4 turns. Typically this is 6+8+8+8 or 7+7+8+8. Any extra Shields are wasted every cycle, unless you can get 40 Shields every 4 turns, in which case you would have a 4-turn Settler/Warrior pump. It's bad to waste Shields, just as it's bad to waste Food (the latter is worse, mind you). The best way to avoid Shield waste is to find another tile that produce an equivalent amount of Food, but Commerce instead of Shields. Inland Coast (lake) and Fish tiles are examples of such.

Anyway, this start is a good step up from Monarch - don't _plan_ on any wonders if you're new to Emperor, but hope for them. I'll try to remember to take a screenie and post a current save so Theseus can see how far I've come.

For now, I would recommend approaching Emperor with your Warmonger hat on. After you feel comfortable with that you can start thinking about being more of a Builder and securing Ancient era Wonders.


Dominae

[ducki]

It's bad to waste Shields, just as it's bad to waste Food (the latter is worse, mind you).

Bad like corruption or bad like "wasted worker turns"?
I guess what I'm asking is, up-front game mechanic bad or efficiency-required-for-Emperor-level bad?

And I really didn't plan on getting any wonders. I just backed into the Gardens, really, then captured Pyramids and Mausollos, and once I was established, only then did I actually "pick" a wonder and go for it.

Thanks for all the great info everyone. Civ is like an onion... layer upon layer upon layer... and I appreciate the effort everyone here spends helping others get their eyes all itchy and burny.

Maybe I should restart until I get a militaristic civ and try again, or is Mil not worth much in Conquests?

[Dominae]

Originally posted by ducki
Bad like corruption or bad like "wasted worker turns"?
I guess what I'm asking is, up-front game mechanic bad or efficiency-required-for-Emperor-level bad?

The second one. It's something that's entirely up to you to avoid.

Maybe I should restart until I get a militaristic civ and try again, or is Mil not worth much in Conquests?

Pick a civ that you like and focus on the basics in the Ancient era. Maybe a Medieval era UU would be best, since they're the easiest to craft a strategy around (and can really turn the tide if you're in trouble!).


Dominae

[Donegeal]

Wow Dominae and Sir Ralph!

Thats some VERY good stuff there!

[ducki]

Alright, for the pro analyses:
My first instinct here would be to move the settler South(2) by 1 and SouthWest(1) by 1, allowing him to be riverside and to use both wheats without culture(it IS the Mongols, heh).

Then, again my first instinct would be to Mine the grass wheat and irrigate the FP wheat, but somehow I'm sure that's wrong. What would you do with this start and the lucky hut-settler?

[Dominae]

Ok, I have a couple of questions for you instead:

1. Why did you build a Settler before a Granary?
2. How much Food does an irrigated Wheat Flood Plains produce under Despotism?
3. With all that potential for Food down South, where will you get Shields?


Dominae

[ducki]

1. I didn't -

with this start and the lucky hut-settler?

2. Er... 5 I think. 4 before irrigation, no? Or is that a raw number that needs to be adjusted for the penalty? Argh.
3. And excellent question.
I did what I described above and was doing nothing but workers from Town #2, sent a settler up north to the unseen furs/forests and made a barracks town.

I really don't know the answers. I need a new feature to be added to C3 for all the folks like me that just can't remember all this stuff. I'd like the "Terrain Info" popup to have buttons so you can do a "What if I Irrigated here" and it would show numbers for your current government.
That would be neat.
Anyway, those are my answers, newbish though they seem. I just can't remember the numbers and rules.

[Dominae]

Oops, I should have figured by the year (3500BC) that the Settler was from a Goody Hut (or I could just have read your entire post...).

Your instinct is correct about the Wheat Flood Plains: once irrigated, it produces +5 Food per turn all by itself! This means that the Wheat and Flood Plains are superfluous for that city...or are they? Since you need Shields as well as Food in your pump towns, those Forests look mighty attractive (they're even River-adjacent). The only problem is that they only produce 1 Food per turn, so if you work, say, a Forest and the Wheat Flood Plains (once irrigated), you're only getting +4 Food per turn. That's where you can use the other high-Food tiles to get beyond +5 Food per turn, and translate the surplus into Shields using Forests. To this end, I would put my second city just one tile South of where the Settler is in your screenshot.

Regarding tile improvements and the despotic penalty: remember what I posted for you earlier, that Irrigation on Bonus Food tiles is never a loss, except for Sugar (stupid Sugar).


Dominae

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Dominae
Regarding tile improvements and the despotic penalty: remember what I posted for you earlier, that Irrigation on Bonus Food tiles is never a loss, except for Sugar (stupid Sugar).

That's why I mine sugar first (2/2/2 tiles are nice, like irrigated furs on plains) and irrigate them eventually after I switch to a better government.

[Enriquillo]

And I was thinking this is a strategy game, it's pure mathematics

I'm just too lazy to play without waste most of the time, I guess you've convinced that this is worthwhile doing at least during your first 50 turns or so.

You need every advantage you can give yourself , especially on poor maps.

[Donegeal]

Originally posted by Enriquillo
And I was thinking this is a strategy game, it's pure mathematics

Trust me, it is still a strat game. You can micromanage all you want, but if you can't strategize, its all for not.