Comparing civs

[markusf]

Re: Interesting replies.. Thasnks!

Originally posted by deity
I guess my original point has been missed.

If we keep going into all the stats and the fact that I'll be Democ first with Colosseums in super cities ready to grow.. blah.. blah then we could both put up a full case for analysis of each civ and then a verdict. I'm at work so I can't look at the save just now.

But my point is that as a general rule we use the above mentioned facts to compare civs, ie the ones I posted plus cities and units to some extent and of course Wonders - but Wonders do show up quite heavily in the pg. This is why a top pop civ is just running slightly second in the pg.

pg is pop+techs+Wonders as the main factors.

I think it fair to say that at the end of a session we all look at the pg and a quick consensus is developed about how we are all faiting. We don't go into the above exhaustive analysis followed by hypothetical scenarios that might follow.

Does anyone undestand me? LOL

Hey drake, I miss you!
I'm just having fun here and this is turning out to be a good thread.... maybe it will swing back my way.... who cares!!!! It's just fun!!

PG = cities + pop count (not population) + units

Wonders have no effect on the PG, nor does infustructure. that is why the PG is useless for comparisons.

[Frank Johnson]

Even if wonders are counted, they arent weighted correctly, how can they? Mikes is much more valuable than say.....lighthouse.

Anyway, its really easy to "fool" the powergraph with WLTPD.

I'm no master of WLTPD and it's reprecusions yet, but its definately better than waiting on the citys to grow, and sometimes those excess citizens can be made into scientists to make up for the increase in luxuries needed, which can be great if you have libraries and unis.........

I've seen both makeo and rah do this strategy, only to find their capital, sporting 4 or 5 scientists, as the #1 city.

[rah]

True, but they're the #1 city due to the amount of wonders

But it can be very viable. Celebrate the pop up. Once they're size 7 or 8, (or larger in your cap) if you have some full food boxes in your core cities, you can starve them for quite a few turns without losing pop. You can crank down the lux since they can't be unhappy if they're scientists. (variation of the XIN YU 5 pop scientist strat) A couple of food caravans from your support cities mean you can keep this up for up to 20-30 turns. And if you lose a pop or two in your fringe cities, no biggie. This and a normal supply of trade caravans will easily bridge the gap while you're racing to SOL and Communism. If you win that race, your civ will be an instant dynamo, and you pop lead can be put to great use finishing your infrastructure and creating the army to continue the expansion. Keeping your science percentage maxed will mean new techs every two/three turns (without a single trade caravan).

All it takes is temples, libraries, and trade routes (and markets and univ. in your core cities). HG makes it easy but without it, you do the same thing but with size 5 and 6 cities instead of 7 or 8.

And if that doesn't work, use and early pyramid to get the pop up where you can start doing this.

RAH

And it does look good on the PG, but I do completely agree that the PG is not exactly a good measurement of power/potential

[deity]

What amazes me is that in reality all of you use the pg as a quick guide but then when it's brought up you all deny it! LOL!

[rah]

I don't see anybody denying that they look at it. Geeze, it's about all you see when you retire. But all the old timers know it's limitations. There have many games that I was way ahead on the PG but acknowledged to the other player that he was kicking my butt when we finished. By now, most of us know how to make the PG look good.

RAH

[Smash]

point of order>

The pg reflects only population,tech and gold.Andu Indoran proved this beyond any doubt(his study is at CF).Units and wonders play no part whatsoever.

carry on

[SlowwHand]

Population skews the graph big time. Why Pyramids render it useless.