The Thinkers guild: Still pop rushing?

[DAVOUT]

In the numerous discussions held on pop rushing, those who are reluctant or opposed generally give up when the final argument is exposed : Since the AI does it, we cannot compete without it ; there is nothing to answer to that, at least when we play at the highest levels.

The question raised in this thread deals with another aspect: when the competing AIs don?t do pop rushing any more because they are in Republic as are in our game Greece, England, Germany and Azteks, the argument is no longer valid; but worse, is it really our interest to decrease our population at a time where the other civs increases their own population faster than us? In other words, in still doing pop rushing when our competitors don?t, are not we easily solving short term problems at the expense of our future? Or, is the situation so bad that the only way to survive to-day is to prepare our fall to-morrow?

Your comments and opinions as always greatly appreciated.

[GodKing]

Pop rushing occures only in despotism and communisim. The other forms of government allow one to Purchase the item under construction with money.

Once we switch to monarchy/republic we will not pop rush any more either. We wont be able to.

In most instances if you do the math regarding pop rushing at this stage, it works out to be a slight benifit because of a) the corruption and b) the unhappyness due to our difficulty level. However, once you change over to a more advanced form of government, you want to have populations around 3+ in the majority of cities for practical reasons, therefor as we are looking to change soon, pop rushing is less desired now so we can get the pop up. However, when in dire circumstances, is it not better to do some pop rushing and get a defender into the city to make sure it stays in our hands, or to just let the city fall to invading barbarians?

[Shiber]

When we switch governments we'll be able to draft citizens. Though we'll get conscripts, which suck, we'll at least get up-to-date units (whereas pop rushing one citizen only gives you 20 shields which is just enough for a spearman but not for a pikeman and later units).

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by GodKing
However, when in dire circumstances, is it not better to do some pop rushing and get a defender into the city to make sure it stays in our hands, or to just let the city fall to invading barbarians?

This issue has already been discussed at lenth, the subject of this thread is restricted to possible danger of pop rushing when the AIs does not.

[DAVOUT]

Shiber,

Does this result in definitly reducing the population ?

[Panag]

hi ,

, we could use captured workers for this , ...

have a nice day

[Shiber]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
Shiber,

Does this result in definitly reducing the population ?

Yes, drafting results in the loss of one citizen and turns another citizen unhappy (unless made happy or content by lux., mil. police etc') but once we invent pikemen and later musketmen drafting will become more cost-effective than pop-rushing the unit.

[DAVOUT]

Drafting is not totally comparable to pop rushing : it is restricted to military units. So, the problem is limited to pop rushing buildings when AIs dont.

[GePap]

At this level the AI gets such a benefit in building that AI rushing of anything other than military units during an emergency- like the ruhsing of the swordman who attacked our archer stack, is higly unlikely. We are playing with distinct disadvantages at this level, so I doubt that comparing our behavior to that of the AI is not very valid. Fro example, the AI gets free military support, which allows them to become republics without having to srhink military. Also, they must get some sort of happyness increase, since I doubt the AI fears war-weariness.

[DAVOUT]

Gepap,

It would be interesting to know precisely all the handicaps we have at that level, but the question is : dont we desadvantage ourselves in pop rushing buildings?

[GePap]

We don'ty really have disadvantages as much as the AI gets bonuses in troop support and shields. Of course, the fact that less citizens are bron content, thus letting unhappiness set in quicker, is a major handicap.

I think that the relative advantage/disadvanatge of pop. rushing must be seen on a case to case basis. Sometimes a certain edifice, like a temple, will be worth more to our civs that the population that died rushing it. Currently our depressed food production (due to despotism) keeps our population relatively low, so pop. ruhsing anythig greater than a temple or spearman is impossible, since it would deplete opur population too severely and create too much unhappiness.

As a princliple I dislike pop. rushing, but on a case by case by case basis, it has its uses. The fact is that we have not used pop. rushing particularly much in this game, and I see its use diminishing in the future, not growing- simply because we will not have enough citizens to afford to rush the more expensive units and buildingd down the line.

[ManicStarSeed]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
Gepap,

It would be interesting to know precisely all the handicaps we have at that level, but the question is : dont we desadvantage ourselves in pop rushing buildings?

Per V1.29f Civ3mod.bic.... at emperor


They start with
4 free defensive units
2 free offensive units

8 additional free support + 2 for each city

3 Turns max anarchy between gov

AI to AI trade rate = 160 (130 for regent) ..whatever this means

[Shiber]

True also for 1.21f

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed


AI to AI trade rate = 160 (130 for regent) ..whatever this means

Anybody knows what it means ?

And what about building improvements ? Are they cheaper for the AI?

[Shiber]

It's a variable in a mathematical function. Since we don't know what the function is or how exactly it affects the game we can't tell for sure, but I'm positive it means that the AIs trade between one another more frequently (though we can't tell how much until we see the equation).