City-Poppin' Huts

[CJM]

For those who haven't experienced it, in PTW goody huts can pop a new city for your civilization (I never saw this in vanilla Civ3, though of course that doesn't mean it was impossible). While I've had this happen a few times, I haven't yet had a settler pop from a hut.

One question I have is, does the "city pop" replace the "settler pop," or can you still get both?

A second question involves the impossibility of getting a settler pop if you have a city producing a settler in vanilla Civ3. Does this dynamic also apply to the city pop in PTW?

This next bit only matters if the answer to the second question is "no." As just about everybody is building a settler somewhere early on, it would suggest the potential for faster growth, especially for the expansionistic civilizations. Perhaps it's an undocumented feature to make the expansion of the expansionistic civlizations that much faster...?

Thoughts? Data?

C--

[asleepathewheel]

There is already a thread on this .here

You can still get settlers from huts

[CJM]

My bad. Posted without perusing the forum first. If you could indulge me, though, do you know if the settler pop restriction applies to the city pop as well?

C--

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by CJM
My bad. Posted without perusing the forum first. If you could indulge me, though, do you know if the settler pop restriction applies to the city pop as well?

C--

I have no idea. I've actually gotten about 5 new cities in my games and only 1 or 2 settlers, so I'm not sure what the story with that is. I've popped cities while I'm creating settlers. But I can't remember what I was producting when I popped settlers.

[alva]

5 !!!

Wow, that is alot !!!!
well, how many ptw have you played allready?

might need some balancing

[Nikolai]

Ah, those good old advances tribes! I really missed them! Now, if just Europe could get the game too...

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by alva848
5 !!!

Wow, that is alot !!!!
well, how many ptw have you played allready?

might need some balancing

I've probably played 25 games. Usually start, play for 10-15 turns then quit. tried out the different game types. new civs, that sort of thing.

[alva]

ok then

isn't this an unducumented feature btw???

[Mike Breitkreutz FIRAXIS]

While this was also possible in Civ3 in rare circumstances, it is now possible for Expansionist civs to get cities from goody huts.

[alva]

Shouldn't this be turned -off for eug "lose one city-lose civ" mode (can't remember the right name , too much info, brain can't cope aarrghh)

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hey, thanks for the Excellent info Mike (though, living in Australia means I probably won't be able to get the game until, perhaps, December....2010 )
Anyway, this to me makes the expansionist trait a LOT more useful! I just hope this means that those who have complained about expansionist (including me ) will now give those complaints a rest! It also shows to me that the Firaxians do take GENUINE notice of fans' concerns! Keep up the great work guys.

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[Tuberski]

This, to me, is actually a reason NOT to take expansionist.

I'd rather get a settler that I can move to a good city location than a city in the middle of crappy terrain.

Being able to get advanced Civs and settlers is kind of redundant.

I fexpansionist got workers instead of settlers it would be a little better, except for sometimes lousy city placement from the advanced Civ.

In Civ2 you could get advanced Civs and settlers, but settlers also had a secondary purpose, in Civ3 they have none.


ACK!

[vmxa1]

I am not sure how the advanced tribe bit will play out, but getting a settler out of the first hut just made it too easy.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by vmxa1
I am not sure how the advanced tribe bit will play out, but getting a settler out of the first hut just made it too easy.

Getting a city will make it easy too.