Another word on AI worker ineffieciency, and about combined arms

[Solomwi]

This has perhaps been covered, but I've got to get it off my chest. Watching my automated workers is absolutely brutal, especially in the late game, and I can only assume that the AI uses its workers the same way it uses my automated ones.

The biggest flaw to me is this: I'm playing PTW, unpatched, with Carthage (or for that matter, any Industrious civ, as I'm hopelessly addicted to the Ind trait) under democracy, with Replaceable Parts. In other words, even a slave worker on flat ground can build a road in one turn. After my latest war of conquest, eliminating the Americans, I've got a lot of underdeveloped land to bring up to Carthaginian standards. The last turn I played, I counted 24 workers standing on unroaded flat ground move onto the railroad, even though I have enough workers already on the railroad to handle all pollution. So, the workers still can't get where they're going until next turn, but now I have to waste ANOTHER worker turn getting onto that empty tile to build the road. Effectively, each time this happens 2 worker turns are lost (Worker A getting off and Worker B getting on). That's FORTY EIGHT worker turns lost in just one turn.

Not being a code jockey, I have no idea, but surely there's some way to program in a "maximum return" type algorithm into the workers, where they realize putting a road under themselves gets them to Point B just as quickly as leaving Point A completely, AND gives the civ a road for future use.

Sorry for the rant, and to go off-topic, this game I've learned to love Marines, Helicopters and Paratroopers and actually got disgusted once I upgraded my tanks to Modern Armor because every place I could land them was reachable the same turn with MA. The airdrops need more range .

I'm really interested to hear some others' combined arms strategies. I became a fan also of not upgrading my Elite Infantry units once MI is available, and keeping them as a type of special forces, dropping them in via Helicopter on top of an airdropped Paratrooper or Marine stack for extra defense, particularly. Anytime I can get Artillery in range of my airdrop target city, that much the better. I've also grown to love the amphibious assault force of three Transports, one loaded with a Marine division, one with an Infantry/MI/Artillery defense force for the beachhead and one chock full of Tanks/MA to pour through.

A final note: the rename unit function is GREAT for the late game, and not just for leader-producing units. I tend to produce modern units in multiples of eight and group them into divisions of eight like units (due to Transport capacity), then name them. For instance, the 3rd Marine Division consists of the 31st through 38th Marines, and if I get 8 Elite Marines, well, the 1st Elite Marine Division is born and the last division formed is cannibalized to fill in the gaps in the other divisions. For me, at least, it makes late game war much more interesting, especially when running MS Word in the background and keeping a history of my nation (knowing which battles I've won and lost in the past also comes in handy for naming AEGIS Cruisers ). It's just more interesting to bombard New Orleans with the CFS Utica (Carthaginian Federal Ship) before an assault by the 4th Marines than to hit it with the nearest Battleship and throw some Marines at it. It's also cool to see an Aircraft Carrier patrolling the seas with my name on it. Has anybody else used naming this extensively?

[Catt]

You've discovered that automated workers are a luxury that come with a price. I have grown accustomed to never automating. Occassionally, in the late game of a peaceful situation, I might automate some workers but keep some on standby manually fortified.

I like te role-playing aspect of the game, and sometimes mount late-game offensives such as you've described, more for fun than for effectiveness. I haven't used the rename feature all that much outside of leader-generating units.

Catt

[Solomwi]

That's exactly what I do with the workers. No matter how many are automayed, I keep a portion of slave workers in my capital, both for trade purposes and to keep in reserve, and most if not all of my workers in another of my core cities, so I know where they all are. Nothing worse than having them all automating, seeing a bunch of cities that you now need to mine because they've hit 20 (or other max. production capacity) and are about to produce specialists, and having to go search your cities for the workers.

I did adapt a tip from this forum to my automated workers and ask myself how my empire got built with such incompetent management . Gracias to whoever suggested that as a Tank/Spearman solution.

One caveat with the renaming is that you get more attached to the units. I almost cried when my veteran 57th Marines went down attacking New Washington .

[Theseus]

Solomwi, you are my kinda player!!

I've been enjoying the late game more and more... if you look back at the older threads, I don;t think I even ever finished a game until about a year ago!!

OnT: I don;t automate the majority of workers until all that's left is RRing non-high-value tiles and pollution control. My BIG ***** is that as of the latest patches, Soren has late-game Workers doing the OPPOSITE of what I consider good tile practice: the little bastards mine shielded tiles and irrigate non-shielded tiles. Taking over an AI civ territory is a MM *****.

[Solomwi]

Theseus, by the time I'm automating workers on a large scale, I want everything mined except whatever grass/plains I have to irrigate to get the mountains and hills worked and I'm through my GA (War Numidian Mercs!). With that bieng the case, the only time shielded/unshielded really comes into play is when I'm looking for a tile to forest to get rid of that pesky 1 excess food. Of course, there's always the case of, as someone pointed out here before, accidentally plain automating one worker and finding the little bastard 20 turns later irrigating all your mines. I laughed for five minutes solid when I read that, having pulled my hair out about it before.

On the subject of taking over an enemy civ's territory: this is why the Internet is a WONDERFUL late game GW. Worry about resistors settling down so you can rush a temple and quit seeing the red city number? Not anymore, given that they're on your home continent. Resist all you want, dammit, your borders are expanding in 5 turns! Woohoo!

Just because I'm in a sharing mood, if anybody's interested, attached is the military history of my current game.

[vmxa1]

Amen to no automated workers, until the key RR are up. The I lets most go with a no changing of improved tiles.
I have a few on manual to handle any new stuff or tile that are improved, but need to be changed.
Even then some will wander off to get in trouble (kill).

[Mountain Sage]

Originally posted by Solomwi
No matter how many are automayed, I keep a portion of slave workers in my capital, both for trade purposes and to keep in reserve,

Why do you trade workers? With an industrious civ, you'll swim in gold anyway and trading workers means that the othe civ gets more powerful (even if you sell slaves). If you want to milk other civs, sell them techs or luxuries instead.

[vmxa1]

I never traded away a worker. In the past it made sense to buy them from the AI if it had one as this would hurt them more than the gold helped them. A patch changed that as they want more gold now.

[Solomwi]

Why do you trade workers? With an industrious civ, you'll swim in gold anyway and trading workers means that the othe civ gets more powerful (even if you sell slaves). If you want to milk other civs, sell them techs or luxuries instead.

For one reason and one reason only: I have too many and the game's effectively over. Actually, I don't do it much, but like to keep the option open. I'll also do it to try to prop up a civ so I have a decent opponent to slaughter next. (Here, Caesar, have these 50 Korean workers... greeeeaaaaattt, now try to get to the street with them, followed by maniacal laughter). Actually I've been trying to get some to Korea in this game, since he's sitting on an island with one city, no army and barbs keep destroying his production. He's been building the same damn Guerilla forever, and apparently saw fit not to use the 1000 gold I gave him to rush it. For whatever reason, though, it won't let me send him any. I guess they'rs afraid I'll overwhelm his treasury (which, I admit, was my first motivation for sending him workers).

[Konquest02]

For whatever reason, though, it won't let me send him any. I guess they'rs afraid I'll overwhelm his treasury (which, I admit, was my first motivation for sending him workers).

Two things, one minor and one bigger (possible exploit...?)

1- I've never seen an AI refuse a gift. I've never tried to give workers but the AI always accepted the gifts I gave him.

2- About overwhelming their treasury, it would be good, when you want one civ to go down, to sign a huge gpt deal (i.e. all their gpt and possibly all their gold reserve if you can do it...) and then give a lot of workers to that AI. IF, and I say IF, those workers have a maintenance value, then the AI would go bankrupt in a matter of a few turns. Strategy, exploit? You decide.

--Kon--

[Solomwi]

1- I've never seen an AI refuse a gift. I've never tried to give workers but the AI always accepted the gifts I gave him.

I wasn't real clear there. Even though I have the workers in my capital, when I go to the Diplomacy screen and talk to Wang Kon (any relation? ), it doesn't show Workers on my side as a possible trade item. Close the screen and talk to Montezuma, Caesar or Gandhi, however, and it does. I even tried giving Korea 5 gpt and then re-opened the screen, to no avail.

You're right, of course, that they would have to be that civ's own workers for the "exploit" to work, but the more I think about it, the AI would simply disband them if it got overwhelmed, although it may be useful to drain the current treasury, I don't know.

Btw, please excuse my typing. I get somewhat dyslexic at times on the keyboard .

Of course, due to my Indian warmongering, Korea just declared war on me , so I may just go raze Chinje in the easiest battle ever.

[Konquest02]

OK, I get it now... I think that rules out the exploit.

to anyone at Firaxis who thought about this...!

--Kon--

(No relation whatsoever with Wang Kon. Konquest was a game one of my friends invented, but the named sucked so we changed it for another one. Imagine a bunch of people fighting for the kingdom of Kon (which in french means stupid...) I kep the name as I found it funny!)

[TheArsenal]

1- I've never seen an AI refuse a gift. I've never tried to give workers but the AI always accepted the gifts I gave him.
--Kon--

On a couple of occasions, I've had the AI refuse a gift - a small amount of gpt, IIRC - a turn or two before it launched a sneak attack.

I've never tried to give or sell a worker, however.

[Mountain Sage]

Originally posted by Solomwi

For one reason and one reason only: I have too many and the game's effectively over. Actually, I don't do it much, but like to keep the option open. I'll also do it to try to prop up a civ so I have a decent opponent to slaughter next. (Here, Caesar, have these 50 Korean workers... greeeeaaaaattt, now try to get to the street with them, followed by maniacal laughter).

Ahhh, to prop up a civ to better slaughter it afterwards. Well, it certainly has a twisted logic

But then, you could just go up a level (if you don't play on Deity already, that is). Then, YOU'll need those workers (or probably won't have as many).

[Sinapus]

I tend to have a few making a trade net, some clearing jungle (I tend to use hot, wet worlds) but otherwise use manual or auto-improve (no changes) this city only" when I have nothing but mountains and hills left to improve, or I need a railnet built in that city radius.