Column #139; By St. Swithin

[DanQ]

Our first "celebrity" column comes from Activision's very own Winnie Lee, aka St. Swithin, who talks about -- what else? -- CTPII in an article entitled "<A HREF="http://apolyton.net/misc/column/139_cities.shtml">Your Cities And You</A>".

Comments/questions welcomed here, or you may choose to contact the author directly.

----------------
Dan; Apolyton CS

[Slax]

Daniel - I think you're right. I would explain it by saying it is due to distance to the city.

St. S. - There is no mention of the city tile being automatically worked. Is it? If it is, then ICS is alive and well, while if it works as you have written, but with the city tile included in the radius the same as any other tile, then ICS is dead.

Please let ICS be dead.

My calcs, if city tile is not auto-worked, assuming 1 resource per tile,

1 6 pop city = 9 resources
6 1 pop cities = 5.83 resources (tightly packed cities)

But if city tile is auto-worked:
6 1 pop cities = 10.83 resources

[This message has been edited by Slax (edited November 04, 2000).]

[Smeagol]

Daniel: But aren't there 16 squares in the 2nd ring? So each worker would then bring in 1 1/3 tiles worth of resources (in the 2nd ring). That is still of course less than the 1 1/2 from the 1st ring.

Here is the picture:

BBBBB
BAAAB
BAAAB
BAAAB
BBBBB

A= first ring, which includes the city tile itself in the middle

B= second ring

This is the way I see it unless those corner tiles for the B ring are not included.
[This message has been edited by Smeagol (edited November 04, 2000).]

[Smeagol]

Slax:

Quote from article:

"The amount of food, commerce, and production is totalled from the 9 tiles under the city's influence - the one the city's sitting on, and the 8 surrounding it."

...From that it does sound like ICS is dead.

[Daniel Frappier]

Slax - You are right, i didn't noticed at first that there was no mentionned about the city tile, i hope it's not only because he forgot to mentionned it. I hope they really did something about ICS.

[Slax]

This new ring configuration differs from the previous explanation at the corners.

[Daniel Frappier]

Smeagol,

You might have the explanation, it would means that the city radius is now a perfect sqare as opposed to Civ II and CTP I.

[Smeagol]

Slax:

That was not an "explanation", merely a theory. Are you sure the corners are not included? How do you know?

[Slax]

quote: Originally posted by Smeagol on 11-04-2000 03:07 PM Slax: Quote from article: "The amount of food, commerce, and production is totalled from the 9 tiles under the city's influence - the one the city's sitting on, and the 8 surrounding it." ...From that it does sound like ICS is dead.

The workers still might only work the surrounding tiles, while the city tile is only included in the total. I wish she had given an example total number of resources collected (or stated it clearer). Is she multiplying 1/6 by 9 or 8 in a 1 pop city? ie , is it tot = 1 + 1/6 * 8, or tot = 1/6 * 9 ?

[Smeagol]

Slax:

I see what you are saying. I too hope that ICS is dead, so I guess we'll wait and hear from Activision on this. Then hopefully we can get a definitive answer on what constitutes the 2nd ring (12 or 16 tiles) and if the city tile generates resources separately from the surrounding 8 tiles.

[Slax]

quote: Originally posted by Smeagol on 11-04-2000 03:11 PM Slax: That was not an "explanation", merely a theory. Are you sure the corners are not included? How do you know?

When I said 'explanation' I meant the post made a while back about this topic, not your post. I guess it all depends on what "a ring around a ring" means. I thought it was the old-style radius, after pop = 6, in the screen shots. I'll have to look again.

[This message has been edited by Slax (edited November 04, 2000).]

[Slax]

According to the latest screen shots, the pattern is:

UCCCCCU
CCBBBCC
CBAAABC
CBAAABC
CBAAABC
CCBBBCC
UCCCCCU

where
A = pop 1- 6
B = pop 7 - (17,18, or 19)
C = pop (18,19,or 20) - (40-50?)
U = placeholder

we also were told that there is another level, likely to the border radius (one more ring).

In the screen shots I found cities as large as pop = 17 with the type B radius. I found a city with pop=20 had a type C radius so, the threshold, in these screenshots, was 18,19, or 20.
[This message has been edited by Slax (edited November 04, 2000).]

[Slax]

It seems to me that no auto-worker in the city makes the most sense. Compare the old way to the new way, with no auto-worker:
using 1 tile = 1 resource

Old way:
pop=1 => 2 res
pop=2 => 3 res

New Way:
pop=1 => 1*1/6*9 = 1.5 res
pop=2 => 2*1/6*9 = 3.0 res

So the growth rate is similar (actually higher) comparing the old way to new way using one city.

[Smeagol]

Slax:

Can you give me a link to that screenshot?

Regarding the workers further away being less productive, I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing anyway. It'll at least keep the game slightly more balanced between huge and smaller empires, and it is a reasonable idea as well (after all, the further away the resources are, the longer it takes to get them to the city.)

[Smeagol]

I think this sounds like an excellent idea... you can still decide with specialists which resources to focus on but the micromanagement is reduced considerably. Another step in the right direction for CTP2!