Building Gold

Bhruic

Emperor
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
1,457
Is it me, or is this an extremely useless way of spending hammers? You get 10% of your hammers converted to gold, meaning you have to put in 100 hammers to get 10 gold. Or, you could build a Scout for 25 hammers, immediately delete him, and get 10 gold, a 40% return on your investment. I haven't really looked into other units to see if there's anything more cost effective, but even if not, turning hammers into gold via Wealth production seems like a complete waste.

Bh
 
Is it me, or is this an extremely useless way of spending hammers? You get 10% of your hammers converted to gold, meaning you have to put in 100 hammers to get 10 gold. Or, you could build a Scout for 25 hammers, immediately delete him, and get 10 gold, a 40% return on your investment. I haven't really looked into other units to see if there's anything more cost effective, but even if not, turning hammers into gold via Wealth production seems like a complete waste.

What else are you going to build in a city that you are razing? Research, I suppose.
 
Is it me, or is this an extremely useless way of spending hammers? You get 10% of your hammers converted to gold, meaning you have to put in 100 hammers to get 10 gold. Or, you could build a Scout for 25 hammers, immediately delete him, and get 10 gold, a 40% return on your investment. I haven't really looked into other units to see if there's anything more cost effective, but even if not, turning hammers into gold via Wealth production seems like a complete waste.

Bh

Totally agree. research is only slightly less useless.
 
The best conversion is to start building a wonder. If someone else builds it first, you get 100% of your invested hammers as gold.
 
What else are you going to build in a city that you are razing? Research, I suppose.

What about resourceless units for gifting to the city states? I don't think they directly provide gold, but the return can end up being happiness, food, culture, or other units.
 
If making a disbanding military offers more gold than producing wealth, that is clearly broken; especially since producing wealth requires a technology to do so.

I see nothing game-breaking about making wealth give 50-100% of your hammers as gold. It's not like it isn't already much easier to get gold over hammers from tiles.
 
What about resourceless units for gifting to the city states? I don't think they directly provide gold, but the return can end up being happiness, food, culture, or other units.

Are you going to have time to finish them before the city burns to the ground? It didn't seem that way in my game, but perhaps I overlooked a possibility.

You can (I presume) buy rush units while the city is burning, if you like, but are you really generating enough hammers/pop to complete a unit before the city is removed from play?
 
I fully agree. Production is worth more than gold as it is. Any negative rate would have been a waste, let alone something of these proportions.
 
This is TERRIBLE

Someone really needs to start the "Stupid Micromanagement Tips in Civ V"

"Don't build gold, build Scouts and disband them"

"Don't buy units, buy the lower level unit and upgrade it"

I'm afraid the science+production overflow calculations are probably terribly messed up as well.
 
Are you going to have time to finish them before the city burns to the ground? It didn't seem that way in my game, but perhaps I overlooked a possibility.

You can (I presume) buy rush units while the city is burning, if you like, but are you really generating enough hammers/pop to complete a unit before the city is removed from play?

I haven't encountered this situation yet.
 
Top Bottom