Settlers production mechanics - EXPLAINED

So after many years of being unsure of the settler production mechanics, I finally tested it properly and these are my results: Food is NOT irrelevant, but neither is it converted at a good rate:

Negative-0 food: +0 from food surplus
+1 food: +1 from food surplus
+2-3 food: +2 from food surplus
+4-7 food: +3 from food surplus
+8-11 food: +4 from food surplus
+12-15 food: +5 from food surplus
+16-19 food: +6 from food surplus
+20-23 food: +7 from food surplus
+24-27 food: +8 from food surplus
+28 etc (seems it continue with a 4:1 conversion rate)

So basicly:
-If you have a big city with tons of production/low food tiles such that you can go quite high in food deficity but high production, then that's beneficial
-If you have a small city with high food tiles and can't go lower than +0 for example, then remember that the first +2 food also gives +2 production
-Then again remember that if you have a city with high food, your food -> production conversion is only 4:1.

Also note: The +production gained from food surplus does NOT receive the +50% from Collective Rule, only "real" production does.

In a recent game I also seemed to note that while building a settler, the game will let you run a -1 food deficit and still just count it as stagnation. In the early game this can make a considerable difference if you have some good gold tiles.

Is this widely known? I haven't seen it mentioned in the forums.

Thanks for this chart by the way.

You can go -2000 food while producing a settler as any growth (positive as negative) is halted during that time.

The real question is: Why doesn't the governor work the best tiles for this situation?

Thanks btw for bringing this up as building settlers might be more popular with BNW (while in Vanilla and G&K you'd pretty much always rather buy settlers).

In a recent game I also seemed to note that while building a settler, the game will let you run a -1 food deficit and still just count it as stagnation. In the early game this can make a considerable difference if you have some good gold tiles.

Is this widely known? I haven't seen it mentioned in the forums.

Click to expand...

Every decent player will know this and its an important feature to do well in multiplayer

nice

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters.

FeiLing said:

Thanks btw for bringing this up as building settlers might be more popular with BNW (while in Vanilla and G&K you'd pretty much always rather buy settlers).

Click to expand...

I feel silly for asking, but why do you think this?

Is it because of the production assistance you can get from internal trade routes?

Lack of gold on the BNW map and requirement of a DOF for lump sum gold trades means much less gold to rush buy settlers.

Ah, Sweden will have fewer worries here, then

Browd said:

Lack of gold on the BNW map and requirement of a DOF for lump sum gold trades means much less gold to rush buy settlers.

Click to expand...

But MadDjinn managed to DoF a civ before the turn 30! That's just the time to hook your first luxury

Tabarnak said:

But MadDjinn managed to DoF a civ before the turn 30! That's just the time to hook your first luxury

Click to expand...

Too bad that civ had like 40 gold.

The Pilgrim said:

Too bad that civ had like 40 gold.

Click to expand...

If it's the norm it will be definitively harder. But if the AI is weakened it will be good for us too.

Tabarnak said:

If it's the norm it will be definitively harder. But if the AI is weakened it will be good for us too.

Click to expand...

I bet it is. Where can it take the gold from? CS and ruins and that's it. I expect every single HoF submission to have Spain in the game. Or several Spains if that'd be ever allowed. I dunno. MD's stream left me very confused and paranoid in regard to AI's competence.