Micromanagement is alive and well in Civ 4!

[Zombie69]

The main issues i have with your analysis are these :

1. You'll rarely, if ever, have a city with 6 grassland hills. Any other type of tile (not counting bonuses like iron and such) will give more advantage to the whipping method, and less to the stagnant method. For instance, try a more likely scenario with 2 grassland hills, 2 plains hills and 2 grassland farms. Same food output, but only 14 hammers instead of 18.

2. You neglected commerce. One of the main strengths of the whip method is to be able to completely neglect any kind of normal hammer production, as well as farms most of the time. Both mines and farms are inferior compared to cottages. Whipping means you don't need mines anymore for your production. Since you don't need mines anymore, then you don't need farms anymore to support the mines. Use only grassland cottages, no mines and no farms. Whip every 10 turns to get all the production you need, and still make tons of money, and still let your cottages grow because you're working nothing but cottages! The whip provides enough production for me in all my games that except for one production city, all my cities will actually have cottages on grassland hills, not mines! Also cottages on floodplains, cottages on flat grassland, cottages on flat plains, cottages on river tundra... you get the idea.

 

[Compromise]

I think my example (long-winded though it is) is misleading. The only thing that matters is the last tile that you're either working or not working. In my example, the only thing that's different regarding the tiles the city is working between the whip and the not-whip case is that the no-whip case can work a tile that the whipped city can't. You can replace the pigs and first 5 grassland hills with anything you want, including food-self-sufficient (or food-surplus) cottages.

The point is that when you're at size MaxHappy and you want a little production, you have the choice of:

1) Whip. Over 10 turns, your Cost/Return is -(HoweverManyFoodToReplacePop)F +(30+bonuses)H

or

2) Don't whip. If you have a single grassland hill mine that your city isn't already working, then your Cost/Return is that of working the grassland hill mine for 10 turns: -10F +(30+bonuses)H.

Since "HoweverManyFood..." is always going to be greater than 10, your biggest benefit to the whip is getting the hammers earlier.

And this neglects the food you have to accumulate to replace your population. If food isn't an issue, then your marginal tile might be a plains hill mine (-20F +40H over 10 turns) or a quarry or metal mine (even more H). -20F might be more food than it takes to replace your population, but 4H/turn is guaranteed not to lose any hammers to production bonus (if multiples of 25%) rounding, and the assumption here is that food isn't a problem.

If you do have to pull citizens off of more productive tiles (e.g. cottages or mined tiles depending on the city's focus) in order to produce food to regrow your population, then those are lost citizen-turns that you're not getting the benefit you want in this city.

So you can still feel to cottage everything in sight (and I agree that farms with +1F and mines with +2H are pretty pathetic compared to cottages), but just save a production tile or two until you've got your infrastructure in place or have run out of places to put your other improvements. Then replace the grass hill mine with a cottage and/or the plains hill mine with a windmill.

Bottom line: having at least one productive tile that your city is not otherwise using means that the normal route of production will be competitive with whipping and might require less micromanaging.

Ironically, having that one tile is probably easier to find in a non-production city than a production one, especially as your happy limit rises. If you're working all the mines and quarries you can, the next tile you can work might not be good for production, and so you whip away the citizen who would be trying to work it.

 

[Zombie69]

I think my example (long-winded though it is) is misleading. The only thing that matters is the last tile that you're either working or not working. In my example, the only thing that's different regarding the tiles the city is working between the whip and the not-whip case is that the no-whip case can work a tile that the whipped city can't. You can replace the pigs and first 5 grassland hills with anything you want, including food-self-sufficient (or food-surplus) cottages.

My point is that your whip scenario was very inefficient. It would have been better to work no mine at all there and all cottages. In that case, your non-whip scenario still looks good next to it, but taking away the unrealistically numerous grassland hills would then make it look rather weak compared to whipping.

2) Don't whip. If you have a single grassland hill mine that your city isn't already working, then your Cost/Return is that of working the grassland hill mine for 10 turns: -10F +(30+bonuses)H.

Ok, this is a valid point. Especially since i'm typically not using any grassland hill at all, so there's a decent chance of having one free for use. However, how about cities without any grassland hills? Those are, after all, pretty common.

Now that i think about it some more, no it's not a valid point, even if you do have a grassland hill available. Like i said, cottages are better. Therefore, you should replace the first 5 mines in both of your original scenarios above with 5 grassland cottages. What happens then in the case with no whipping? Excess food. How do you use that excess food? You whip. Since excess food is almost always easy to get without a single farm, that's why whipping is almost always worth using. That was my original stance and it's still valid. That is, for any city that can have at least +3 food without a single farm (which in typical games of mine is about 90% of my cities), you should always whip every 10 turns.

And this neglects the food you have to accumulate to replace your population. If food isn't an issue, then your marginal tile might be a plains hill mine (-20F +40H over 10 turns) or a quarry or metal mine (even more H). -20F might be more food than it takes to replace your population, but 4H/turn is guaranteed not to lose any hammers to production bonus (if multiples of 25%) rounding, and the assumption here is that food isn't a problem.

Food may not be a problem, but more food can always be turned into more hammer very efficiently using the whip, so more food is always good. A plains hill is actually a rather crappy tile that i would never use with anything but a windmill, and even then avoid if there's anything else i could use instead (including a plains cottage, even that would be better).

Bottom line: having at least one productive tile that your city is not otherwise using means that the normal route of production will be competitive with whipping and might require less micromanaging.

It won't be, because you neglected the excess food that's obtained from not using 5 mines. This excess food is most efficiently used through whipping.

Again, try your example above but replace the first 5 mines with 5 cottages. You'll see that no matter how you slice it, you'll end up whipping, and whipping often.

 

[malekithe]

If I made an error, let me know by post or PM, and I'll correct the analysis so that readers don't have to flip between posts to find out the truth.

While not an error, per se, I do have a problem with one aspect of your analysis. You're looking at a situation in which the mariginal tile is a very productive tile, designed to do exactly the same thing the pop-rushing does; generate a lot of hammers given a food supply. A grassland hill converts food to hammers at a ratio of 1:3 which, you'll note, is better than the conversion rate for slavery at 6 population (~1:2). What you've shown, essentially, is that pop-rushing is sometimes not worthwhile in cities focused on hammer production, or cities that still have mined hills they are able or willing to work. I pretty much took that as a given. However, in some (most) cities, you can't readily obtain that 1:3 conversion ratio, and, as such, you need to settle for a lower ratio. Slavery is the most readily available efficient hammer source through most of the early game.

Additionally, relying on hills to convert your food to hammers can only convert as much food as you have hills available. Slavery, on the other hand, is only (possibly) limited by your available population cap, as you can whip multiple citizens at a time. What this means is: cities with plenty of hills available and a relatively small food surplus are better off mining most of the time. However, any city that does not have abundant hills, or does possess a large food surplus, will find it can more efficiently produce hammers through the whip.

Also, as Zombie pointed out, employing slavery as your food-to-hammers converter often allows you to continue to work (and grow!) commerce generating tiles.

Note: Both you and Zombie added another post while I was working on this, but after reading over your comments, I still think this adds to the discussion.

 

[Zombie69]

Just to make a nice, easy to understand conclusion. You've shown that with +1 food (what we have in your example at pop 6) and being already at max pop, whipping is slightly better. You would find that at +2 food, whipping becomes even better compared to not whipping, at +3 food it would become even better, and at +6 food (which you'd get by replacing all the mines with superior cottages), whipping would be a total no brainer.

From personal experience, like i said before, +3 food is the point where i start whipping constantly and never go below +1 unhappiness through whipping. At +2 food, i'll whip a lot, but not constantly, since the city must be allowed to grow. At +1 food, the city is so crappy i wonder why you'd even want to make such a city! But if i have one such city, i won't whip at all unless it's at max pop, and then only whip one pop so that it can have a chance to grow back up.

 

[Compromise]

Again, try your example above but replace the first 5 mines with 5 cottages. You'll see that no matter how you slice it, you'll end up whipping, and whipping often.

Okay. But all that matters is the very last tile!

Using the +/- food surplus for the tile, not absolute food produced.

No whip:

10 turns of:
. . .Center: +2F 1H 1C
. . .5 x BestTownsOnGrassWithAllCivicsOnRiverWithFinancial: 5 x +0F 1H 9C
. . .(We don't need the pig for grassland, so let's make it a cottage as above): +0F1H9C
. . .1 x GrassHillMine: 1 x -1F3H
. . . . .Total: 10 x +1F 10H 55C => +10F +100H +550C
. . . . .Note: all 10 food is wasted because we don't want to grow

Whip: (warning: cut and pasted and edited...an error-generating process!)
Turn 0: (whip) 7(16) --> 6(16) + Whip Hammers
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 1: 6(18)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 2: 6(20)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 3: 6(22)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 4: 6(24)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 5: 6(26)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 6: 6(28)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 7: 6(30)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 8: 6(30) (Note: 2 Food wasted because we don't grow and pay unhappy support)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 9: 6(30) (Note: 2 Food wasted because we don't grow and pay unhappy support)
. . City(+2F1H1C), 6 BestCottages (6 x +0F 1H 9C): +2F +7H +55C
Turn 10 6(32) --> 7(16) pop growth
. . This is back to where we started, so we can whip again (or not!)

Total: +4F (wasted to prevent civic-cost popgrowth)
+(70+whip)H
+550C

Comparison:
. . Whip: 70+whip hammers; 550C
. . Nowhip: 100 hammers, 550C

All that matters is the last tile! With the food surplus, both routes waste food, though the nonwhip wastes less. Commerce is exactly the same and comes on the same turns. That's because both techniques use the same tiles, except that in the whip case we can't use a tile, and in the nowhip case we use it for production (to try to match the productivity of the whip.

So: whip=30 hammers now, nowhip = 3/turn over next 10 turns.

It gets better for the no-whip case!: Use those 10 wasted food (and remember that's left over after giving 1 food per turn to a grass hill mine) to feed a plains hill mine instead of a grass hill. Now, the nowhip is 110 hammers and 550 commerce.

In that case, your choice is whip for 30 hammers now versus 4/turn for the next 10 turns!

And what if you happen to have just one quarry around a commerce city?!

I agree that whipping is a good way to get production in a city whose last tile is not very hammerlific.

And I agree that there is an exploitable bug in the computation of pop->hammers for the whip.

And I agree that if your production isn't a multiple of 4 in each turn, you'll probably get better rounding results from getting all your hammers in one blow and thus one roundoff, rather than fractional losses in each turn.

But I think the way to evaluate whether or not to whip has everything to do with the opportunity cost of the would-be unhappy citizen. What's he gonna do if you don't throw him into the cement mixer to increase the volume?

@malekithe: Just noticed your post. I agree that it depends on having a productive marginal tile. I also agree with the limits of the number of hills. For just these reasons, and I know it's ironic, but whipping might be most useful in production cities with a food resource or two (as it runs out of mines to work) rather than a commerce city with only one hammerlific tile!

 

[Zombie69]

A grassland hill converts food to hammers at a ratio of 1:3 which, you'll note, is better than the conversion rate for slavery at 6 population (~1:2).

Just because it's important to the discussion, i must correct you here.

At pop 6, whipping one pop, going back to pop 5 and going back up to pop 6 costs you 15 food. You this, you get 60 hammers. Those 60 hammers, obtained with a 25% production bonus, correspond to 60 / 1.25 = 48 base hammers. Therefore, you got 48 hammers for 15 food, which is a ratio of 1:3.2, not 1:2. 1:2 is only if you don't use the trick highlighted in my article, and we're discussing a situation where we actually use the trick.

Also, Compromise, you should put the hammers gained from whipping at 48, not 60. Yes, you get 60 hammers, but those are after applying the 25% bonus. They are the same as 48 base hammers.

 

[Zombie69]

. . .5 x BestTownsOnGrassWithAllCivicsOnRiverWithFinancial: 5 x +0F 1H 9C

Try just hamlets on rivers with financial, which are more realistic for this discussion : +0F +4C.
Personally, i consider the fact that the hamlet is growing to be worth 2 commerce. If you agree with this assumption (which i actually use in game to decide which tile to work), that makes them worth +0F +6C.

. . .(We don't need the pig for grassland, so let's make it a cottage as above): +0F1H9C

This is where you're wrong! This is what i've been saying all along! You can always use more food, and should always work the pigs. This is the main reason why whipping is so powerful! You should use the pigs AND the cottages, no matter what, because those are all your best tiles (the mines are weaker than the cottages, which are weaker than the pigs). Then you'll see that whipping makes the most sense.

I won't comment on the rest of your post because this invalidates everything after that. I'll comment on your conclusion though, just to make my point clear.

But I think the way to evaluate whether or not to whip has everything to do with the opportunity cost of the would-be unhappy citizen. What's he gonna do if you don't throw him into the cement mixer to increase the volume?

No, the efficiency of whipping depends on two things, and the one you mention above is actually the least important :
- Your food surplus (you keep giving examples with low food surplus, give me my pigs back!)
- Like you said above, what tile you could use instead

@malekithe: Just noticed your post. I agree that it depends on having a productive marginal tile. I also agree with the limits of the number of hills. For just these reasons, and I know it's ironic, but whipping might be most useful in production cities with a food resource or two (as it runs out of mines to work) rather than a commerce city with only one hammerlific tile!

On the contrary, because production cities tend to have lower food surplus, whipping is less attractive for them. Remember, you want as high a food surplus as possible. Of all three resources in the game, namely food, hammers and commerce, food is by far the most important and the most powerful, and one of the reasons is because food can so efficiently be turned into hammers using slavery. You want super high food!

 

[Compromise]

Also, Compromise, you should put the hammers gained from whipping at 48, not 60. Yes, you get 60 hammers, but those are after applying the 25% bonus. They are the same as 48 base hammers.

Ooops. I thought the 60 came because the algorithm gave out the hammers in multiples of 30 and that those hammers were then multiplied by 1.25 for the bonus. If it's only 48 base hammers, that's less appealing for the whip.

In my examples, none of the turn-by-turn hammer outputs have included a bonus. I'm trying to come up with a way to analyze the situation properly.

 

[Zombie69]

In my examples, none of the turn-by-turn hammer outputs have included a bonus. I'm trying to come up with a way to analyze the situation properly.

Then just count the whip as 48 hammers, which doesn't include the 25% either.

By the way, i added a big part to my post above after you posted (but before i saw that you posted), which means you probably didn't see it. Be sure to check it out again.

 

[Compromise]

Z, I've read through your extended post. Thanks for the heads up.

Please reread my post (#207) past the point where I "remove the pigs." It doesn't invalidate the rest of what I write at all. The point is that you don't need to work the pigs at all; I would give them to you if it helped, but it would hurt the whip analysis in this case. You would waste every food your pigs gave you because with the city center's free 2 food, you have enough food to grow back to size 7 in 10 turns.

And as for cottage vs. hamlet vs. town: it literally does not matter at all. Both the whip and the no-whip case work exactly the same tiles for almost all of the 10 forget-the-whip turns! Except that the whip might need to lay off the cottages a little to grow whereas the no-whip works a mine because it needs production.

Please, PLEASE, oh god I beg of you, PLEASE read my ramblings

 

[Compromise]

In a private discussion about this topic with Blake on another forum, he pointed out something I've neglected in the preceding discussion: you can whip more than one person at a time and get more hammers but only one unhappy citizen.

This is true. But while those extra citizens aren't around, he can't be working tiles so you'll have to wait until they grows back to have him work your tiles. And if you've got enough food surplus for them to grow back quickly, why are you working a food resource instead of a cottage?

A way around this is to grow your city past the happy point and whip those citizens, but this requires extra food. And again, if your city has that much extra food, why aren't you working more cottages instead of food resources. And you'll have to pay some (probably small) civic upkeep for those unhappies until you throw them into the Great Wall....

As Blake and others point out, another time whipping is really good is when your massively-fed city is growing and before your workers have gotten around to improving your tiles. That's usually when you need infrastructure too. Whipping and cities growing too fast for their improvements are a good combo.

I like whipping. I just want it to take its proper place in the repertoire of tactics.

 

[Zombie69]

Please reread my post (#207) past the point where I "remove the pigs." It doesn't invalidate the rest of what I write at all. The point is that you don't need to work the pigs at all; I would give them to you if it helped, but it would hurt the whip analysis in this case. You would waste every food your pigs gave you because with the city center's free 2 food, you have enough food to grow back to size 7 in 10 turns.

No, the pigs are crucial. If you still get too much food, you just whip more than 2 pop at once, creating the same unhappiness but getting more production. Not working the pigs is just plain dumb.

I won't add anymore on the subject until you actually try it with the pigs. You'll see how awfully powerful pig + 5 cottages + whip is.

 

[Compromise]

No, the pigs are crucial. If you still get too much food, you just whip more than 2 pop at once, creating the same unhappiness but getting more production. Not working the pigs is just plain dumb.

I won't add anymore on the subject until you actually try it with the pigs. You'll see how awfully powerful pig + 5 cottages + whip is.

Fair enough. I have to go offline for a while, but hope to be back before too late tomorrow.

 

[Zombie69]

In a private discussion about this topic with Blake on another forum, he pointed out something I've neglected in the preceding discussion: you can whip more than one person at a time and get more hammers but only one unhappy citizen.

Finally, you get it.

This is true. But while those extra citizens aren't around, he can't be working tiles so you'll have to wait until they grows back to have him work your tiles.

Wrong, wrong, wrong! Do like i say in my article. Whip at the end of a pop level. Whip 2 pop. The very first turn after the whip, you'll grow back up one pop. With pigs, you'll probably grow back up the entire 2 pop in 2 turns.

I'm sorry, but it does get irritating when you explain something carefully (in an article no less), and someone still argues with you without taking into account the entirety of what you're proposing.

And if you've got enough food surplus for them to grow back quickly, why are you working a food resource instead of a cottage?

Because the food resource will allow you to get more food, hence gain more production! Why is that hard to understand? ALWAYS work the food resource, no matter what your strategy is. The food resource is UBER POWERFUL.

 

[Zombie69]

By the way, for your analysis, know this :

- whipping 1 pop can yield 60 hammers = 48 base hammers
- whipping 2 pop can yield 90 hammers = 72 base hammers
- whipping 3 pop can yield 120 hammers = 96 base hammers

Use those values in your analysis. As you notice, this means that the more pop you rush at a time, the less effect the exploit giving you 30 extra hammers will have. You can get more than 30 extra hammers using the exploit, but assuming a 25% bonus, you need to whip at least 5 pop for this to happen.

 

[malekithe]

By the way, for your analysis, know this :

- whipping 1 pop can yield 60 hammers = 48 base hammers
- whipping 2 pop can yield 90 hammers = 72 base hammers
- whipping 3 pop can yield 150 hammers = 120 base hammers

Use those values in your analysis. Try to whip 1 or 3 pop, because that's more efficient than whipping 2. If 2 happens to be the average you can afford, then whip 3, then 1, then 3, then 1. If 2.5 happens to be what you can afford, whip 3, then 3, then 1, then 3 (for an average of 2.5).

Just curious, but how do you get the 150 hammers out of 3 pop? The most I think you can get is 120, for 96 base hammers. (Given a 25% production bonus)

 

[Compromise]

By the way, for your analysis, know this :

- whipping 1 pop can yield 60 hammers = 48 base hammers
- whipping 2 pop can yield 90 hammers = 72 base hammers
- whipping 3 pop can yield 150 hammers = 120 base hammers

Use those values in your analysis. Try to whip 1 or 3 pop, because that's more efficient than whipping 2. If 2 happens to be the average you can afford, then whip 3, then 1, then 3, then 1. If 2.5 happens to be what you can afford, whip 3, then 3, then 1, then 3 (for an average of 2.5).

Thanks Z, that'll help. Agreed about the averaging technique.

I know the best-possible whips will be better, because they are bugs. What I'll be computing is the no-whip alternative, so that you know what you're comparing to. This will still be useful if they ever fix this bug. I will compare to the optimum too, though.

As for the value of food, yes I get it. All I'm saying is that the food is not valuable directly. A city working 10 grass pigs makes 42 food and can grow to size 21 even if the happy cap is 10. The value comes when you whip the people, not from the food itself. In fact, happy and unhappy people cost the same to support, so the unhappy people in this ridiculous situation have negative value.

You're right about the whip being better at the end of the pop growth. I took the no-whip case--where you wouldn't put excess food into the granary after growing to the happy cap--as the default. I can change that. Like the pigs, it makes zero difference in the 1-pop whip case. It will make a difference in the multi-pop whip, though, so I'm glad you reminded me before I ran those numbers.

 

[Zombie69]

Oops, sorry, that was at 50% bonus. You're right of course, you can't get 5 for 3 at 25% bonus. Thanks for correcting me.

I'll edit the post above accordingly.

 

[Zombie69]

Compromise, i changed my post after Malekithe's correction. Use the new version instead.