2 production queues?

[Dale]

If you do a ratio split for a second queue and build two items, it will always end at the same turn number as sequentially building them.

Unit == 40 hammers
Wonder == 300 hammers
City builds 20 hammers / turn

Total hammers needed == 340
Total turns needed == 17

Regardless of how you spread those hammers (50:50, 75:25, 99:1) it will always take 17 turns to complete both via single or double queues.

 

[Herrhals]

they could do a combo of total war and historic civ games. (I've only played cIV, so idk the other games)
Buildings would require the production aspect of cIV, and training units would require a monetary investment and take X turns to train. The units would be available with proper facilities and resources like in Total war (minus the resources part). This would create a gold sink, because in cIV, gold was just kinda useless for most of the game beyond the concept of maitenence.

 

[Drago Askani]

The only way I could see this working properly would be if they treated cities like planets in Gal civ 2. For instance you have your military production, your social production and your research spending per city/planet. Now when not building anything social production spills into Military production and/or reasearch, it also has an option to have a city/planet focus on one type of production diverting production from other projects to the perfered output per city/planet. A system like that allows dual production lines while still being balanced and allowing a lot of flexibility in what you do with you city/planet.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

I don't know about two production queues, but I think you should certainly be able to "send" your production to other cities. I hate having the island city that's bringing in loads of foreign commerce but I can't build a Customs House because its only resources are sea-based.

 

[say1988]

I disagree, unless yu are heavily penalized or it is very limited, say you have to build a unit, send it to the city you want, then it gets broken down into half of the production and cannot be used on wonders..
There are advantages and disadvantages to where you settle, lets no negate them too much.

 

[Takhisis]

If you do a ratio split for a second queue and build two items, it will always end at the same turn number as sequentially building them.

Unit == 40 hammers
Wonder == 300 hammers
City builds 20 hammers / turn

Total hammers needed == 340
Total turns needed == 17

Regardless of how you spread those hammers (50:50, 75:25, 99:1) it will always take 17 turns to complete both via single or double queues.

Yes and no.
If after the first unit is built, you switch to 20-0 for the wonder, then, as you said:
[pre] 8 turns
UNIT1 8* 5= 40 Unit is complete
WONDER 8*15=120 180 shields remaining
+9 turns (total 17)
UNIT2 9*0= 0
WONDER 8*15+9*20= COMPLETE[/pre]However, if you always you have two separate queues, then:
20 shields/turn¹ total. You split it 15-5.
In 8 turns, you'll have got
[pre]UNIT1 8* 5= 40 Unit is complete
WONDER 8*15=120 180 shields remaining
8 more turns
UNIT 2 8* 5= 40 Complete
WONDER 16*15=240 60 shields remaining
4 more turns
UNIT 3 4* 5= 20 20 shields remaining
WONDER 20*15=300 Complete[/pre]
If you stay on the same split, you'll have built another unit and be one turn away from the next one when you finish the wonder, taking 20 turns instead of 17 but capable of defending your strategically important city. In wartime, you might consider slowing down your unit production in order to be able to keep what you've built...

1: shields, hammers, it's the same.

 

[say1988]

If you build the wonder or units first, or split them up, same result.
In your example, run 3 turns wonder, 1 turn unit, repeat. You have your 2 units and wonder in 19 turns, with an option to put 20 more into a unit on the 20th. You will receive units on the exact came turns.
You gain 1 turn of effect for the wonder, and you have more leeway for changing decisions regarding units without having production sit in them/disappear.

Since there is no penalty for changing the queue and hammer decay takes time to begin, there is no difference.


The only way this idea would be useful is with different production systems for units and structures.

 

[Gedemo]

I remember this system is used in Europa Universalis III, isn't it?

 

[Rowain deWolf]

Currently with 1 queue you have to make a decision. you built too few units you might get invaded and lose. You built too few buildings/too many units you fall back in the tech and lose too. So the current system does add a lot of decisionmaking, add a lot of fun.
With 2 queues especially with the forced 50/50 split you remove this decisionmaking and the fun with it.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

I disagree, unless yu are heavily penalized or it is very limited, say you have to build a unit, send it to the city you want, then it gets broken down into half of the production and cannot be used on wonders..
There are advantages and disadvantages to where you settle, lets no negate them too much.

Well it would obviously have to have its drawbacks...for example you would suffer a penalty of 4:1 (four every for hammers you send, only one makes it to the city) that might decrease to 2:1 when you research Economics, it might also cost you 1 gold per turn for ever 4/2 hammers you send. So in reality you would be losing overall production, but it would be worth it to run it for time to construct an important building in a city with minimal production.

 

[Takhisis]

Currently with 1 queue you have to make a decision. you built too few units you might get invaded and lose. You built too few buildings/too many units you fall back in the tech and lose too. So the current system does add a lot of decisionmaking, add a lot of fun.
With 2 queues especially with the forced 50/50 split you remove this decisionmaking and the fun with it.

But if you make ALL units reduce your population (unless you're building a Reaver or something robotic) then you can't just spam units, because your population level will decrease.

 

[morss_4]

I remember this system is used in Europa Universalis III, isn't it?

Yes and no. Yes there are separate build ques and yes you can build both at the same time, but EU3 is considerably different from Civ on the whole in this regard. In any given province both ques will spend 95% of the game unused. You can raise an army in 6 months in EU3 (and the game lasts 400 years) it's paying for it and and keeping it reinforced it that is the problem. Like wise you'll build probably about half a dozen buildings in a province over the course of 4 centuries, and most take a year to build.

But if you make ALL units reduce your population (unless you're building a Reaver or something robotic) then you can't just spam units, because your population level will decrease.

I do not want this system implemented in Civ V.

First of all, this doesn't even make sense. There is no civ in history that drafted itself into nothingness or even came close. Raising a division in a city of 3 million people makes no real dent in the population and even during WWII most countries only had about 10% of the population in arms. It's paying for an army that should be problematic, not finding enough poor saps to fill out the lines. Manpower has been a problem for some countries in history, but here the problem is finding enough able bodied young men. Even if an entire generation of young men is lost women, children and the elderly remain, so from a Civ standpoint I don't think building units and turning your 20 pop city into a 4 pop city makes a lot of sense.

Second of all I don't like it from a gameplay standpoint. Food is already important enough in Civ. I see no reason to make it even more important. The way civ is now if you have a city with a few food resources then in the early game you won't even notice this effect because it's happiness not food that is limiting your population, but if you lack food resources then it renders you impotent. The guy who lacks food resources is already at enough of a disadvantage because he can't whip or run specialists, I don't see the need to punish the poor guy more by telling him he can't raise an army.

 

[Takhisis]

Really? Have you played RFRE for Conquests?

 

[morss_4]

Really? Have you played RFRE for Conquests?

I don't even know what RFRE stands for.

 

[Takhisis]

An infidel! You must be enlightened! http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=111682

 

[morss_4]

An infidel! You must be enlightened! http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=111682

Ok.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how that addresses my concerns?

 

[Takhisis]

Sure (sorry for the delay but I had to go AFK). All units in that scenario take population to be built, because they're recruited from your population. Only garrisons -'præsidium'- don't take population costs, but that is because they're defensive units with the Inmobile tag, 'armed citizens' who won't go into other people's lands. So your armies are limited in size, making SODs rather rare. You might raise large armies but they're unlikely to be unstoppable. Good use of you cavalry and light infantry becomes essential, especially after the barbarians from 2000BC onwards get units without pop. cost -to simulate the endless hordes coming from the East and North- and you can't just spam them back at you. Eventually you are forced to abandon Britannia, Gaul and Hispania for the East.

 

[morss_4]

Sure (sorry for the delay but I had to go AFK). All units in that scenario take population to be built, because they're recruited from your population. Only garrisons -'præsidium'- don't take population costs, but that is because they're defensive units with the Inmobile tag, 'armed citizens' who won't go into other people's lands. So your armies are limited in size, making SODs rather rare. You might raise large armies but they're unlikely to be unstoppable. Good use of you cavalry and light infantry becomes essential, especially after the barbarians from 2000BC onwards get units without pop. cost -to simulate the endless hordes coming from the East and North- and you can't just spam them back at you. Eventually you are forced to abandon Britannia, Gaul and Hispania for the East.

Ok.

That's interesting for that mod, I still don't really think it is a good fit for Civ V.

 

[mrt144]

@Mitsho: But it's not realistic. My country doesn't stop producing soldiers just because a new public transportation system is built.

Of course, if we ever entered a war I'm sure they'd stop diverting money to the PTS and divert it to the weapon industry, etc.

Realism isn't always fun and accessible. TF2 isn't realistic, but it's a lot more fun than games that claim to be realistic and aren't like MW2.