5 turns at tech rate under Republic!!!

[Sultan Bhargash]

I WILL pass judgment: it's not an exploit. When you lose your old temple in your big city, you are losing that culture generation potential, you are losing another smiley face, and even if you only have to spend one turn to replace it, that is one less modern armor you will be airlifting to your newly acquired base someday. Civ 2 did something similar but much harsher. Think of this as the consolation prize for no longer being able to poison their water supplies...

 

[Neomega]

EXPLOIT!

I can't believe how many people consider obvious exploits valid strategies. I discovered this concept while creating a mod and had too many units to start with to test. Of course I never considered using it in a game. Whee, playing with exploits is fun. it boosts my self esteem and makes me feel like I'm a winner.

 

[deleted]

deleted

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

So you are telling me that they thought about it enough to make you lose units and buildings when you have a negative balance, but somehow it is an exploit to let this happen? An exploit, my friend, is when you do something the AI can't do or doesn't expect or isn't programmed to handle. The AI, for the record, almost entirely runs their economies in the negative all the way (I have often watched the enemy players suddenly lose all their ports and be unable to trade with me while they were lagging behind in tech). Besides which, if you tried to run the whole game this way, in short order you would be out of libraries and universities and suffering a tech lag anyway, not to mention having lost all of your workers, artillery pieces, boats, scouts, explorers and then regular units...

No, the deficit spend is a valid tactic: far from being something that makes you feel good about winning, it usually just lets you breath a sigh of relief about staying alive in the game.

However I would welcome a RULING FROM CIVFANATICS on the subject...

 

[Drakken]

I would love to play a great strategy game without dumb exploits. This type of thing can ruin the multiplayer game.

Personally, I play the game and don't ever trade techs with the comps at all. I find it challenging having to research everything myself. It is too easy to exploit the computer players as well. You should try playing this way. It is a lot of fun and eliminates gamey tactics.

 

[kojimanard]

This tactic probably rarely has any value. However, in the game I was describing (post #40), I have about 100 cities, so one temple doesn't mean much. The reduced turns per tech are much more important (if only so I can build a spaceship and finish; it takes forever playing with so many cities).

 

[Bamspeedy]

I kind of consider it an exploit. I think it would be better if you lost more than 1 unit or building. If you are losing several hundred gold/turn, that deficit should not be covered by the selling of 1 warrior

It would work better if each unit/building was given a 'reasonable' value for what it is worth if sold (and not the measly 2 gold or whatever you get for selling a granary or barracks, for example). And you would lose however many buildings/units it takes to break even. But wow, if every building was worth 2 gold and you ran a deficit of 100 gold/turn, you'd lose 50 buildings/turn!