TheOverseer714
Overseer
All politics aside, I love to have as many slaves I can get. It's a game, not reality, and keeping it a game is why it's still fun for me. Why drag drab, dreary reality into it?
Captured worker(s) sent home?
- Thread starter 1940LaSalle
- Start date
timerover51
Deity
That is one of the things that puzzles me about the game, the fact that the Mayans have a unique unit with the Enslave ability, while the Aztecs do not. The Mayans did not engage in war for the sole purpose of acquiring victims for their human sacrifices, while the Aztecs did. The Mayans did engage in ritual human sacrifice, but not to the degree or scale of the Aztecs.
As for the captured workers, once I have wiped out their civilization, they are now my citizens, and it is a matter of making most efficient use of them. For me, that is working them into my cities, and allowing me to make workers from there that are much more efficient in getting things terraformed.
This goes back to what Theov was saying - I don't care how slow they are, they are free. Why would you replace free workers with workers that work twice as fast - but you need to pay them and IIRC, slaves do not count towards your total units allowed, which is another perk. My goal is to rejoin my native workers to cities as soon as I have enough slaves to do all the work - albeit because I'm a builder this happens later in the game that is probably fiscally responsible.
I can buy many reasons why you would chose to do this, but efficience is not one of them, at least if we are talking about large picture in-game efficiencies. If you are talking about fewer mouse clicks and button pushing, then I can see your argument.
timerover51
Deity
Given the modified games that I play, a worker in a city is generating a minimum of 2+ gold per turn, so adding captured workers to a city immediately generates quite a bit of income per turn, aside from also generating more food and shields, speeding up the production of not only workers, but anything else that I need produced. A captured worker in a city more than pays for the worker of my civilization that I produce later.
Second, I play on Huge or larger maps, right now on some that are 300 by 200 or so, and I have my cities spread out, not on top of each other. The time it takes to get cities connected by road or rail is a matter of some importance to me, therefore I want it done expeditously. Since the maps are very large, and I do not automate any workers, reduced mouse clicking and button pushing is also a factor.
Lastly, I simply do not like using slaves. Period!!!!!
The size of the font does not add validity to your argument. I immediately conceded that there are many reasons you may chose not to use slaves/foreign workers. You cannot apply a rational for a personally modded game to a general discussion. Even if I concede this point, it folds into my initial 'exceptions'.
Additionally, you are expending a native population point and 10 shields to create the native worker in the first place. So the slave you folded into the city to replace the worker you just created is not creating a net gain. It is also a dubious argument since farms tend to grow to maximum size relatively quickly anyway. Adding slaves or peeling off workers/settlers usually results in a very small short term net gain/loss.
Joining slaves/foreign workers into your city does not make sense if you want to get roads done faster. As the slaves are free (no maintenance) and can be joined with native workers, you could get the road done faster with both workers.
I'm not arguing you should use slaves. I'm saying that efficiency/expedience are not logical arguments for excluding them from the workforce. I also never suggested automating workers. That is a truly horrible idea, I agree.
If your objection is to slavery, they you should avoid capturing workers and either give them back or disband them immediately. If you take them back to your cities and join them in, then you are condoning kidnapping. I don't see the fine distinction.
Everyone plays the game the way they want to. I think Raliuven is right that slave workers is usually the most efficient way to play the game. However, everyone has personal preferences so TimeRover is playing the way he wants to. I wouldn't say it's always the best strategy but we all have eccentricieties. I don't like to cut down forests, but that's an eccentricity.
Treehugger!
I completely agree. No disrespect to anyone's playing preference intended. I have too many idiosyncrasies to throw stones. Well, except for the one above . . .
CommandoBob
AbstractArt
That is not it at all. Ataxerxes is an Ewok. Chopping forests is like destroying home.Treehugger!
I completely agree. No disrespect to anyone's playing preference intended. I have too many idiosyncrasies to throw stones. Well, except for the one above . . .
timerover51
Deity
I do not like to cut down forests either, so in my mods, I am setting the value in shields of forests to "0".
And after looking at the General Settings in the editor, you can set the Captured Unit to "None" from "Worker". I will have to give that some thought. I might do that in any modifications I make to the Pacific War scenario. The survival rate of Europeans captured by the Japanese was 73%, assuming that you were not an Aviator. Those rates were considerably less. For non-European captives, the survival rate was under 50%. The Japanese military typically fought to literally the last man, and those Japanese civilians on the island of Saipan committed suicide rather than surrender.
That is not it at all. Ataxerxes is an Ewok. Chopping forests is like destroying home.
So you are saying that Ataxerxes is a small, furry critter with a talent for ambush tactics, performs idol worship and occassionally indulges in human sacrific? Can't he just play as the Aztecs instead?
Elephantium
Trampling the AI
Indeed. timerover's preferences may be more valid than mine -- he HAS taken the moral high ground, after all -- but morality isn't a measure of efficiency. I think most of the debate in this thread is a reaction to the idea that timerover's preferences are also the most efficient way of using workers and slaves, something that can quickly be proven or falsified by comparing production and commerce counts from an actual game: First, play long enough to get some slaves. Save the game. Play the next 5 turns or so twice -- once by joining the slaves to a city, once by using the slaves to build improvements.
So you are saying that Ataxerxes is a small, furry critter with a talent for ambush tactics, performs idol worship and occassionally indulges in human sacrific? Can't he just play as the Aztecs instead?
So you are saying that Ataxerxes is a small, furry critter with a talent for ambush tactics, performs idol worship and occassionally indulges in human sacrific? Can't he just play as the Aztecs instead?
I've been found out!
timerover51
Deity
I've been found out!
No one has yet figured out that I am a curmudgeon.
As for whether or not my use of captured workers is the most efficient one, there are some kinds of efficiency that I would rather not use. Albert Speer commissioned a study to determine exactly how little you could feed someone and still get useful work out of them. That is efficient, but would you like your employer to view you that way?
Elephantium
Trampling the AI
And that's fine, so long as you say "this is my preference" and not "my preference is more efficient"
I understand the personal preference and that's a valid reason. We all play the game for fun.
I wouldn't want life to be like CivIII. I'm very peaceful in real life and a psycho in CivIII. Anyone behaving in a totally efficient way is often unpleasant in real life.
I think your opinion is suspect. You are probably still sore about all the trees that were chopped down to make space for the Death Star's field generator. The Empire isn't really evil. Its just misunderstood. It was really a work program designed to spur economic growth and industry. The shooting didn't start until those pesky rebels showed up.
I do many things in my games that are probably not the most efficient. But I do think that it is important to distinguish between personal preference and the more black-and-white gaming advice. I was mislead by a few random posts when I first joined and it probably set me back about 6 months - I almost gave up on the game entirely.
While I repect everyone's method of play, I respectfully disagree with some of the conclusions.
Similar threads
