city specialization guesses

[DalekDavros]

It is stated, it says +4 happiness, same with all the happy buildings we have seen so far. (+X happiness) for cicus and theatre.

There may be some buildings with a local effect, but none are known.

Part of the point of "Empire wide happiness" and Golden Ages triggered by happiness is so that 'excess happiness' is not wasted.

In that case what is wrong with a city designed to produce happiness.

From an economics standpoint, I think that there'd be a problem with cost vs. return. For example:

Circus costs 150 hammer, produces +3 happy, and has an upkeep of 4 gpt.
Colosseum costs 150 hammer, produces +4 happy, and has an upkeep of 3 gpt.

Since happiness is empire-wide, you get a better return on investment if you build a Colosseum in two cities than you do for building both a Colosseum and a Circus in one city. Once you have a Colosseum in every city, it may make sense to further specialize those cities with horses/ivory by adding a Circus there, but until that point there will be better uses for the hammers (e.g., instead of having one culture city and one happy city, it'd usually be more efficient to have two culture/happy cities).

Basically, I think that most specialization will have to do with the unique possibilities of the city (i.e., what things can only they do due to the nearby resources, etc.) rather than being based on some abstract function (like "happy city" or "culture city"). The only exceptions are when buildings provide percentage increases instead of fixed magnitude increases or when having the building in multiple cities provides no advantage over having it in only one city. So, based on what is currently known, this means that it may make sense to have specialized cities for science (University), gold (Market, Stock Exchange), GPP (Garden, National Epic), and military production (Barracks, Stable, maybe Harbor).

Also, the "must have X in every city" wonders will probably mean that every city needs at least a bit of generalization, for the sake of supporting the requirements of more specialized cities.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

From an economics standpoint, I think that there'd be a problem with cost vs. return. For example:

Circus costs 150 hammer, produces +3 happy, and has an upkeep of 4 gpt.
Colosseum costs 150 hammer, produces +4 happy, and has an upkeep of 3 gpt.

Since happiness is empire-wide, you get a better return on investment if you build a Colosseum in two cities than you do for building both a Colosseum and a Circus in one city. Once you have a Colosseum in every city, it may make sense to further specialize those cities with horses/ivory by adding a Circus there, but until that point there will be better uses for the hammers (e.g., instead of having one culture city and one happy city, it'd usually be more efficient to have two culture/happy cities).

Basically, I think that most specialization will have to do with the unique possibilities of the city (i.e., what things can only they do due to the nearby resources, etc.) rather than being based on some abstract function (like "happy city" or "culture city"). The only exceptions are when buildings provide percentage increases instead of fixed magnitude increases or when having the building in multiple cities provides no advantage over having it in only one city. So, based on what is currently known, this means that it may make sense to have specialized cities for science (University), gold (Market, Stock Exchange), GPP (Garden, National Epic), and military production (Barracks, Stable, maybe Harbor).

Also, the "must have X in every city" wonders will probably mean that every city needs at least a bit of generalization, for the sake of supporting the requirements of more specialized cities.

There are other aspects to specialization besides which buildingsto place in a city. Some buildings have bonuses with some types of Terrain improvements, ie Libraries+Farms (for large populations).. or certain terrain.

So a Science City will be as Large as possible with lots of farms, and you will need a lot of happiness to support it.

a Gold city will be 'normal sized' ie never any bigger than~40 pop... if it is bigger, replace Farms with Trading Posts

Happiness and Culture seem the most likely to just be 'spread out'.... however, Great Artists are a type of GPerson so Culture Focused cities are definitely possible (not just the imperial gold supporting building but some local food supported population contributes to culture.)

That Is why I'm not sure there will be a GPP City
1. If Specialists are the primary GPP source, then given that they provide other benefits as well, a GPP city will probably just be a Gold/Science/Culture/Production city with the National Epic (if it does increase GPP)

2. If Wonders are the Primary GPP source, then the GPP city will be the Wonder City. (heavy Production)

as it is Gardens seem like a good thing to add onto any of those type of cities after you have the first 'specialist building' ie Library, Temple, Workshop, Bank

obviously focusing on the type of GP you want.

 

[Gre_Magus]

I'm not sure how much I like the idea of a city focusing on "generating happiness", but you're right, this might be a viable strategy

Polobo beat me to the punch...but I agree: there definitely examples in the modern world of cities and regions that "specialize" in happiness. The Hawaiian islands would be another.

 

[DalekDavros]

I definitely agree that the terrain will be a major factor in specialization (this is what I meant by specialization being based more on available resources than on needing another Specialty-X city). I do think you're overestimating the importance of farms in sci cities however--especially if you have Free Thought as a SP goal, Trading Posts will eventually beat farms and it might be worthwhile to run Trading Posts in science cities in anticipation of the bonus. Also, depending on the unhappiness, the trade-off of (unhappiness from 2 citizens)->(1 extra beaker) may not be high enough to justify trying to maximize population with farms. Rather, I think libraries will be useful mainly for getting an extra benefit out of citizens that you already have producing things other than food.

It's worthwhile to focus on buildings, however, as the upkeep cost system means that a building is really just a way to convert gold to other types of resources. Take a Garden for example: if a city is producing 4 GPP a turn, the garden is going to cost you 2 gold per turn and provide 1 GPP per turn--possibly a net loss even if we leave out the production cost of building the Garden. Unless gold is really cheap in comparison to GPP (I haven't seen data on how many GPP are needed for a GP, so I have no idea if this is the case), I don't see the Garden as a building that gets built in every city that can support it.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Polobo beat me to the punch...but I agree: there definitely examples in the modern world of cities and regions that "specialize" in happiness. The Hawaiian islands would be another.

"I'm goin' to Disneyland!"

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I definitely agree that the terrain will be a major factor in specialization (this is what I meant by specialization being based more on available resources than on needing another Specialty-X city). I do think you're overestimating the importance of farms in sci cities however--especially if you have Free Thought as a SP goal, Trading Posts will eventually beat farms and it might be worthwhile to run Trading Posts in science cities in anticipation of the bonus. Also, depending on the unhappiness, the trade-off of (unhappiness from 2 citizens)->(1 extra beaker) may not be high enough to justify trying to maximize population with farms. Rather, I think libraries will be useful mainly for getting an extra benefit out of citizens that you already have producing things other than food.

1 Citizen->1 Beaker without a Library (primary basic source of science), 1.5 beakers With a Library.

so 1 Food+0.5 Happiness->0.75 base beakers (wth a Library)
Now I'm not sure how much food a farm will make v. how much Research will be provided by a Trade post with particular SPs. As well as the other bonuses.

also there are something like 4-5 Science Specialists that a Science city can support

now I'm not sure what the condition is of pop units that
1. Can't work a specialist tile
2. Can't work a terrain tile

If those pop units produce research or not, if they benefit from the 'Freedom' SPs (that cut food/happy costs for 'specialists')or not will depend.

It's worthwhile to focus on buildings, however, as the upkeep cost system means that a building is really just a way to convert gold to other types of resources. Take a Garden for example: if a city is producing 4 GPP a turn, the garden is going to cost you 2 gold per turn and provide 1 GPP per turn--possibly a net loss even if we leave out the production cost of building the Garden. Unless gold is really cheap in comparison to GPP (I haven't seen data on how many GPP are needed for a GP, so I have no idea if this is the case), I don't see the Garden as a building that gets built in every city that can support it.

I imagine it would be produced in every well developed city of the desired Type though. (ie Culture/Science/Gold/Production) based on the presence of the specialists.

 

[DalekDavros]

1 Citizen->1 Beaker without a Library (primary basic source of science), 1.5 beakers With a Library.

Interesting. I wasn't aware of the pre-library bonus, which will certainly tip things more in favor of farming. I like it from a realism perspective: after a certain time, more of the population ought to be working in cities as specialists.

Edit: This may change your farm vs. trading post analysis in gold cities too: having merchant specialists supported by farms may be more efficient than having trading posts.

I imagine it would be produced in every well developed city of the desired Type though. (ie Culture/Science/Gold/Production) based on the presence of the specialists.

Possibly. But for comparison, note that the +25% GPP bonus is the same as the Roman Forum in Civ IV. It's not at all exact, since I imagine that GPP will be global now (making it much more useful to have GPP from multiple cities), but that certainly wasn't an every-city build in Civ IV (or, at least not because of the extra GPP).

The value of the Garden ultimately comes down to: 1) how much sooner will you get the GPs and 2) how many more of them will you get?

Taking the Great Scientist's Academy (+5 science tile) as an example, getting it a few turns earlier probably won't recoup the investment in gpt (especially when you consider that you could have two libraries in other cities for the same gpt cost), so I'd say that the Garden will be of limited early-game use (unless you want it for the culture specialist, which may be hard to get otherwise in the early game). Assuming that the GP costs increase each time you get one as in Civ IV, consideration (2) is likely to be the more important one in the long run, as Civs without lots of Gardens may just stop getting GPs altogether after a certain point.

I imagine that it'll boil down to how useful GP are for your strategy in a given game. If you're going for lots of GP, it could definitely change overall specialization goals. E.g., a culture city with a lot of food is probably going to run out of artist specialization slots, so it may have to build some science/gold/etc. infrastructure too and rebrand itself as a "specialist city."

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Interesting. I wasn't aware of the pre-library bonus, which will certainly tip things more in favor of farming. I like it from a realism perspective: after a certain time, more of the population ought to be working in cities as specialists.

Edit: This may change your farm vs. trading post analysis in gold cities too: having merchant specialists supported by farms may be more efficient than having trading posts.

Well that would be my thought.. with the Freedom bonuses at least, Farm->Specialist should probably be the best use of a tile IF there are specialist slots available of the type you want

Possibly. But for comparison, note that the +25% GPP bonus is the same as the Roman Forum in Civ IV. It's not at all exact, since I imagine that GPP will be global now (making it much more useful to have GPP from multiple cities), but that certainly wasn't an every-city build in Civ IV (or, at least not because of the extra GPP).

well if GPP Are global then that Definitely changes the balance

It also means your GPPool can become 'polluted' easy (it looks like each type of GPP are accumulated separately, but if producing one of one type increases the cost of ALL types, then there will be that 'pollution' problem

Gardens will let you 'purify' the GPPool by ensuring that you get extra point towards the type you want.

The value of the Garden ultimately comes down to: 1) how much sooner will you get the GPs and 2) how many more of them will you get?

Taking the Great Scientist's Academy (+5 science tile) as an example, getting it a few turns earlier probably won't recoup the investment in gpt (especially when you consider that you could have two libraries in other cities for the same gpt cost), so I'd say that the Garden will be of limited early-game use (unless you want it for the culture specialist, which may be hard to get otherwise in the early game). Assuming that the GP costs increase each time you get one as in Civ IV, consideration (2) is likely to be the more important one in the long run, as Civs without lots of Gardens may just stop getting GPs altogether after a certain point.

I imagine that it'll boil down to how useful GP are for your strategy in a given game. If you're going for lots of GP, it could definitely change overall specialization goals. E.g., a culture city with a lot of food is probably going to run out of artist specialization slots, so it may have to build some science/gold/etc. infrastructure too and rebrand itself as a "specialist city."

Well I think the Garden will be most useful in enhancing rather than 'becoming a specialist city'.

 

[Marcin388]

I hope that there will be war specialized cities.
It was so stupid seeing Spartans complaining about the war and saying that it isn't good for anything, damn!! It supposed to be a war city, I was building all military buildings in it, but they still were complaining.

 

[Lyoncet]

It looks unlikely that that scenario will crop up again, since unhappiness is global now. "War-specialized" will, for all intents and purposes, probably just mean "hammer city with military buildings." Adding in an anti-war-weariness factor seems redundant.

 

[SuperSmash5]

I see three major types of cities developing:

1. Science/Culture/Specialist Cities
Why science culture and specialists all in one? Because they go together. These would be the core cities of the empire. They would require rivers for the extra food not only to produce science bonuses but to run science and cultural specialists. Jungles aren't bad to have but the best tiles would be floodplains or grasslands on rivers. Capitals would likely develop into these kind of cities and they would make up your "core" cities that form the economic backbone of your empire. Critical buildings would be Libraries, Granaries, Gardens, Temples, Monasteries, Universities, Watermills etc.

2. Production/Military Cities
As you would imagine, these cities would produce military units. They would be best founded near strategic resources and near hills and forests. They would be much smaller than culture cities and would have just enough food to work strategic resource improvements and mines. Of course, these cities would be best placed between your core cities, and other civilizations. Since you'd be working few tiles, you'd be able to keep a large forested area as a solid line of defense. Combined with the affinity for creating units, production cities would be almost impenetrable. Critical Buildings would be Granaries, Windmills, Barracks, Forges, Stables, Walls, Armories, Harbors (if coastal), Windmills, Factories etc.

3. Gold Cities
Gold cities would focus on producing gold. To be honest, I don't really have a very good gauge of just how important gold will be. Anyway, gold cities would be best formed on the COAST. Why? So they don't take away the rivers from the precious culture cities. I believe the latter will be more important. Coastal tiles aren't complete crap since there aren't 8 commerce towns anymore. They have the added benefits of not taking up green tiles from other cities and not needing to be improved. Also, the coast has one more benefit: seafood. Food surplus from seafood would allow the cities to be able to make use of the merchant specialists. Critical buildings would be Lighthouses, Markets, Harbors, Banks, Stock Exchanges, Mint(if gold/silver are present) etc.


Food resources would of course be important for every city. Wine and Incense would obviously make better culture cities. Gold and Silver would make better gold cities. Ideal city specialization would be impossible. There's also the happiness city idea which could be viable but that remains to be seen.


Obviously these are just my thoughts on what I've seen so far. We haven't completely seen how Social Policies would affect improvement yields, or even what most of the buildings actually do. There is also probably a lot of stuff that we already know that I never bothered to properly research.

But screw that, speculation is fun and so are incomplete assumptions and conclusions.

 

[yanner39]

1 Citizen->1 Beaker without a Library (primary basic source of science), 1.5 beakers With a Library.

so 1 Food+0.5 Happiness->0.75 base beakers (wth a Library)

What do you mean by this?