Well, yeah. Cos it is smaller. But there is this whole second tree that you have ignored... Examples please. Agree with this ^. I'm not saying that there are no tactical considerations in IV. If you read what I write properly, you can see that I am actually dispelling the notion that 1UPT brings way more tactics with it, when we really get down to it. The thing is that -what we call- tactics in any turn based game is going to work very differently to tactics in real life, as the clock does not stop ticking in the latter; yet is always stopped in the former. So when Balkans says that these decisions have become tactical rather than strategic...that comparison doesn't really hold up. We have bastardised the meaning of those two terms. Sure WW is comparable. It is something you have to guesstimate off of experience. I mean sure, you could screenshot the game and measure the height of Mario's jump (assuming you're good enough to catch him at the apex of his jump); but knowing that exact figure will only help you more than your gut instinct, if you have a ruler out and often pause the game to measure the height of various obstacles etc. And who wants to play a game that way? It isn't how the game is intended to be played! In both cases we are not supposed to calculate using exactness. We are supposed to weigh up the pros and cons from past experience and act accordingly. If we get it wrong, that gets added to our experience. It seems coherent to me. Civ could be called a god game. But it isn't Populous. We role play as the -undying eternal lol- leader of our nation. Not as a god who is all knowing. This isn't intellectually rude Though it may be frustrating if you struggle to effectively counter my points. Maybe it would be okay to hide the food/growth and research costs. I wouldn't do that myself, as that has always been known in Civ (though in a video where Soren talks about what he wanted to put into IV initially they almost took it in a real time direction that could have looked more like this) whereas something like WW hasn't consistently been spelled out through out the series (and hasn't even been in the whole series). Maybe this is something that younger players expect... People who are used to being able to look into the game code and mod it can find out anything -almost-, if they really want too. Maybe the idea of some game mechanics being alluded to, but not spelled out is an old school idea. To me it is what the devs want it to be. You can make a case to them that something should be known, or shouldn't be; but they have made the call on what is presented to you directly, and what is not. I don't see that I should have the formula for WW any more than I should know where hostile units are in the FOW. It certainly isn't thematic to me that I should know. Why do you long for such a dry certain mathematical take on everything? The immersive nature at having to guess some things, and develop hunches as a result is reason enough to me.