Do you use the build governor?

[jkp1187]

Okay I'll probably go with:

Rush only if:
1) It's an essential growth enhancing build. By default these are Workboat, Granary, Lighthouse.
2) Rush only if the gold is surplus and above 15x that in the coffers - ie if it costs 100g to rush, you must have 1600g...

They might still siphon off some cash you wanted to rush a wonder but at that rate they shouldn't be stealing any reserved for unit upgrades. Often later in the game I just build up like 4000 cash in reserves and I wouldn't really mind if the governors get their grubby paws in that because it's pretty much there for rushing stuff and upgrades.

Blake,

I don't know if you were planning to mess with the actual interface or not, but is it possible/advisable to create a "spend cash/whip" check box? That way, the user could tell the governor whether or not he could rush items?

I have *never* used the governor as is (well, maybe once when the game first came out just to see,) but I might be interested in trying it out -- especially for marginal cities in games where I'm playing on a standard or larger map.

 

[Chuggi]

I never touch the Governor option. I prefer to have full control of my production.

Same ^

I usually go for libaries and temples first, then univercities etc.

Would never use the auto governor

 

[HardCoder]

Is the coal plant thing a problem with the AI building coal plants or not building coal plants? I always build coal plants because they are the best power structure unless you can build a hydro plant and even if hydro plants are just around the corner the coal plant will probably still pay for itself since they are simply really good value and mean the hydro plant gets built quicker. This isn't so true for Vanilla but in Warlords the fact that 100% of production multipliers go to build Wealth/Research means that coal plants pay off massively whatever you are doing with the city.

Why not make the decision to build a coal plant based on the health (and of course production) of the city?

 

[Bushface]

I never use "automate production" and never shall. Choosing what to build, or train, is to me an essential aspect of the game, and I base my decisions on the current situation. Sometimes I deem it better, for example, to train a Missionary to send to a city which really needs the +25% religious production bonus, rather than build something, and I feel certain that I would at times overlook such possibilities if production switched seamlessly from one building to another: that would require me to check the Event Log each turn, and I might well not spot my opportunity.
Furthermore, I often find that in one, some, or even many of my cities that there is simply nothing worth building. Health and happiness are both well positive, no need for Colosseum or Hospital, so make a unit (if needed) or Wealth or Research - and how would you weight such a choice ?
In other words, I see no need for production automation to be available to a human player, but obviously there is need for it for the computer-controlled adversaries. And I hope they go on getting it wrong !

 

[jeff744]

i use it only because i HATE micro-managing (did it for a while in civ3, and 4 but decided that i hated micro-management), i like to look at the big picture and spend my time making invasion and defence strategies, but i'll take control of cities everynow and then to make sure that the things i want done get done

but also usually i'm just screwing around with the things, and moving around mass armies to points that are essential to a invasion, and first strike (taking out oil, aluminum, iron, uranium, and bombing the crap out of cities)

 

[khumak]

The build governor, aka "Train useless settlers and military units".

Does anyone use it?

The reason I ask is I'm thinking, as part of the better AI mod, of usurping the build governor so instead of doing what he currently does, he instead automatically develops the city - basically by build buildings - no units, no wonders, just buildings followed by build Research or Wealth. In other words you can turn it on if you never want to hear another peep out of the city, or if you want the city built up so you can come back later and set it to infinite build units or something.

I'm curious if ANYONE uses it as it is?

That's an interesting idea. I currently don't use the brain dead governor for builds at all but I do use the worker priority buttons (food/hammers/commerce/no growth/etc). I think having the governor change to build infrastructure and no units would be nice for large games where you really don't care that 10 of your newly conquered cities just finished building their theatre...

 

[Specialk1988]

I wasnt even aware that there was a governer feature....tho Ill never use it anyway

 

[paperchase417]

I have however recently used the buttons that tell your city to focus production on wealth, food, research, or well production. They are alright if you dont want to keep shifting them around manually. I tend to emphasize food in the early game, then once a city hits ten or twelve or so, I change to production. Then war time, and after war I'm usually in deficit and switch off to wealth. and towards then end I'll switch it to research to sprint through then end game techs.

 

[Bushface]

Fortunately, the "focus" controls are quite separate from the "automate production" feature that is Blake's current concern, and with which I wish him luck. Yes, I sometimes use focussing, but what the city is actually making I like to keep firmly under my own control. If I want to build a minor Wonder in a city with poor production rather than in a powerful one, then that's my choice and I don't want the AI sticking its oar in.
But clearly there has to be some system controlling what the AI civs produce, and currently (in v2.08, no mods) some strange selections are made. For example, I had a rival civ down to one city with one newly-produced defender, which it followed by starting to build a University which would take many turns. Not, I feel, the strongest line of defence. And I've just had a case when my last rival, having lost his Oil, turned out about a dozen Frigates to face, briefly, my Destroyers and Battleships. Yamato syndrome ? In both these examples the enemy civ was on the brink of defeat, obviously: but does this influence its decisions, and if so shouldn't they be better ones ?

 

[khumak]

I usually load up my newly conquered cities with a build que similar to what Blake put in the auto governor except that I always either cash rush or pop rush a Theatre first.

 

[Doomed_UK]

Post repeated here in the hope blake notices it

Could you please remove the drydock (or whatever it is called) from the list of govenor buildings to build.

Could you add in bunker and jail if the city can build them quickly (say less then 5 turns)

 

[Jevggis]

I didn't even know that something like that exists :')

 

[Quagga]

Although it doesn't have any negative health consequences, auto-building Stables is questionable. I'd prefer that build be moved way, way down in the build sequence or left out entirely.

I have cities captured in the modern era that could be building anything -- even wealth -- that would be preferable to wasting several turns on building a Stable. Maybe this happens because I haven't built the tech that officially obsoletes Stables (Rocketry?), but I stop building mounted once I have Infantry and certainly once I have Tanks.