1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Is this a good idea?

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Strategy & Tips' started by Ringo Kid, Sep 4, 2005.

  1. Ringo Kid

    Ringo Kid Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    536
    I tried something I had'nt thought of before today. I had a bunch of cities on a far away continent that were almost , but not entirely corrupt. I had them build workers, then sold the workers to other civs for cash. I also razed some cities during a war, and I sold those workers too. I noticed, by the way, that the AI would pay more for them one at a time than in bunches.

    Question is , does that make sense, Or would I get more cash by just setting the semi-useless corrupt cities to wealth. Maybe it would be a good idea to sell your native workers that cost you upkeep, once you have developed all your productive land anyway. I always build lots and lots of workers because I think its worth it to get your territory producing sooner rather than later. What do you think?
     
  2. TimBentley

    TimBentley Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,898
    Location:
    Troy, MI
    I would rather merge the native workers into cities and keep the slave workers (even if the land is fully railroaded and developed, you'll still have to deal with pollution if you build hospitals or factories).

    Another way to deal with corrupt cities is to irrigate all their terrain and get as many specialists as you can. I usually have them build artillery, workers, or wealth, depending on whether they will produce the artillery in time and if I need the workers.
     
  3. Heroes

    Heroes Heroes of Might and Magic

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    869
    I think producing wealth is not good in most situations. Cash rush costs 4 gold for 1 shield, and wealth makes 1 gold for 2 shields (that's after economics, 1:4 before that). OTOH, disbanding units makes 1 shields out from 4 shields. If you do cash rush at some time (that's almost for sure), you see that's a waste. It's better to produce units and disband them somewhere.
     
  4. Choffy

    Choffy One more turn

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    Continents 80% water
    I think you still need to pay to support slave worker.
    So if you have more units than supported by your number of cites / politicalregim then you should not give workers. Else it is up to you. I prefer to add my useless workers to my core cities to increase it to 12 or above.
     
  5. eldar

    eldar ChiefTank

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,244
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, PA
    Slaves (and any other captured units) have no unit support, ever.
     
  6. Ringo Kid

    Ringo Kid Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    536
    Thanks for the replies. And I want to clarify I am talking about selling extra workers, not selling off workers that I have work for.
    If your city can produce a worker every three turns, that you can sell for 30 gold, isnt that more gold that you would get from wealth? Or would taxmen give you more than that?
     
  7. WackenOpenAir

    WackenOpenAir Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,196
    Location:
    Eindhoven, the Netherlands
    It is not only wealth you compare.

    Wealth turns that 1 shield in 1 gold.
    That worker does not only cost you 10 shields, it also costs you 10 food. If you set your city on wealth, you can stop a citizen from working and let him eat that food while he is scientist. In this case, you get 30 science and 10 gold in those 10 turns.

    In some cases you might want to actually help your opponents, this can either be when you want them to help your research for a fast space game, but it can also be when you are soon to have a superior army and you would like your oponent to build some more roads for your army to use for a faster conquest.
    In most cases though, i do not prefer to strengthen my oponents and therefore do not prefer to get them extra workers. Worker shortage is one of the AI weaknesses, and those workers are well worth the gold for them.
    Also, you are an extraordinary player if you have so many workers that you can't use them yourself. I have not seen many people who build enough workers at all.

    And my oppinion about the side topics mentioned here:
    -Wealth is good for those cities that only produce 1 shield.
    -The decision to join up your own workers and to keep the slaves around is not an abvious and clearcut choise as many people seem to think. They work half speed, and depending on the situation, it could be better to just pay the upkeep for your real workers and join 2 workers to your cities for more city growth (if the original civ no longer exists to culturally convert your cities) Sometimes you may be below your unit upkeep and the real workers wont even actually cost you money. So think about this instead of blindly keeping those upkeep free workers.
     

Share This Page