Power Rating vs. Power Graph

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Does anybody know if the power rating (what is told to you by your (F3) advisor) uses the exact same formula for computation as the power graph?

Andu covered the power graph in the War Academy and said that military units play NO part in it, but in the discussion thread that followed it (about 17 posts down), it appears that Andu and Vladmir say that military units DO matter for the power rating.

Any ideas which is correct?


BTW, this all started in a GOTM thread but I figured we might get more answers here.

------------------
I always wanted to be a professional procrastinator, but I just never got around to it.

 

[starlifter]

Picking up where we left off in our GOTM thread, I have gone back and read Andu's and Vladimir's #17 and #18 posts. They are wrong, at least for Civ II MGE.

From their comments, it sounded like they were sort of hedging on the answer.

The real source of confusion is the unfortunate choice of the word "power" by the game creators; most players associate "power" with military force. But that is not the context in the PR and PG. It is the civilization's power as measured in the intrinsic economic, scientific, and population capability of the civ. This is pretty much in keeping with Sid's original view that Civ is not a wargame, but war is a possible consequence. As such, the PR & PG don't reflect military might, but civilization might.

In some quick tests yesterday to double check, when I added 100 archers at a time (400 BC) when total citizens were about 15-20 for each of the 7 civs (and each civ had about 10 units), my Power Rating and Power Graph stayed moderate for the next 5 turns of the test. The Power Graph did not change at all.

Also in 400 BC, I added 100 stealth bombers. Likewise, no change in the PR or PG (tested for 5 more turns... no change).

While this is not exhastive, it just re-confirms for me what I learned by running more tests two years ago.

If anyone knows of contradictory information about units having no effect on the PR & PG (for certain), please feel free to share it.

 

[SlowwHand]

The Power Graph puts too much emphasis on population.
A large population doesn't equal power.

This is why, if you go to the Zone for instance, you may see offers to play a "League" game or "Ladder" game until 1.A.D.
Power graph decides.
First thing, a run by the individual for Pyramids and it's just about a done deal.
If you're going to play until a fixed year, be adamant that Pyramids are not to be built.

Pyramids and Dips. Over valued in II.

------------------
It's In The Way That You Use It
Tuatha De Danann Tribe
ICQ 51553293

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

That's what I'm trying to find out. I know the power graph focuses on population and doesn't take into account military strength, but does the power rating (given by the (F3) foreign minister) also exclude military strength?

I have seen threads here and on Polyton that say that military is taken into account for the rating, but starlifters test says otherwise.

------------------
Remember the golden rule, he with the most gold rules.

 

[SlowwHand]

F3 is strictly military related.
To get the best idea, go to World, Demographics.

------------------
It's In The Way That You Use It
Tuatha De Danann Tribe
ICQ 51553293

 

[Andu Indorin]

Subsequent to my original post, where I suggested that military units are included in a Power Rating; I've since discovered that they are not. (And I still find that strange.)

The Power Rating is based on the same factors as illustrated in the Power Graph. However, the Power Rating is calculated every other turn; while the Power Graph records changes (at Deity Level, Classic) every four turns (the OEDO years).

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Originally posted by Andu Indorin:
Subsequent to my original post, where I suggested that military units are included in a Power Rating; I've since discovered that they are not. (And I still find that strange.)

I find that strange also. It seems very stupid to not count something that can very easily change the tide of the game so quickly.

I found the spot on Polyton where they talked about it and they also thought it counted military units.

Oh well... The power graph and power rating are, for the most part, worthless then. Just because a Civ is larger, it doesn't mean they are better and that is what is measures, size.

------------------
Remember the golden rule, he with the most gold rules.

 

[starlifter]

The Power Rating is based on the same factors as illustrated in the Power Graph. However, the Power Rating is calculated every other turn; while the Power Graph records changes (at Deity Level, Classic) every four turns (the OEDO years).

That's interesting to know! I hadn't looked into the pattern, but knew it was not every turn, but knew if I test for 5 turns, it always seemed to "update" everything

.

BTW, that was an excellent piece of work and documentation of the whole "Power Graph" mystery, Andu!

 

[Morgasshk]

I always thought that the power rating - You are talking about Moderate, Strong, Supreme and all that aren't you??? I thougt that was based upon you units attack points multiplied by ammount of units... Because many a time when I have leo's lab and have about 30 units and they get upgraded from dragoons to cavalry and other civs have 50/60 units and I'm moderate first, after my units get the autoupgrade done on them I become Supreme... Which Is what makes me think It would be the Atack points counting towards the power ratings...

Morgasshk

 

[starlifter]

posted July 16, 2001 12:12 AM
I always thought that the power rating - You are talking about Moderate, Strong, Supreme and all that aren't you???

Yes, that's what we're talking about. I have not ever been able to show a change in the PR or the PG by increasing the military power of any nation, even when I give hundreds battleships, tanks, and stealth bomber to a BC Civ using Cheat Mode.

If anyone has actual proof in the form of controlled tests that the PR increases with Mil Units, please post it, along with the version of Civ II you used. In Civ II MGE, military power just flat does not affect the PR at all, that I have ever observed in tests. Nada. Zip. Zilch.

 

[Håkon]

The power rating might change with military units, but not too much. Reason being that I usually are Supreme - even though my cities are defended with one Phalanx in AD 1400 and I have no other military units (okay, I know that I'm a horrible player). I have Civ II Fantastic Worlds.

SlowwHand said:
A large population doesn't equal power...

In Civ, it does. I'll grant you. You are stronger with forty cities than with thirty. But a 35 size city is no better than a 21 size city, for fairly obvious reasons (only trade increases in a 35 city, no shields and wheat).

------------------
What's wrong with Bodø/Glimt?

 

[starlifter]

But a 35 size city is no better than a 21 size city, for fairly obvious reasons (only trade increases in a 35 city, no shields and wheat).

From size 21 to 35, you only add additional citizens, which do not affect trade because there can be no available land for them to control. They can be used to gold, science, or luxuries, however. But at size 37, additional citizens can only be used for luxuries, and not even science or taxes

.