Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

The bug with Slavery where you would get extra hammers up to the Civ4 1.61 patch has been fixed with Warlords. So in some respects, yes, Slavery is less powerful than you might have been used to. However, it's still quite a decent tool if used effectively.

Generally, it is best to whip at least 2 population with any pop-rush. This is because you receive 1 unhappy citizen for 10 turns in the city regardless of the number of population that you whip. Thus, whipping only 1 population is a rather inefficient way of whipping if you are doing it a lot, since you are gathering at least twice the unhappiness than you would otherwise get if you were whipping 2 or more population at once, and thus your city will probably become very unhappy quite quickly.
 
Asking anyone here, :confused: Is there such a bonus?
yes :D

ho, you want more information?
you get the following message when someone circles the globe :
" X circumnavigated the globe first"
civilization X's ships get +1 movement after that. All ships get it, existing or yet to build, work boats or battleships.

Small points about this :
It's map dependant =
- if the map doesn't wrap (like great plains, I believe), there is no such bonus.
- if the map wraps north /south as well as east/west (fantastic realms), you need to circumnavigate in both direction to get the bonus (never tested, pure assumption)

It's not about really navigating = it's just about being the first to have a map with one tile in each column (usual horizontally wrapping map). So you can be the first to circumnavigate without even having a boat, by buying maps from more than 1 neighbour.
 
okay I have another question. Once again, monarch/epic. I took a 6 month break or so, and I want to know if slavery is still super strong, and how best to use it. I usually just wait until it only costs 1 pop, and unhappy for 15 turns. It doesn't seem to be so gamebreakingly important like everyone says it is though.

I agree with Lord Parkin. It is generally accepted that it is better to whip two or more population points. As you play at epic speed, the unhappiness lasts for 15 turns. He is also right that the removal of a bug associated with the hammers you get from whipping has slightly decreased its efficiency when you were abusing the bug before. The removal of the bug doesn't have a big effect if you were unaware of the bug and weren't abusing it.

How to whip the most efficiently:
1) Whip just before a city is about to grow into unhappiness.
Why? Because a size 6 city with a 46/48 foodbox changes into a size 4 city with a 46/42 foodbox if you whip 2 citizens. So you'll get a nice food overflow. Upto that moment you were using the maximum number of citizens the city could maintain within the happiness cap which is efficient. It is less efficient to whip after getting unhappy because you won't get the food overflow. It is less efficient to whip earlier because you won't use the maximum number of citizens as long as possible.

2) Whip 2 (or more) citizens each time.
Why? Because it takes time for the unhappiness to wear off (15 turns at epic speed) and during that time, your city can regrow. If you only whip one citizen, then you'll regrow quickly and have 1 unhappy citizen due to whipping unhappiness. If you whip two or more, then the unhappiness will wear off while regrowing. If you whip 2 citizens at the moment that I mentioned in the post above, then you will actually only be 1 pop under the old happy cap after 1 turn and because of the happiness penalty of whipping, you're at the happy cap. Each whipped citizen will give you 45 base hammers which are effected by the production bonusses in the city.
Usually it is less efficient to whip more than 2 citizens. The reason is that it takes too long to regrow upto the old happiness cap. However, if the city is growing quickly (large food surplus + granary), then it can be more efficient to whip more than 2 citizens.

3) Use a granary in cities where you whip.
Why? It allows you to regrow upto the old happiness cap more quickly and thus is more efficient.
Whipping with a granary allows an efficient conversion of food into hammers.
For instance: Your city with granary is size 4, foodbox almost full and decides to whip a worker. It takes 44 food to get back into the city at size 4 with an almost full foodbox, but you get 90 hammers now. Note that you aren't using one citizen for 15 turns.

4) Whip units like workers and settlers.
Why? If you build them, then you're converting 1 food into 1 hammer. If you whip them with a granary, then you have a better conversion factor as you can see above in point three.


People who are crazy about whipping will often mention the very good food-hammer conversion factor. They often don't seem to realize that you're not using a tile for 15 turns. If a city can't regrow quickly enough, then you're losing a tile for more than 15 turns. If a city doesn't have a granary, then the food-hammer conversion that is achieved by whipping isn't that great if you consider that you're losing a tile for 15 or more turns.

Whipping is good and it is the only way to use the extra food that cities are producing while they are getting near their happiness cap. But you have to know when to use it. It is absolutely horrible to use a 4 citizen poprush in a size 8 city which only grows at 2 food per turn and doesn't have a granary.

You can only whip half the citizens of a city. If the building/unit is more expensive than the hammers provided by those citizens, then you can't whip. Whipping small and great wonders is usually very inefficient. You get less hammers for each citizen when whipping these things.
Whipping can get you some things which you'd rather have now than later. For instance a defending unit in a city that is under attack or a granary in a city that has to grow a lot or a lighthouse in a city that will use lots of coastal tiles. Don't whip things without any hammers invested in them (during the first turn of construction). You will get only 2/3 of the hammers from each whipped citizen in that case (30 per pop at epic speed).

Good luck whipping and welcome back to civ!
 
very good points about whipping from RJ.
Exception : GT city. Whipping (and better : drafting) from the globe city is really powerful and should not be neglected.
If you have 4 or more good food sources (= 5 or more food per tile), you can basically draft every turn or whip every other turn (to avoid the penalty from whipping without invested hammers).

I'm a slaver, and can tell you this :
- working unimproved (or just low output tiles) is not good.
- having unhappies is not good

To get rid of unhappies or unproductive (working 2F tiles or lower), nothing beats the whip.

My favourite move : whipping 8 universities 2 turns after education is in. Sure it takes 5 pop points. But at least you won't have unhappiness problems and you can start oxford a lot sooner this way :).
 
My favourite move : whipping 8 universities 2 turns after education is in. Sure it takes 5 pop points. But at least you won't have unhappiness problems and you can start oxford a lot sooner this way :).

Just the thought of doing that it so horrible its beyond my comprehension, not the actual whipping (its only a game after all), but whipping away 40 population to improve science output by 25% in each city. I shudder to think how much science you're actually losing, just to erm??? make more science???

Sorry this isn't anything personal, but I've been doing some analysis of whipping myself, and as RJ said, its what those whipped folks could have been doing while the city grows back. And it isn't just the grow back, its also the potential for extra growth on top of an unwhipped population. Also there's the possibility of running caste system / slavery at that time of the game, and theoretically losing 40 scientists (unlikely but just about possible).

Don't get me wrong, whipping is incredibly useful especially early on, but when hereditary rule is an option, unhappiness doesnt need to exist anymore, and then its all about the above decisions.

Its an incredibly complicated subject, but slavery really isn't the total complete one and only strategy that some people think it is.
 
I knew i wasn't making proper use of slavery. Many times I have one of those cities with say a rice and pig or crab and corn, and my pop grows back in like 2 turns, so I have to wait another 13 turns before I whip again. And then sometimes I can whip, but I have been waiting until it only costs me 1 pop, so by the time I can, the forge/library/axeman or whatever will be done in 4 turns or so anyways. Thanks for the input.
 
Just the thought of doing that it so horrible its beyond my comprehension, not the actual whipping (its only a game after all), but whipping away 40 population to improve science output by 25% in each city. I shudder to think how much science you're actually losing, just to erm??? make more science???

Sorry this isn't anything personal, but I've been doing some analysis of whipping myself, and as RJ said, its what those whipped folks could have been doing while the city grows back. And it isn't just the grow back, its also the potential for extra growth on top of an unwhipped population. Also there's the possibility of running caste system / slavery at that time of the game, and theoretically losing 40 scientists (unlikely but just about possible).

Don't get me wrong, whipping is incredibly useful especially early on, but when hereditary rule is an option, unhappiness doesnt need to exist anymore, and then its all about the above decisions.

Its an incredibly complicated subject, but slavery really isn't the total complete one and only strategy that some people think it is.

did I say it was a winning move? ;)
It's just the fastest way to get oxford (and I said 8 unis, but it's often just 6, if that is better for you).
Those commerce cities get whipped 3 times mostly in this situation :
- a granary early on
- a library later
- a university at this point

I know people whipping every 10 turns for 2 pops, and that's a lot more :p.
 
How "normal" are wars in Civ4 games? I'm in year AD-1230 and so far no sign of a war anywhere yet... This is using latest build of Better AI and playing on Chieftain difficulty
 
How "normal" are wars in Civ4 games? I'm in year AD-1230 and so far no sign of a war anywhere yet... This is using latest build of Better AI and playing on Chieftain difficulty

can't say for better AI, but here are some basic trigger pulling facts :
- you can attack whenever you want (duh!)
- some AIs are likely to attack for every opportunity, others won't attack whatever the situation
- border tension/lacking expansion possibilities is a real trigger. At chieftain, it's very likely expansion is not yet over :rolleyes:
- who hates who? some AIs are very touchy on some subjects, for some of them it only touches the human player (demands are only directed to the player), for others (religions) it may be enough of a reason to attack another AI
- power graph : if noone is really on top, or if the top guy is a peaceful guy, it's very unlikely any war starts. That + the massive upgrade discount the AI gets make some techs very likely to trigger a war. However stupid it is, most of those techs are "defensive" :lol:. Let's say AI 1 discovers feudalism. It upgrades all it's archers to LBs and sees itself as very powerful. Attack!
- weak cities : some AIs will go for the low hanging fruit, if there is one.
...
 
Well so far the one on top of the graph is me (still haven't discovered the other continent). But I don't have that much military to start taking over people just yet I think. Celt guy wont talk to me but he is not close to me either so I don't think he can start war with me (he is weakest so far).
 
Well so far the one on top of the graph is me (still haven't discovered the other continent). But I don't have that much military to start taking over people just yet I think. Celt guy wont talk to me but he is not close to me either so I don't think he can start war with me (he is weakest so far).

If you want war, build units and attack ;).
No need to have an overwhelming army. Just enough to take a city or 2 and build reinforcements while you do so.
 
How "normal" are wars in Civ4 games? I'm in year AD-1230 and so far no sign of a war anywhere yet... This is using latest build of Better AI and playing on Chieftain difficulty

If you want a game with more wars, then you should use the 'aggressive AI' setting in the game setup. For the rest, I agree with Cabert. It is very dependant on some factors which differ from one game to the next:

-closeness of borders
-spread of religions. Two civilizations bordering eachother with different religions are likely to go to war at some time. Two civilizations with the same religion are unlikely to go to war
-number of civilizations: More civilizations, more wars
-gamespeed setting: A slower game (epic, marathon) allows for more turns in which a war could start
-leader personality
-differences in power (this is NOT the number of points of the civilization, but their strength in the power graph (F9)).
-lack of expansion possibilities
-etc.
 
Of course, notching up the difficulty level will usually also tend to have the effect of making wars more common. But you may not wish to do that at this stage. :)
 
is there any way to play OCC with AIs can have max of 1 city as well?
 
OK, here's a couple of things I've learned:

- producing a settler right out of the box is probably not the best idea.
- slavery is useful in producing certain things
(when and when allowed is still not 100% clear)
- chopping forrests adds to your cities - especailly early on.
(but, if I build a farm - on a forrest - does that have the same effect?)
- I understand the "cross" that encompases a city.


I still don't think I understand hammers, coins and food. I know it is good to build a city near those items. So, a little bit of expanded explanation on those would be nice.

Farms - how many? - how close to the city?
Mines - I tend to build a lot of them - is there profit in that?
Windmills - later, you can build windmills in the same place that you can build mines - is there any profit in that?

Cities - on the cross thought. You can build cities as long as they are more than 2 squares away from other cities. But should you? Their crosses will overlap. Do they share the resources? Or would a better choice be to build them so thier crosses touh, but do not overlap.

I understand that there are no absolutes. I'm just looking for a couple of general thoughts to get a little better - It's kind of hard to tell how good I am doing when it takes SO long to play a game. Plus, I can generally win - although it's frequently a time victory. I have dominated a couple of times, but that involved some luck.
 
I'm also curious about the windmill vs mine and watermill vs town debate.

I usually do mines because it seems that they find new resources pretty quickly, which then outweigh the windmill's bonuses.

As for towns vs watermills, I'm trying watermills now, since they produce extra food and an additional hammer vs. the town. I'm out 3 commerce, but I think it's justified...
 
OK, here's a couple of things I've learned:

- producing a settler right out of the box is probably not the best idea.
- slavery is useful in producing certain things
(when and when allowed is still not 100% clear)
- chopping forrests adds to your cities - especailly early on.
(but, if I build a farm - on a forrest - does that have the same effect?)
- I understand the "cross" that encompases a city.


I still don't think I understand hammers, coins and food. I know it is good to build a city near those items. So, a little bit of expanded explanation on those would be nice.

Farms - how many? - how close to the city?
Mines - I tend to build a lot of them - is there profit in that?
Windmills - later, you can build windmills in the same place that you can build mines - is there any profit in that?

Cities - on the cross thought. You can build cities as long as they are more than 2 squares away from other cities. But should you? Their crosses will overlap. Do they share the resources? Or would a better choice be to build them so thier crosses touh, but do not overlap.

I understand that there are no absolutes. I'm just looking for a couple of general thoughts to get a little better - It's kind of hard to tell how good I am doing when it takes SO long to play a game. Plus, I can generally win - although it's frequently a time victory. I have dominated a couple of times, but that involved some luck.

Worker is ussually better as first build, when you start with mining. Research bronzeworking for early chopping of settler. for more starting strategies read in the strategy forums.
If you form over forests it will count as chopping when the farm is finished.
Whipping, when to do it or not is best learned by experience. Its best to whip 2 pop most of the time. it will have time to grow back while unhappynis wares of.
Farms, how many you need depends on the total amount of food you have. Ussually you want as many farms as you need to work all tiles. In the beginning you can only farm near freswater. Rivers, oassis. Without a food resource, 1 or 2 farms will help you grow the city more quickly, and provide growth for whipping. If you want to run specialists you need more farms to provide for the food specialists need. if the city has a lot of mines you will of course need more farms in order to have enough food to work the mines.
Mines will give you hammers. In the beginning nothing will give as many hammers as mines. iron and copper resources not taken into accaunt.
Further each mine will have a small chance each turn of spawnig a resource, while bieng worked. Later Windmills with the proper techs will give besides the 1food bonus, the same amount of hammers as grassland mines. But with the proper tech also commerce.
Commerce, (coins) are diveded in research, gold and culture with drama. Commerce is essential (if your not running a SE) for generating beakers (research) and gold. How much of each it will generate depends on where you put the sliders. The best way of generating commerce is cottaging. Rivertiles give extra commerce. Windmills give commerce and food late game, Thats why most people will change tose mines to windmills. Late game that extra commerce and food might let you run a specialist or grow you city large enough to work all tiles in its BFC.
Overlapping can be good if food is rare. You can then swap the food resource to control growth of both citys by switching wich city works the food. They same is true if your low on production, sharing mines, will help both cities build things by alternating.If it wiht overlap you can make better cities than without overlap (creating cities with a lot of unworkable tiles) you should do it. Try games with overlap, and see how it plays out.
 
Top Bottom