Quick Settler Production

[BOSS NASTi]

@Boss Nasti

I haven't crunched the numbers exactly, but a rough approximation is that it costs twice as much food to grow from population 1 to population 2 as it does to grow from population 2 to population 3.

A settler costs 20 production and 1 population (under Republic obviously).

The food cost of 1 population is approximately half as much if you work at population 1 and 2 as opposed to working at population 2 and 3. This is a significant savings. So by growing to population 3 you are (approximately) doubling the food cost of the settler. The tradeoff is that you get some turns where you can work three tiles. This sounds like a great deal, but in a standard early situation where you have only tiles yielding two food and two production available, the few extra turns on extra tiles is mitigated by the increased food cost of each settler.

Even in situations where operating at population 2-3 would show slight long term improvements over operating at population 1-2, the short term of getting the first couple of settlers out quicker becomes a major consideration.

What I have found to be by far the most effective method for farming settlers out of a city is the following:

1. Work a food and hammer tile until I am 2 or 3 turns away from growth. The game has a nasty tendency to jump from 2 turns to growth to growing for no apparent reason so I stop early to avoid that situation.
2. Switch to two hammer tiles to complete the settler.
3. When the settler is built, because I had enough food banked to grow from population 1 to population 2, my city is already population 2 again despite the population cost of the settler. Repeat from step 1 until no more settlers are necessary.

This minimizes the time that you have to waste working food tiles in your settler farm(s).

First off all I got from what you said, because you jibberished it up so much and couldn't just explain it simple lamen terms for me that'd be great. But pretty much what I did get out of that is that you think all I do is just put my guys on 1FT & 1HT(T=Tiles), but if you actually did read my posts correctlyl, they did say whether it was here or on another thread, they did say that players will have to adapt and learn their own strats and tactics to improve it and make it more efficient. But Starting out like this is the best basic way to start off doing a Feeding strat. Now obviously i'm not going to come out and tell everyone what I do, because dat's just not me.

Now since you say your strat is obviously supperior to mine. Better yet, when the fastest you've been able to finish the tech tree? I've finished it at 850 A.D.(but this was when I focusing more on gold than science. So I haven't actually been able to test out how fast I can really do it)

 

[BOSS NASTi]

My responses are in bold.

I have read what you said.

And what you are saying is that you should "always work a food and hammer tile". And for best efficiency, I am telling you that is not true.

Because it is true. Now I did not state or say in any way, shape, form that this is the way you should do it all the time. I said this is the best basic set-up to start ODB, but players should learn to adapt and tweak it to achieve max efficiency.

Here are some rough numbers. Again, because of the interface, I don't have precise food costs for growth so these are estimates:

Growing from pop 1 to pop 2 costs approximately 10 food
Growing from pop 2 to pop 3 costs approximately 20 food
Growing from pop 3 to pop 4 costs approximately 30 food

These #'s are for those people who don't run with a handi. This is for most of the players who run with a 40% handi like I do. Because running with a 40% handi is the only way to get anywhere in this game on MP.
Pop 1-2 is 5 food
Pop 2-3 is 10 food
Pop 3-4 is 15 food
They go up by 5's.

So a settler produced at population 3 costs 20 production and 20 food while a settler produced at population 2 costs 20 production and 10 food. That is, the settler produced at population 2 costs 10 food less than its counterpart produced at population 3.

10 food is 5 turns on a basic food tile. So unless you are spending at least 5 turns at population 3 during the production of each settler, the extra tile turns are not recouping your investment.

How about some examples:

Simplest settler farm:

Needs two forests and a grassland. Follows the plan I mentioned above. Completes a settler about once every 7 1/2 turns after the first one is out.

Max efficiency pop 3 settler farm:

Needs two forests and two grasslands. Basic plan is to work a combination of tiles to produce 20 food and 20 hammers while building a settler and to always maintain the ability to work 3 tiles. Completes a settler about once every 6 2/3 turns after the first one is out.

Looks pretty bad for the 2 pop settler farm as it loses 5/6 of a turn during the production of each settler? Yes, but you are ignoring the very important words in each of those "after the first one is out".

The very simple fact is that the first settler will be out significantly earlier in the 2 pop farm than the 3 pop farm for the simple reason that to set up for the best efficiency of 6 2/3 turns between settlers, the 3 pop farm will need to come up with a significant amount of food before the "first" settler to achieve that efficiency.

To be precise:

The 2 pop farm can produce its first settler at 10/20 food (population 2) and achieve maximum efficiency for its type.

The 3 pop farm can produce its first settler at 20/30 food (population 3) and achieve maximum efficiency for its type.

That is 30 extra food required to set up the "efficiency" the 3 pop farm allows.

How much time does that cost? Well the 2 pop farm produces its first settler in five turns from 10/20 food with no invested hammers.

The planned 3 pop farm spends 3 turns working 2 grasslands to bring itself 2/30 food (population 3) still with no hammers invested. It can then work any combination of tiles (micromanaged) that will bring it 18 food and 20 hammers over time with the caveat that the food has to be finished no later than the hammers. That will take 6 1/3 turns. So it doesn't get its first settler out for 9 1/3 turns, which is 4 1/3 turns after the 2 pop farm could have done it. And it requires a more constraining location (needs an extra grassland).

Those 4 1/3 turns will be made up over time by the increased efficiency, but it will be behind the 2 pop farm until it produces its 6th settler which is a very long time.

But see were talking about two different scenario's. Were not on the same page, because you talking about your strat for No Handi and i'm talkin about my basic strat for a 40% Handi.

 

[vale]

Sure, if the food cost for population growth is half what it normally is perhaps growing to population 3 is the way to go. I have never seen this in the game though. If the food cost were half though, everything happens much faster. Research obviously will be much quicker if you can grow twice as fast.

I don't have the full game yet, but in the demo I had a cultural victory in 800 AD where I had researched the entire available tech tree (including 4 locked techs thanks to Atlantis and Oxford). I also built every wonder except stonehenge which the Egyptians got for free. This included the Military Industrial Complex. This was with normal food costs using the method I described before.

I have some screenshots that I took. I'll see if I can find them and upload them.

 

[vale]

Turn before victory. There are two screenshots here because I didn't have a single screenshot that showed the UN build and the date. Notice the Military Industrial Complex build in the side city:

Spoiler :

 

[BOSS NASTi]

Yea well I used to run the same strat that your speaking of now that I kinda got what your saying a little more now and thought about it for a sec. But the reason I like to run with a 40% handi is just overall it allows the full game to open up more quickly and everything becomes more efficient to do, so everything will happen at a faster pace. It is possible to do everything as well with no handi, it's just that most players don't want to go thru the time of having to figure that out I guess or maybe they just like the 40% handi features.

 

[MKElderGod]

This Strat is too unstable and basic. I understand that people are finishing techin like in 500 AD but that because YOUR USING ROMANS. They are a god tier Civ and what you can do with them you cant do with any other civ. I think when we talk strats we gotta leave the romans out because no civ has the advantage that they have. When i was playing as Romans in the demo i had 3-4 megacities But when i was Egyptians i couldnt even finish one. But than again i mastered the general idea of the Roman strat but the egyptians or any other civ just cant achieve that sort of superiorty.

 

[sigmakan]

Agreed. I refuse to play as rome because I know they are going to get gimped sooner or later and playing them in their current condition feels like cheating.

 

[MKElderGod]

I love an overpowered factor to any game because you can have fun but when you wanna be serious its always good to have that kinda of challenge.

If i win as the russians against the Romans it feels good lol

 

[BOSS NASTi]

Honeslty I've been able to max out my MC's with using the egyptians, I can run the same Feeding strat using the Egyptians it just takes more turns to get your Republic established. But honestly the good thing about my using the Romans is that since I use them more than the egyptians. I've came up with a grip of counter strats depending on who i'm playing against. Now obviously I don't have real-time counters for the other civs that are in the full game due to me only having the demo. But i've been able to stop a Horseman rush when someone when using the egyptians on me and he actually did it pretty good to. But I was able to defend him and win while implementing my Feeding strat. I was still like +15 techs ahead of him by the time I decided to counter him and almost win. I was a turn or two away from taking his last city.

But it's all about being able to adapt your strat to the challenge of playing other civs who might rush you ODB. That's exactly why I make up different tech paths that I like to take depending on what I plan on doing ODB, due to whomever i'm playing against. While still being able to implement my Feeding strat. Of course this has taken me a good amount of time to think about and experiment with. And while I am still always thinking of new strats and tactics to use in my gameplay. I always experiment. I just can't wait for this game to come out in 2 days though.

 

[wayneflo]

The 2 pop farm can produce its first settler at 10/20 food (population 2) and achieve maximum efficiency for its type.

The 3 pop farm can produce its first settler at 20/30 food (population 3) and achieve maximum efficiency for its type.

That is 30 extra food required to set up the "efficiency" the 3 pop farm allows.

This is a very helpful analysis. I did not understand the meaning of "10/20 food" and the total of "30 extra food". I would appreciate if you could explain further.

I would like to compute this for a different civilization than Rome. Have you done any work on that?

 

[vale]

By 10/20 food I mean when you have produced 10 food (apples) out of 20 food needed to grow at population 2. If you produce a settler at the right food level, you instantly regrow to population 2 as the Settler is produced. This allows the constant working of 2 tiles as opposed to turns spent working only one tile. Now my 10-20-30-pop growth estimate is just an estimate.

So in practice, I tend to do it a little more conservatively to make sure I regrow immediately. Typically I switch from food+production to just production when the city screen says 4 turns to growth.

By 30 extra food to get set up, I mean that to get from the 10/20 food level to the 20/30 food level, you need to first produce 10 food to grow to population 3 and bring you to 0/30, then produce 20 more food to bring you to 20/30 food. This is a total of 30 extra food to get the farm established which is quite a prohibitive cost in general.

This analysis would apply to any civ running Republic, not just the Romans. I've done some numbers on doing this under other governments but it gets a little messier because you have to account for more factors during regrowth. Again though if you are trying to farm settlers out of a city, a good general approach would be to try to do so at the lowest population possible (population 3). Just try to time your builds so that the food bar is very close to being filled when the settler is completed.

If you are running some sort of handicap (I wouldn't suggest it) then the analysis breaks down because apparently (I haven't tested yet because I am against handicaps after finding out what they do) everything you do is cheaper and faster. So the food costs are lower, the production costs are lower, the research costs are lower.

 

[BOSS NASTi]

This is a very helpful analysis. I did not understand the meaning of "10/20 food" and the total of "30 extra food". I would appreciate if you could explain further.

I would like to compute this for a different civilization than Rome. Have you done any work on that?

You will still need COL in order to take advantage of this information though, unless you plan on using another strat besides that of Feeding.

 

[BOSS NASTi]

If you are running some sort of handicap (I wouldn't suggest it) then the analysis breaks down because apparently (I haven't tested yet because I am against handicaps after finding out what they do) everything you do is cheaper and faster. So the food costs are lower, the production costs are lower, the research costs are lower.

Aight first off bra, please don't talk about stuff which you know nothing about, cuz it just makes you look like another person who's giving false information. Bra the whole point of running a Handi is so the game can be played at a more efficient pace. So the game can get started off quicker and faster than it normally would so were not sitting their waiting as long to get everything started and out. That's just kinda the point of a Handi is to speed up food by 1/3 and cuts building cost/hammers in about Half.

But it doesn't lower the cost of research. It doesn't do anything to techs bro. Please stop giving out false information when you have done no research as you clearly stated in your full post that you haven't tested it out yet in Handi. So how would you know what goes on or how it works? You wouldn't, your most likely going off what someone else told you or your read about thinking that they were right.

 

[sigmakan]

I believe if both players are running handi then it makes the AIs lag behind. That hardly sounds like a complete game of civ. So its not quite as simple as just increasing the speed of the game. If the AI got the bonus as well then it would be equivalent to a speed-hike.

 

[BOSS NASTi]

I believe if both players are running handi then it makes the AIs lag behind. That hardly sounds like a complete game of civ. So its not quite as simple as just increasing the speed of the game. If the AI got the bonus as well then it would be equivalent to a speed-hike.

Bra your trying to make it sound like were cheating out the AI when the AI is just simply put in their for you to take advantage over them. I mean sure you have to worry about them sometimes in the early game, but who are you really playing against? The other human/humans, the AI were just put in their to just make the game a little more interesting, but seeing as how everyone already rapes the AI, it really doesn't matter. Your trying to make it sound like I should give the AI a chance to win, why?

Not saying that they might not have feelings or what not even though it's just the computer. But the point that I really feel you drifting away from is that in the MP your not focusing on the AI, your focusing on the other player/s. Also since you claim that it would make the AI's lag behind, can you please provide some evidence to back up your claim, sine you obviously haven't provided any at all?

 

[sigmakan]

Well, can you provide proof that they don't lag behind. Common sense tells me that if you apply 40% handi to yourself, and your opponent provides 40% to himself and the AI doesn't get a chance to apply a handicap then it would only make sense that they don't get the handicap.

For asking for so much proof, you sure fail to provide some of your own. You might want to work on that

 

[BOSS NASTi]

Well, can you provide proof that they don't lag behind. Common sense tells me that if you apply 40% handi to yourself, and your opponent provides 40% to himself and the AI doesn't get a chance to apply a handicap then it would only make sense that they don't get the handicap.

For asking for so much proof, you sure fail to provide some of your own. You might want to work on that

Bro why are you so indenile of that your wrong, I mean did even read what you just wrote? You pretty much just said that you want me to go and provide information for you, for a point that I wasn't even trying to prove in the first place, you were pimp. So I think i'm not going to go waste my time finding info for you. Ok why are you contradicting what we already know. It's like your trying to point out common sense itself.

Obviously the AI can't use a Handi Inspector Gadget due to them having no feature for us to add on to them. Thanx for pointing out the most obvious thing in the game, that had no need to be pointed out. Pimp you need to work on re-reading what you post, or maybe you should just not post without doing research first, because you really are not sounding knowledgable at all right now. Go read a book and attain some knowledge.

 

[sigmakan]

*sigh* Why do I bother . . .

Also since you claim that it would make the AI's lag behind, can you please provide some evidence to back up your claim, sine you obviously haven't provided any at all?

Followed by my post stating that if the AI doesn't have 40% handicap then they are going to be 40% slower in building everything including settlers and military units. So I believe that because they are slower at doing these actions it will make them lag behind. That makes sense, right?

 

[BOSS NASTi]

*sigh* Why do I bother . . .



Followed by my post stating that if the AI doesn't have 40% handicap then they are going to be 40% slower in building everything including settlers and military units. So I believe that because they are slower at doing these actions it will make them lag behind. That makes sense, right?

Your making a the most obvious claim in the world bro. Obviously they would be slower due at making buildings or producing units. But what's your point? You state facts that everyone who runs a Handi already knows. So what are you getting at? Because all your doing is stating a fact.

So what your saying is that due to this fact, it's wrong of players to run a 40% Handi because it's not fair to the Artificial Intelligence, even though the AI was put in place for you to bluntly take advantage of them? Is this what your really trying to say?

 

[vale]

Fine.

If handicap doesn't lower research costs, I stand corrected.

I also refuse to use it though because it is cheap and it cheapens the meaning of any accomplishments you get.

And if you can't see how a handicap gimps the AI further, lets consider:

You grow faster than normal.
You build faster than normal.
You expand faster than normal.

and

The AI gets none of these benefits (unless you have some ability to set a handicap for them).

If all the humans have a handicap, then the AI is gimped even more.

The point of a handicap is not to "make things more efficient". The point of a handicap is for players of different skill to be able to play with each other on a relatively balanced playing field. That is it. Look up the word handicap.

What a handicap is doing for you is allowing you to get away with unsound practices (like letting settler farms grow to pop 3) with no penalty. You then think you have some very efficient strategy, when in reality the main power of your strategy is in sliding that handicap up to 40% at the start. If you really believe that king + 40% handicap is "harder" than Chieftain, then you are totally ignoring how powerful the cheapened growth and production are.