Ran out of use for workers

[Charles 22]

I like to keep them around. If they are idle get them to building fortresses along your coast to ward off those pesky amphibious landings. Not a top priority but good work for idle hands.

Has anyone written an article in the +/- of building fortresses?

I guess you would have to measure that against the tendency of seaborne invasions not having amphibious landings, because placing fortresses on those same coasts may help against phibs (but don't they all have just 1 movement point anyway?) but whatever lands in those hexes is protected from your counterattack. Maybe the 2nd row of hexes beside the coastal ones are the better ones to fortify?

I thought about it a second and have come to the conclusion that you're probably talking about manning those forts. In any case the coastal hex doesn't slow them down, manned or unmanned seems to me, because they always land on that hex. The 2nd row being forted, or more properly barricaded, would prevent the multi-move units after that landing turn, from being able to progress beyond just one hex. If you're playing the game quite well I'm not so sure it's very useful against the AI, but I suppose there are instances particularly when you're on nothing but an island where it could prove some worth.

Actually, come to think of it, the idea of having a wall of barricades 2 hexes into the territory is a pretty good trap. They land and if that wall is manned they don't have that many hexes they can retreat to. Of course sealing them off with a unit in each adajacent hex to the landing one might be more practical in most situations.

 

[Shinatoo]

Good point. Either way though you need to man the fort to make it usefull. So if you are on the coast and they come with non-anfib forces they cannot land and if they come with anfib forces you have ready the extra defence and time saved to move some troops to that area. I tend to notice that the AI doesn't like to land on a coast with forts on it.

But once again this is rarely a A B or C priority. Just if you have nothing else for them to do and you are more of a peaceful builder.

 

[Charles 22]

Good point. Either way though you need to man the fort to make it usefull. So if you are on the coast and they come with non-anfib forces they cannot land and if they come with anfib forces you have ready the extra defence and time saved to move some troops to that area. I tend to notice that the AI doesn't like to land on a coast with forts on it.

But once again this is rarely a A B or C priority. Just if you have nothing else for them to do and you are more of a peaceful builder.

The way I figure it, if you have enough units to not only completely wall off all of your coasts and still man them, then you're probably so powerful it don't matter. What is more probable however is that while you may or may not wall the entire coast, you cannot man all of it, so that probably means a non-phib landing at an unmanned spot. Having said that I have no idea whether the AI is shooting more for an open gap in the wall, or just trying to land, opposition or not, to the weakest garrisoned coastal city.

It might work well to wall between two different cities and leave one or both cities relatively defenseless (assuming their is no phib threat) -and- leave one hole in the wall (unwalled) so that not only is there a set spot to land but also juicy cities to tempt.

Maybe you could do this in walling: X=wall, C=coast

X
X
X
X
XX
XC
XX
X
X

 

[mortalmadman]

Is it a good idea to add workers to citys already at max?

 

[Charles 22]

Is it a good idea to add workers to citys already at max?

No we were talking about adding them to conquered cities. In adding them to full cities the only possibly profitable way would be to leave them resident in the capitol as units and trying to trade them off.

 

[Shinatoo]

Point taken. Maybe I just am to fond of the way the forts look.

 

[El Dorko Grande]

I always use them to boost production in my totally corrupt outer edge cities. Have a stack plant a forest, cut it down and you've got ten shields of production for free

I only do this with slaveworkers, my own workers get added to my productive cities.

 

[Dell19]

That was fixed in a patch at some point so that planted forests didn't get the shield bonus when chopped down again...

 

[Shinatoo]

How about building forts around key cities

 

[Shinatoo]

Here is a thred on fortresses!!!

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=107835

I'll drop it now.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I rarely run out of things to do with my workers - I'm usually conquering new lands as fast as my workers perfect old ones.

 

[zekila]

I can't get enough workers! There's always things to do for a worker. As already mentioned, if all your cities are fully managed, and you have railroads on every square witihin your territory, your workers can still be valuable.

Currently I'm playing a game at regent level at a large map, and I have app. 130 citites. A lot of these cities produce only 1 shield per turn, but due to a huge amount of workers (several hundreds), I manage to keep up production even in those. Plant forest, clear forest - with industrious civ and democracy, it only takes four workers of your own nationality to produce ten shields, so 40 workers produce 100 shields per turn, and so on. I need a lot of battleships right now, but my major harbor cities are too far away from where I need the ships, so I build them i horribly corrupted cities with my workers. I have enough to build two ships per turn (1 in each of 2 cities), even if those cities produce only 1 shield per turn.) Hail the worker

(Btw. Do capture all the enemy's workers that you can. They work a bit slower, but they're free!)

 

[JMK]

I can't get enough workers! There's always things to do for a worker. As already mentioned, if all your cities are fully managed, and you have railroads on every square witihin your territory, your workers can still be valuable.

Currently I'm playing a game at regent level at a large map, and I have app. 130 citites. A lot of these cities produce only 1 shield per turn, but due to a huge amount of workers (several hundreds), I manage to keep up production even in those. Plant forest, clear forest - with industrious civ and democracy, it only takes four workers of your own nationality to produce ten shields, so 40 workers produce 100 shields per turn, and so on. I need a lot of battleships right now, but my major harbor cities are too far away from where I need the ships, so I build them i horribly corrupted cities with my workers. I have enough to build two ships per turn (1 in each of 2 cities), even if those cities produce only 1 shield per turn.) Hail the worker
(Btw. Do capture all the enemy's workers that you can. They work a bit slower, but they're free!)

You can only forest a square ONCE, so you won't be able to build a Battleship that requires no less than 200 sheilds by planting/clearing forest. But you can do it once get 10 sheilds and buy the remaining 190 sheilds; this will be much cheapper than buying the full 200 sheilds.

Forestry operation is a good example of using workers.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

I place my cities so that they have 12 tiles of ground each.

I build enough workers that i always have fully worked tiles for everone in my cities.

Since that means you have to work ahead of your city growth a little, i usually have my terraint fully worked when my cities are size 9-11. I then use my workers to bring my cities to size 11 or 12. Of course, if you have hospitals or railways soon, it could be better to keep your workers for such jobs, i but i never yet gotten to hospitals or railways in civ3.

I am planning for a space victory now though, so i will need to make different plans now

 

[Crakie]

I place my cities so that they have 12 tiles of ground each.

I build enough workers that i always have fully worked tiles for everone in my cities.

The city placement sounds ok to me, but I am puzzled why you would have a large worker force around to just keep up with the growth of highly corrupt cities - they are of little use, except harbouring luxuries, reducing your unit maintenance or increasing your score. I usually determine my number of workers to keep up with the growth of non/semi-corrupt cities and when these are done, they move to less corrupt cities. Exceptions of course are that I want luxuries and resources connected and cities interconnected asap.

On a related matter: Since most or all shields are lost, I usually try to make my corrupt cities as big as possible, so I irrigate whenever I can. That is, if I can keep them happy of course.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

oh yes, the workers only for my good cities. I don't work my captured ground. Only roads for my millitary units.

 

[punkbass2000]

Irrigation can be useful in outlying cities. This is particularly true once you have Drafting or are in a gov where you can pop-rush.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

yes, also good for score (milking) i know, but i am too lazy to do that.

 

[Crakie]

If you're not interested in score or culture, there's no point in putting non-core cities close together in such a way that they can work about 12 squares. Corruption in your good cities will increase because your # of cities will be much bigger than your OCN.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

No, the number of cities does not matter for corruption.

The number of cities Closer to your capital matter for corruption.

In conquered areas i just build whatever cities you need to cover every tile within your borders. If however you want to milk the game for a better score, it might be better to ics the whole map.