# Settlers production mechanics - EXPLAINED

Discussion in 'Civ5 - Strategy & Tips' started by Glieze, Jul 4, 2013.

1. ### GliezeChieftain

Joined:
Oct 17, 2011
Messages:
85
So after many years of being unsure of the settler production mechanics, I finally tested it properly and these are my results: Food is NOT irrelevant, but neither is it converted at a good rate:

Negative-0 food: +0 from food surplus
+1 food: +1 from food surplus
+2-3 food: +2 from food surplus
+4-7 food: +3 from food surplus
+8-11 food: +4 from food surplus
+12-15 food: +5 from food surplus
+16-19 food: +6 from food surplus
+20-23 food: +7 from food surplus
+24-27 food: +8 from food surplus
+28 etc (seems it continue with a 4:1 conversion rate)

So basicly:
-If you have a big city with tons of production/low food tiles such that you can go quite high in food deficity but high production, then that's beneficial
-If you have a small city with high food tiles and can't go lower than +0 for example, then remember that the first +2 food also gives +2 production
-Then again remember that if you have a city with high food, your food -> production conversion is only 4:1.

Also note: The +production gained from food surplus does NOT receive the +50% from Collective Rule, only "real" production does.

2. ### Gori the GreyThe Poster

Joined:
Jan 5, 2009
Messages:
7,211
In a recent game I also seemed to note that while building a settler, the game will let you run a -1 food deficit and still just count it as stagnation. In the early game this can make a considerable difference if you have some good gold tiles.

Is this widely known? I haven't seen it mentioned in the forums.

Thanks for this chart by the way.

3. ### FeiLingDeity

Joined:
Jan 9, 2012
Messages:
2,073
You can go -2000 food while producing a settler as any growth (positive as negative) is halted during that time.

The real question is: Why doesn't the governor work the best tiles for this situation?

Thanks btw for bringing this up as building settlers might be more popular with BNW (while in Vanilla and G&K you'd pretty much always rather buy settlers).

4. ### tommyntEmperor

Joined:
Sep 28, 2008
Messages:
1,814
Every decent player will know this and its an important feature to do well in multiplayer

5. ### peddroelmKing

Joined:
Jul 13, 2011
Messages:
671
nice

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters.

6. ### Big J MoneyEmperor

Joined:
Feb 23, 2005
Messages:
1,026
I feel silly for asking, but why do you think this?

Is it because of the production assistance you can get from internal trade routes?

Joined:
Aug 5, 2012
Messages:
11,801
Gender:
Male
Location:
Rural Vermont
Lack of gold on the BNW map and requirement of a DOF for lump sum gold trades means much less gold to rush buy settlers.

8. ### Big J MoneyEmperor

Joined:
Feb 23, 2005
Messages:
1,026
Ah, Sweden will have fewer worries here, then

9. ### TabarnakCut your lousy hairs!

Joined:
Sep 17, 2010
Messages:
5,968
Gender:
Male
Location:
Québec
But MadDjinn managed to DoF a civ before the turn 30! That's just the time to hook your first luxury

10. ### The PilgrimDeity

Joined:
Jan 26, 2009
Messages:
3,007
Location:
Virtual reality

11. ### TabarnakCut your lousy hairs!

Joined:
Sep 17, 2010
Messages:
5,968
Gender:
Male
Location:
Québec
If it's the norm it will be definitively harder. But if the AI is weakened it will be good for us too.

12. ### The PilgrimDeity

Joined:
Jan 26, 2009
Messages:
3,007
Location:
Virtual reality
I bet it is. Where can it take the gold from? CS and ruins and that's it. I expect every single HoF submission to have Spain in the game. Or several Spains if that'd be ever allowed. I dunno. MD's stream left me very confused and paranoid in regard to AI's competence.