Two population gone with settlers!

[PinkyGen]

What are they thinking. I'll have to wait for a size three city before I can expand. I'm already going to be slowed down because settlers won't be able to double as workers, but not it will be impossible to expand with my settlers! Arghhhhh

 

[Matrix]

I was a bit astonished myself too, when I read that. And I'd say that the workers cost none of the population. But I suspect the workers become obsolete by the engineers and maybe they won't 'cost' habitants of a city.

But I don't understand the reason they did that. What's "Infinite City Sprawl"??

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://home.hetnet.nl/~maartencl/tmp/MatrixBW.gif" border=0>
<FONT size="1">Studying chemistry means: having fun, drinking beer, having more fun, drinking more beer, hang above the toilet and have a good night sleep!

And each time Pedro says: "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh", I feel so good!!!</FONT s>

 

[gar13]

Matrix, i have no idea.

i think it was a stupid idea, but we'll see how it works out. who knows, maybe it will be great?

maybe they plan on having like 30 civs at once, and they don't want you to expand too fast, and kill them all too early?
*wishes*

 

[Thunderfall]

My guess is that Civ3's terrain squares would produce more food than in Civ2...

 

[VanillaCube]

You may hate me for saying this but I think they should of done what was don in CTP.
were the settelers only job was to make citys and the city used some of its own production to make roads and railroads and Irragation!

------------------
my words of wisdom

1.Square meals often make round people.
2.You Cant Argue With Stupitity!
3.an Eye for and Eye(and while your at it take 2)

 

[gar13]

why would we hate you for saying that?
actually, it sounds interesting to me. i never played CtP (is that why it sounds interesting... cause i don't know better?), so can you explain how that worked? were the roads build automatically or something?

 

[BlueMonday]

I guess we'll have to wait and see how it turns out. Might be a good thing -might not.

Two questions though: If two are taken away from the city, does the newly founded city start with two? Does your first city start at two?

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/goodbye3.jpg" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">"BEWARE MY WRATHE"</FONT c>

 

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Thunderfall:
My guess is that Civ3's terrain squares would produce more food than in Civ2...

That's a very nice guess!

Originally posted by Thunderfall:
Two questions though: If two are taken away from the city, does the newly founded city start with two? Does your first city start at two?

I doubt it: both would be just one.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://home.hetnet.nl/~maartencl/tmp/MatrixBW.gif" border=0>
<FONT size="1">Studying chemistry means: having fun, drinking beer, having more fun, drinking more beer, hang above the toilet and have a good night sleep!

And each time Pedro says: "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh", I feel so good!!!</FONT s>

 

[BlueMonday]

If that's the case, it does suck!

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/goodbye3.jpg" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">"BEWARE MY WRATHE"</FONT c>

 

[Loaf Warden]

So it's going to take 2 population, 30,000 people, to make a Settler unit, yet the new city it founds will presumably have a 1 population, 10,000 people? Granted that mathematics has always been my worst subject, but something just doesn't compute here.

[This message has been edited by Loaf Warden (edited April 08, 2001).]

 

[VanillaCube]

Originally posted by gar13:
why would we hate you for saying that?

because I you might think that I want civ 3 to be like CTP!
OK in case noone knows how it works in CTP!
I will break it down slowly so I wont confuse any body!
1.first your city gets production from the the workers (the sheilds)
2.then you put how much of that production(sheilds) you want to use for tile Improvements (like roads Irragation)
3.and you do that by using a slider to make a percentege of the production your workers make to tile Improvment.
(kinda like how in civ it divides up the money your city makes into 3 catogorys{trade, luxurys,and sci)
4.then that percentage of the production you make goes in to storage production (like how your tresurey builds up money)
5.then each of the tile Improvments cost a certain amount of production(sheilds)(like a road might cost 20 sheilds)
then you use your storage producuction(sheilds)to buy a tile Improvment and place it were it belongs!
6.then the thing takes some time to build the Improvment, then 2 or so turns later you now have a road space!

there is a city radius limit to placing tile Improvments but you can also place a Improvment tile next to an existing Improvment tile so if you want you can create a road to another civ!




------------------
my words of wisdom

1.Square meals often make round people.
2.You Cant Argue With Stupitity!
3.an Eye for and Eye(and while your at it take 2)

 

[VanillaCube]

Originally posted by Loaf Warden:
So it's going to take 2 population, 30,000 people, to make a Settler unit, yet the new city it founds will presumably have a 1 population, 10,000 people? Granted that mathematics has always been my worst subject, but something just doesn't compute here.

(edited April 08, 2001).]

..30,000
-<u>10,000</u>
..20,000

wow thats a lot of people dying in order to found a new city!

------------------
my words of wisdom

1.Square meals often make round people.
2.You Cant Argue With Stupitity!
3.an Eye for and Eye(and while your at it take 2)

 

[R]

Yes it sounds like slow.... but it might be interesting, you have to change strategy some.

I think they really want to get the co-existance-part longer.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.missionsos.org/urkraftkallan/civsignatur.gif" border=0>
...................................(R)

 

[Hell-Raiser]

I like the Idea of CTP!

It will be easy you can really do things quick,you can place it were you want (within the radius!)

Very Very Verrrry good idea!
I like it!

 

[TimTheEnchanter]

Originally posted by Matrix:
But I don't understand the reason they did that. What's "Infinite City Sprawl"??

ICS (a.k.a. "Infinite City Strategy" or "Infinite City Sleaze") is a strategy for winning at Deity that I saw described in some detail on Apolyton. I've never tried it, and don't know all the details, but you basically have as many size 2 cities as you can create, constantly cranking out settlers for more cities (keeping population at 2). You build cities a few squares away from each other without ever intending to grow them...they just need a little food, and some production and you're good to go. I think if your population grows over 2, you make the extra citizens elvii until it starves back down, and so on.

I think you have to have Hanging Gardens for it to work, (so you have one happy and one unhappy citizen in every city) and cities are often left unguarded as martial law actually works against you somehow. It has something to do with the Double-Unhappy citizens that can occur when you get beyond a certain number of cities.

I guess you could say it is the opposite extreme of OCC.

I'm sure some of the Apolyton veterans around here could explain it much better than I can.

------------------
DEATH awaits you all...with nasty, big, pointy teeth.

 

[Matrix]

Thanks, Tim.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://home.hetnet.nl/~maartencl/tmp/MatrixBW.gif" border=0>
<FONT size="1">Studying chemistry means: having fun, drinking beer, having more fun, drinking more beer, hang above the toilet and have a good night sleep!

And each time Pedro says: "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrggh", I feel so good!!!</FONT s>

 

[Mongol Horde]

Really don't understand this one, If ICS is how Tim has described it then who would want to play the game in that stupid way anyway? Surely the new cities must start at two, it would make no sense otherwise.

I am not normally one for pestering Dangerous Dan with pointless questions but if you are listening Dan, what's the deal?

 

[TimTheEnchanter]

I think the trick with ICS is that you trade one production square (the citizen used to create the settler) to get two production squares in the new city (the citizen plus the city square).

To combat this, it sounds like building a settler will take two squares away from the old city and give you two squares in the new city. Therefore production growth can not happen through the act of simply creating settlers and founding new cities.

If I read between the lines correctly, I think this is what they are trying to accomplish.

------------------
DEATH awaits you all...with nasty, big, pointy teeth.

 

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by Mongol Horde:
Really don't understand this one, If ICS is how Tim has described it then who would want to play the game in that stupid way anyway? Surely the new cities must start at two, it would make no sense otherwise.

I am not normally one for pestering Dangerous Dan with pointless questions but if you are listening Dan, what's the deal?

OK, here's how ICS works in Civ II:

1) You found a city with your settler. That city is a pop 1 city. But, in the city view, you really have two citizens, because each city ALWAYS has a citizen working the center square that the city rests on. That's essentially a "freebie" worker. Then for each population point you get another worker who can either work a square outside your city or you can put them to work as an entertainer, etc.

2) So now your city is size 2. You go and produce a settler. Settlers in Civ II do cost one pop point, but only one. Why is this a problem? Because you take that one pop point away from the first city, and your city size is now size 1 again, but it still gets to "work" two squares. Meanwhile that settler you produced can form a new city, and guess what, even though it's a pop 1 city, it gets to work two squares.

3) Rinse and repeat. What happens is you only "pay" one pop point per settler but you end up getting that "free" square in each new city you found.

4) The kicker is that each of these measly pop 1 or 2 cities can still produce chariots and you end up with a bunch of desolate little cities cranking out halfway decent units. You might have an even better unit than a chariot, but if the other guy can send 5 of them at you, your chances of survival are not so great. Plus, because he's not building anything of value in his cities (no wonders or improvements), his maintenance costs are lower.

Essentially, it exploits a fundamental design flaw of the game and ruins a lot of people's Civ experience.

The simplicity of the solution we raise is that you now must "pay" for what you're getting. It costs two pop because essentially that's what you get once you build a city, two squares being "worked".

Dan
Firaxis Games, Inc.

 

[R]

That makes sense. But practically that means that the whole expansion is going to be a lot slower, right? It won't be possible to either conquer the world or send a spaceship that early anymore in the game.

I also hope the same rules apply to the AI civs...

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.missionsos.org/urkraftkallan/civsignatur.gif" border=0>
...................................(R)