warrior city

[kaskavel]

A city unconnected to the trade network (possibly in food-low hilly or tundric regions that cannot be exploited properly by the player's metropolis), typically exploiting 3-4 tiles (5 or 10 uncorrupted shields), whose whole purpose is to drop out regular warriors (until repl parts of course). Those warriors are used
1. For Military Police under communism or monarchy. Like mini 10-shield portable temples.
2. For dispansion when pollution strikes and a couple of shields are missing before the final round. Even for permanent periodic dispansion in case that capital is stupid enough to produce 98 shields for example.
3. Moving from 1. to other circumstansial needs like going to war, killing resistance fast without delaying the main stacks, delaying amphibious attacks until serious inits arrive or preventing cultural flips.
Does this concept already exist? Any ideas, objections or additions?

 

[Theov]

Not a crazy idea.

 

[Spoonwood]

I guess I could object in that such is not all that efficient.

First off, Republic is a better government than any that uses MPs extensively.

"When pollution strikes"? Again, not all that efficient. It's better to have 12 tiles per city, or even 10, and forget hospitals all together for production and commercial purposes. Your empire ends up using all good tiles more quickly that way. And hospitals cost 2 cavalry, then we need time for the city to grow. They thus don't pay off. Unless playing 20k, then 5 hospitals have a very small benefit for the culture from the extra culture from Battlefield Medicine after one runs out of better builds.

"killing resistance fast"

It's better to combine healing with crushing resistance after a war finishes usually.

Amphibuous attacks... I can't recall when I've last had one. I played a game with the Vikings as an opponent a while back, and they didn't even use berserks in that game.

Honestly, if I want warriors from a city, I'll just pillage relevant resources, I think. Sometimes new cities make warriors for pillaging in my games.

But, if you want to use your warrior city, go ahead. It's your game after all.

 

[Spoonwood]

Not a crazy idea.

Yea, I agree, it's not crazy. Since there's no accompanying "this is better than conventional build plan X".

 

[justanick]

"When pollution strikes"? Again, not all that efficient. It's better to have 12 tiles per city, or even 10, and forget hospitals all together for production and commercial purposes. Your empire ends up using all good tiles more quickly that way. And hospitals cost 2 cavalry, then we need time for the city to grow. They thus don't pay off.

The additional city tile yield, the lower building maintenance cost per tile and the lower rank corruption mean that going for metros does offer a nice uplift in the net output of your empire. It is not huge, but not small either. If it were not for the limit of 4 turns per tech, then metros would almost be a no-brainer.

If you preselect a government with military police, then warriors are more useful than usual. In such a scenario i did build a large amount of warriors. It worked out okay, but going for republic would likely have resulted in a better outcome.

Even if your government allows military police, there is no need for a town dedicated to it. Rather sooner than later you will run out of free unit support and you rather want that limited free units support used for proper units. So while the idea is not crazy, it usually falls short of the viable alternatives.

 

[kaskavel]

"When pollution strikes"? Again, not all that efficient. It's better to have 12 tiles per city, or even 10, and forget hospitals all together for production and commercial purposes. Your empire ends up using all good tiles more quickly that way. And hospitals cost 2 cavalry, then we need time for the city to grow. They thus don't pay off. Unless playing 20k, then 5 hospitals have a very small benefit for the culture from the extra culture from Battlefield Medicine after one runs out of better builds.

Of course, you should exploit all tiles. And then a time comes you can do the same with half the building cost. Also, have you ever added up how much production/commerce/unit support more a 13-size metropolis has compared to a 12-sized city, especially if the tribe has relevant traits? They are so big that in one of my recent games I built hospitals in all my 12-cities and added a specialist so they can grow one more.

Amphibuous attacks... I can't recall when I've last had one. I played a game with the Vikings as an opponent a while back, and they didn't even use berserks in that game.

Wrong choice of words, I meant AI landing troops next to your city. They may not be able to kill 3 warriors plus a couple more that come from the neighbouring city during the single round they have before your proper troops arrive and kill them..
As for the rest, dont you get a little bored always running a city-sized republic? Is that what you ALWAYS do? I could for example similarly claim "Republic? Aqueducts? Revolution? Poor stuff. No pay-off. Just build a lot of towns to cover all ground, reach 10 shields per town and sweep down the map with swordsmen".
OK, the game has been around for some time and a somewhat optimal way of playing has been established, but if you never run lets say...a modern age, communist, no artillery allowed, no trade with those guys, have to research all garbage techs, have to make war with those, (some more self-restriction), (a couple of interesting modifications to the edit), then how dont you get bored doing the same again and again? Do you even remember what it is to pause and think if monarchy or map making should be your next tech in this weird situation instead of always rushing to philosophy and trade all the rest?

Even if your government allows military police, there is no need for a town dedicated to it. Rather sooner than later you will run out of free unit support and you rather want that limited free units support used for proper units.

Assuming that you are in need of happy faces because for some reason you cannot trade/claim all or almost all luxuries (happens a lot before navigation in continents), why is the slider a better option? MP costs 1 base commerce per face. The slider costs 1.5-2 gold per face (you taught me that). And it is a mess with city sizes and different levels of corruption. And with careful management it is possible to waste nothing, always have your MP exactly where they are needed, while the slider leaves a huge mess. Even if you exceed the free unit support, the relevant penalty is a ilussion, you would lose more by using the slider. Not to mention that a huge slave-worker based communist may not even break the free unit support limit.

 

[Spoonwood]

Also, have you ever added up how much production/commerce/unit support more a 13-size metropolis has compared to a 12-sized city, especially if the tribe has relevant traits?

By the time this becomes relevant, AIs can have surplus gpt available via trading technologies. Especially on Large and Huge maps.

As for the rest, dont you get a little bored always running a city-sized republic? Is that what you ALWAYS do?

No, I don't get bored of it. I only don't run a Republic when I play Always War or more commonly what I call Always Battle (which allows for peace in the middle of a turn, but not at the end of a turn).

If I were turn-rushing a 100k type I would get into Feudalism.

Just build a lot of towns to cover all ground, reach 10 shields per town and sweep down the map with swordsmen

No, that's not comparable. Swordsmen fighting isn't all that efficient. The XOTM games generally have horseman rushes.

OK, the game has been around for some time and a somewhat optimal way of playing has been established, but if you never run lets say...a modern age, communist, no artillery allowed, no trade with those guys, have to research all garbage techs, have to make war with those, (some more self-restriction), (a couple of interesting modifications to the edit), then how dont you get bored doing the same again and again?

The game has different victory conditions and map types. I never run Communist. I also never run no artillery allowed, because I will still capture artillery type units. No trade only applies for strict Always War, but clearly the trading system is there for a reason. The game got designed with it as intended to get used for most games, and I do use it in most of my games. It's not the same again and again with different map types. Also, with different difficulty levels, there exist more variations.

Do you even remember what it is to pause and think if monarchy or map making should be your next tech in this weird situation instead of always rushing to philosophy and trade all the rest?

You mean from not knowing how the game works? No, it's been over 15 years now. Well, I did learn that Map Making after Republic is useful for low level histographic games, even though it's not so useful for fast paced technology games.

But Monarchy over Republic? No, no, no. It's not a question. Only if war weariness is or might be high AND there's no compensation later. Even on Huge Sid, Republic can be better with extreme war weariness, since Republic is better once the war weariness goes away, say for more happy citizens via a more effective use of the luxury slider.

Assuming that you are in need of happy faces because for some reason you cannot trade/claim all or almost all luxuries (happens a lot before navigation in continents), why is the slider a better option?

The luxury slider CAN give a city happy faces. Military police CANNOT do so. It only changes unhappy citizens to content citizens. And happy citizens score 2 points each, while content citizens score 1 point each. If playing for maximum score, thus the luxury slider easily can do better than military police.

And with careful management it is possible to waste nothing, always have your MP exactly where they are needed, while the slider leaves a huge mess.

We are talking over 200 cities eventually on a large map here, assuming we go all the way up to the domination limit. What you say about "waste nothing" won't hold.

Even if you exceed the free unit support, the relevant penalty is a ilussion, you would lose more by using the slider.

0. You're just calculating there. It doesn't really match empirical play experience from competitions, and it makes some incorrect assumptions.

1. You can't research as fast in a Monarchy as in Republic. So, Monarchy is worse for Spaceship, Diplomatic, and 20k games (research is extremely relevant, since one wants to get to technologies with great wonders first to build them).

2. The luxury slider can make happy faces. And those happy faces can exceed three. Military police in a Monarchy has a limit of three citizens. And those citizens only turn content. Happy citizens do more for score than content citizens. So, Republic has serious advantages over Monarchy if going for maximum score, that Republic ends up better.

But hey, you think the standard, old claims about Republic as Monarchy wrong still? By all means submit a COTM, GOTM, or HoF game using Monarchy and see how it compares to the games that use Republic. Most top charting games have used Republic for a longtime, and for very strong reasons.

Republic also fares better than Monarchy if playing for a 100k type game, because research towards Miniaturization, Replaceable Parts, Education, or even just Feudalism goes more quickly under a Republic. But again, Feudalism works out better than both theoretically, if one has a willingness to pop rush buildings with citizens.

 

[Spoonwood]

If it were not for the limit of 4 turns per tech, then metros would almost be a no-brainer.

No, because an AI researching Sanitation even on Emperor might not happen until the end of the industrial era. Sanitation makes for an optional technology, and you're not likely to get back those turns if you research Sanitation via hospitals IF you had tight enough city spacing to begin with.

Metros can make sense if you have tight spaced cities AND someone else researches Sanitation for you.

Hospitals do, of course, also eventually make sense if going for maximum score in a histograhpic game. So, they are not useless in terms of the overall game design.

But CORE cities deliberately spaced waiting for hospitals loses out on a lot of late medieval/early industrial commerce and production. But, that's exactly when military production and research can pay off big time. So, they really should get maximized then, and thus tighter spacing in core areas makes more sense.

 

[kaskavel]

Come on, "horsemen, not swordsmen, content faces, not happy ones", you know that is not the point of my words. The point is that it is not productive to answer every post that contains the word MP with "republic is better" and every one that contains the word "pollution" with "hospitals is a waste". Of course republic is better, we know that after 20+ years of experience. I didnt even claim the opposite, noone evermore does, why do you invest so much energy at that point?. But this does not mean we cannot try different variations once in a while, it may be always war, it may be some other self restriction, it may even pop up something weird (I got monarchy on round 35 with 4 cities if you recall in my current game)
By the way, since you mentioned, only using captured artillery is my favoured rule. Next one is "cannot move and fire at the same round".

 

[justanick]

Even if your government allows military police, there is no need for a town dedicated to it. Rather sooner than later you will run out of free unit support and you rather want that limited free units support used for proper units.

Assuming that you are in need of happy faces because for some reason you cannot trade/claim all or almost all luxuries (happens a lot before navigation in continents), why is the slider a better option? MP costs 1 base commerce per face. The slider costs 1.5-2 gold per face (you taught me that).

I donnot think you got the point i tried to make here.

Free unit support should be used by proper units(including workers etc). But every unit above free unit support should of course also be a proper unit. The implication is to use proper units as military police, at least during peacetime. In the very early game warriors do fine and by turn 100 there may yet be little incentive to disbanding them, but by turn 150 the incentive to disband them because proper units become available in numbers may arise. Even if the incentive to disband old warriors is avoided by say military expansion, the incentive to build new warriors will rather sooner than later disappear. Therefore i conclude that in most circumstances a dedicated warrior city is disadvantageous compared to other options, say building workers or wealth or whatever else makes sense.

 

[justanick]

If it were not for the limit of 4 turns per tech, then metros would almost be a no-brainer.

No, because an AI researching Sanitation even on Emperor might not happen until the end of the industrial era. Sanitation makes for an optional technology, and you're not likely to get back those turns if you research Sanitation via hospitals IF you had tight enough city spacing to begin with.

If it were not for the limit, then ~4 turns invested could be regained by faster research. At Sid research may be slow enough for hospitals to be worth it, as the limit does often not apply.

But CORE cities deliberately spaced waiting for hospitals loses out on a lot of late medieval/early industrial commerce and production. But, that's exactly when military production and research can pay off big time. So, they really should get maximized then, and thus tighter spacing in core areas makes more sense.

That is why some gap filler cities will be needed in the meantime.

 

[kaskavel]

I donnot think you got the point i tried to make here.

No, I havent exactly. Not sure if you want to say that
1. Such a city is not a good idea. (reasonable, I didnt claim to discover America, I just dropped an idea on the table)
2. MP is in general inferior to the slider
3. MP with warriors is inferior to MP with units proper.

Free unit support should be used by proper units(including workers etc). But every unit above free unit support should of course also be a proper unit. The implication is to use proper units as military police, at least during peacetime.

Why? Instead of having 100 infantries and 20% slider or 140 infantries or 100 infantries and 40gpt payment to the Mayans for some wines, I have 100 infantries and 40 warriors. What's the problem?

In the very early game warriors do fine and by turn 100 there may yet be little incentive to disbanding them, but by turn 150 the incentive to disband them because proper units become available in numbers may arise.

Why disband them??? I keep them as MP and instead of paying the slider, I pay unit support. I could keep 3-4 warriors in my capital....well...forever.

Therefore i conclude that in most circumstances a dedicated warrior city is disadvantageous compared to other options, say building workers or wealth or whatever else makes sense.

OK, that is a quite possible conclusion when all is said and done I guess. What about the idea of eventualy dispanding them vs pollution?

 

[Spoonwood]

I didnt even claim the opposite, noone evermore does, why do you invest so much energy at that point?

Your post asked for objections. But you know what? At this point... try the warrior city and tell us how it goes compared to other strategms you've used before. It would be more interesting to have some sort of report from actual game play experience. Even though...

I don't believe I'll be using military police in the middle ages or later anytime soon...

 

[justanick]

OK, that is a quite possible conclusion when all is said and done I guess. What about the idea of eventually disbanding them vs pollution?

Well, you would need to know in advance where and when pollution will strike. My guess is that simply allocating slightly more production than would be needed is more expedient. Production and disbanding means a loss of at least 75% of shields, so usually that is no good idea. It is a decent idea is you build where shields are plenty and disband where shields are scarce. Your suggestion is the opposite case.

In later stages of the game it can make sense to produce wealth in a city with very high production. Wealth does not suffer from pollution. In extreme this may mean that any harbourless city producing significantly more than 40 shields may produce wealth. If you need less than 3 turns for one modern armour the relative impact of pollution is higher. But then again, the impact of pollution is somewhat limited, so please avoid giving the issue a priority it does not deserve. If your metropolis produces 120 shields even with the best tile polluted, then this is of course fine in most circumstances.

Why disband them??? I keep them as MP and instead of paying the slider, I pay unit support. I could keep 3-4 warriors in my capital....well...forever.

Yes, you could. And there are circumstances where that may make sense. My assessment is that such circumstances are rare.

Why? Instead of having 100 infantries and 20% slider or 140 infantries or 100 infantries and 40gpt payment to the Mayans for some wines, I have 100 infantries and 40 warriors. What's the problem?

Sure you can. We differ on the underlying assumption. My assumption is that none of meaningful options for military police remain unused while you focus on the opposite case.

Also a luxury good benefitting from marketplace will likely offer twice, thrice or even fourfold the amount of good faces. So while your example is good to illustrate a principle, it is unlikely to occur as such.

No, I havent exactly. Not sure if you want to say that
1. Such a city is not a good idea. (reasonable, I didnt claim to discover America, I just dropped an idea on the table)
2. MP is in general inferior to the slider
3. MP with warriors is inferior to MP with units proper.

None of the above. I am saying directly or indirectly that keeping unit upkeep reasonably low is important and that it is easy to go beyond that.

If as a monarchy you produce 10 shields per city, have 4 free unit support per city and 2 workers per city, then it takes only 8 turns to produce 2 4/4 MedInfs per city. Those workers and MedInfs then already completely absorb free unit support. At that point you need to choose what to do with your old 3/3 warriors from the ancient age. If they still help to lower the slider, then keeping them for now can be sensible. But building additional ones is not. And should you build even more proper units, then even disbanding the old warriors may make sense.

Being a republic frees your mind up from such conundrums. There the rationale of disbanding obsolete units is more obvious.

 

[justanick]

Thread 'Compromised Moderator Login; your data is safe though'

Apr 12, 2025

The short version of today's events:
What happened: A moderator's account was compromised
Did I get hacked? No, your data is safe and not at risk.
Have you fixed everything? No, not yet.
How long will it take to fix everything? We TBH don't know.

The long version of what happened today:
Today's events were triggered that a single moderator account got compormised. This was a targeted attack at that moderator, although we don't understand why it was him specifically. Nobody else seems to have been targeted. The moderator probably had a weak password, which allowed...

• The_J
• Replies: 89
• Forum: Site Feedback

• 

 

[lymond]

Moderator Action: workin' on restoring this now

Moderator Action: Okay..I believe I captured everything that should be here. Not an easy process, but most of yall quoted each other, which makes the job significantly easier. Please lemme know if I missed anything, and please accept our apologies and understanding as we get through this mess. We are implementing measures so that this does not happen again, and also should announce a recommendation that all members here reset their passwords, make them stronger, and active two-factor authentication on the site. thanks -lymond

 

[BlackBetsy]

But CORE cities deliberately spaced waiting for hospitals loses out on a lot of late medieval/early industrial commerce and production. But, that's exactly when military production and research can pay off big time. So, they really should get maximized then, and thus tighter spacing in core areas makes more sense.

This. 1000% this. If the game isn't over by the time you can build hospitals, with only the finish date or score in doubt, you probably aren't doing it right. The vast majority of the game where you are setting the conditions to win are done before Sanitation. Create your core cities to maximize from 12 tiles, folks!

(Yes, I know you can hit Sanitation before Steam Power or Replaceable Parts.....but why would you? Those are 2 of the best techs in the game).

 

[justanick]

Yes, I know you can hit Sanitation before Steam Power or Replaceable Parts.....but why would you?

The tech is cheap and it significantly increases your research output. Hospitals before factories makes perfect sense. At Sid this may very well enable an earlier modern victory(space race or UN).

Usually it is clear before entering the industrial age that victory will occur.

 

[kaskavel]

Usually it is clear before entering the industrial age that victory will occur.

Even if one somehow "succeeds" in having a balanced game at this point (which is already difficult, I agree), he will make sure to get Theory of Evolution, followed by Hoover dam. Then, taking into account the human's ability to properly handle railroads, there is no turning back. There is something wrong at this point of the game and I feel it needs some heavy editing if any hope of playing a balanced ind/mod age exists...

 

[kaskavel]

Your post asked for objections.

Well yes. Objections for the concept of the city (and I got many). But not for the whole background of the set-up with monarchy, communism and hospitals!

But you know what? At this point... try the warrior city and tell us how it goes compared to other strategms you've used before. It would be more interesting to have some sort of report from actual game play experience. Even though...

I don't believe I'll be using military police in the middle ages or later anytime soon...

I will, but I do not expect to reach any conclusion just by that. It does offer a pleasant feeling of accuracy up to this point (building a warrior and chain-sending him exactly where he is needed), but comparing that to a different set-up where the city is building let's say workers...well, that is hard to do.