Whip away unhappy workers?

Yes. About the only exception I can think of is if you're about to fix the happiness problem somehow. Maybe you're temporarily experiencing a lot of war weariness or you just discovered Calendar and your workers are about to complete plantations that give you 2 more luxuries. Even then, it would probably be better to have stagnated growth for a few turns to avoid the unhappiness in the first place, though war weariness can't always be completely predicted.
 
But see... here's the tricky part. When you whip your population, you gain +1 unhappiness for 10 turns. So, in reality, if you're trying to eliminate unhappy citizens, you usually need to whip more than one pop point at a time.

For instance, say your city has a max happiness of 7, and your population is now 8. That gives you 1 unhappy citizen. If you whip one population, you're still stuck with unhappiness. Now you're at 6 happy faces and 7 population. You need to whip several points at a time so that your population drops to under your current happiness - 1.

This can be all well and good in larger cities, but when your city goes from 7 pop to 4 or 5 pop, you can often lose the ability to work some of the more crucial tiles surrounding your city.

Overall, I find that it's better to try and manage your happiness situation before it becomes a problem, rather than try to fix it by using slavery. However... I could be wrong. ;)
 
Better to prevent it from going unhappy in the first place unless you're growing it for the express purpose of whipping.
 
Slavery is nice for BIG cities, or cities with a very good food output, but even then you will need the city to be at least 3-4 min.

And even then the best settlements should be spared to become big and use the specialists, these golden ages and special bonuses are so yum yum :goodjob:
 
Hirohito said:
Slavery is nice for BIG cities, or cities with a very good food output, but even then you will need the city to be at least 3-4 min.

The bigger the city, the less efficient slavery becomes, as it costs more food to regrow the population for an equal hammer output. Slavery's at its best at about size 6-8, not in big cities.
 
In general, I find slavery effective for small to medium cities as well. Especially if you work two or three food special resources, and then whip anyone who isn't on those tiles. Your growth stays quick (especially with a granary), and your production is respectable despite not working a single mine.

I would say the optimal whip range is in the 4-8 size--two guys on a food resource can grow to 4, whip down to 2 (I usually double-whip people--more hammers, same unhappiness--that's a deal!), and repeat.
 
I'm trying to give myself some guidelines about whipping.
I'm not the meanest slaver out there, but i need the production often.

I whip for one of those 3 reasons:
- happiness cap (theme of this thread) : here i whip either a happy building like a temple or a unit.
- emergency, in a very large acceptance of the term : including granary asap and library if culture is needed ;), forges, banks, universities, theatres if i need a few before starting the "special" (IW, Wall Street, ...).
- useless pop (working unimproved, low ouput tiles) : here i whip a worker or a settler.
 
Really useful input, thanks.

I'm learning this game by playing pbems, and the scope for major screw ups becoming obvious only after a year of playing is only too obvious.

The Antilogic suggestion is especially relevant to 2-3 games I am in.
 
That's the rule I have developed in about the last half dozen Prince games I've played (all victories). It has served me well...

Seriously, in a game I'm currently playing as Frederick, I have a city that has every building it could possibly need from whipping, and now is running into happiness problems because troop whipping usually only takes 1 population, instead of multiple. It was blessed to have sheep and 2 fish resources...I need a greater happiness cap so I can work up some cottages and specialists! Or, I need more expensive troops to whip.
 
Back
Top Bottom