|
Slaving
Nov 10, 2006 15:38:15 GMT -5
Post by akreider on Nov 10, 2006 15:38:15 GMT -5
When is it worth it to slave/whip? I'm particulary interested in ancient inland sea ctons (and Warlords 2.08).
I've only done it when I risked losing a city. Normally it seems too costly.
|
|
stin
Settler
Posts: 39
|
Slaving
Nov 11, 2006 3:21:53 GMT -5
Post by stin on Nov 11, 2006 3:21:53 GMT -5
There are some other threads about this. But Ive found that most newer players dont slave anywhere near enough and then wonder how someone gets an army so quick or their civ up and running so quick.
I slave a lot at the beginning of a cton. Slave workers and settlers from cap and slave buildings from other cities. If you are exp or agg you can slave gran or barracks quick and use leftovers for next building. Mid game I tend to use slavery for a whole bunch of workers to help me with my end game push for points. Also check what needs slaving before going serfdom.
Ive seen some advocate slaving every 6 turns after unhappiness disappears but that may be too often. Find a style that suits you but definitely slave more.
|
|
|
Slaving
Nov 11, 2006 10:03:45 GMT -5
Post by mrsaturn on Nov 11, 2006 10:03:45 GMT -5
If you are exp or agg you can slave gran or barracks quick and use leftovers for next building. I thought chopping/slaving for extra hammers ondouble speed buildings didn't work anymore.
|
|
|
Slaving
Nov 11, 2006 14:37:06 GMT -5
Post by Atomation on Nov 11, 2006 14:37:06 GMT -5
When in doubt, whip it out! Oh wait, that didn't come out right...wait a minute that didn't either. The usefulness of slavery largely depends on the game level. Since we play on noble, the unhappiness is virtually a no-factor, and thus slavery is completely imbalanced when used judiciously. Judicious use? Try to whip whenever you are using a less than interesting tile - it's a comparison of how many resources you lose over time from having less population as compared to the boost in hammers you get from the slavery combined with the fact that slavery is an instant effect. It's also a good idea to slave multiple populations at the same time, as each pop only still costs the same amount of unhappy. Try to avoid slaving with 0 hammers in the queue, though, as that decreases the hammers you get from the first pop slaved by half.
On higher difficulty levels, the happiness threshhold is often reached very rapidly thus rendering slavery much less useful. Charismatic civs may have a decisive advantage in this respect, especially with stonehenge, as they can slave liberally with their bonus happy.
|
|
|
Slaving
Nov 13, 2006 0:41:04 GMT -5
Post by akreider on Nov 13, 2006 0:41:04 GMT -5
For a typical inland sea ancient CTON, when you start out with a single city, at what point does it make sense to whip?
Normally I do 1-2 warriors or scouts and then produce a worker. Should I whip the first worker? I normally have a population of 2 or 3 by this time.
Or would it make more sense to whip if you had a city working a food resource like corn, producing six food, and then the square you'd lose from whipping was a regular flood plain?
Or should I wait to first build a granary?
|
|
|
Slaving
Nov 13, 2006 1:31:58 GMT -5
Post by churchill1 on Nov 13, 2006 1:31:58 GMT -5
Should I whip the first worker? Most definitely. Then whip the 2nd and the next settler. Like Atom says "When in doubt..." . Whip. Whip. Whip. Use the excellent tips Atom gave, but if ur not using slavery much already just use it - don't be afraid, click the button! Using food as mfg in this way is much much more effective (usually) than growing a little bit more to work mines. With a granary, good food and a low population you grow back super quick (so that you hardly lose out anyways). It also actually means you need less workers ^^, because say you only worked 6 tiles in a city and it takes 6 turns to grow from 5 to 7, then you slave 2 guys every 6th turn and NEVER have to work that extra tile (apologies for naff example ). I kind of try and slave when my city grew to the point that it can no longer work super tiles (but that's not a hard and fast rule). It's also worth noting that you might want some cities to grow more so they can work more cottages (especially the capital) - even so you will still slave in these cities . Like MLL says with us playing on noble level (shouldn't we be playing on a harder level? IDK), it takes some time to reach your hapiness cap. However some cities will get unhappy . This makes hooking luxuries (and planting that city in such a way so that you will be able to hook the beaver super important, it also makes monarchy a bit of a priority tech. That said in very high food cities I sometimes find myself over slaving, so watch out for that. But say u r running hereditary rule and your front city has a lot of food and like 30 units in then slave to your heart's content. Globe theatre is best put in a high food city, this way you can slave every single turn (although alternate turns is better cos of the penalty when zero hammers are invested in something) and never ever get unhappy. Don't be afraid to have low population cities for the first few turns - it will really pay off in the long run. Too often I hear people say, "but my city needs to grow." Why does it need to grow, huh? That logic is plain wrong. Slavery is totally game breaking. Learn how to us it or suck @ CIV.........forever.
|
|
|
Slaving
Nov 13, 2006 22:25:33 GMT -5
Post by akreider on Nov 13, 2006 22:25:33 GMT -5
Growth is important because population is generally the largest factor in your score. But slaving early on, won't affect this.
I have noticed that my capital often has a much larger population than anyone else's (ex. 18 vs 12) and maybe this is part of the reason. Instead I guess you can have more smaller cities - downside is that it gets costly to maintain them (my science rate will generally fall to 50% if I do a good job expanding).
Does bee-lining for bronze working make sense so you can start slaving? I used to bee-line to chop trees, but since the trees were downgraded focus more on agriculture, animal husbandry, pottery, and archery if I'm being attacked. And I don't worry about bronze until I'm going to churn out my first settler (so they can settle near it, if there is bronze).
|
|
|
Slaving
Nov 13, 2006 23:17:14 GMT -5
Post by mrsaturn on Nov 13, 2006 23:17:14 GMT -5
I usually got bronze first thing (or mining to get to bronze). That tech is so important early on, and is a factor in how you will proceed. If there's copper near your capital, great- you probably don't need archery for a while, and you don't have to worry about your military situation. If there isn't, you go for archery or you build a settler quickly to settle near some not-so-distant copper.
And either way, you can go slavery and chop trees. Such a useful tech. If you go for bronze working first, you can usually pop out 2 or 3 warriors while letting your city grow to size 2 or even 3 if you have floodplains, then build your worker and slave it to finish.
|
|
|
Slaving
Dec 7, 2006 23:20:19 GMT -5
Post by akreider on Dec 7, 2006 23:20:19 GMT -5
I've checked the button to see how much population it would cost and still haven't found a situation where slaving was useful (outside of being under siege and about to lose the city). The cost just always seems to be too high.
I've also done pretty well playing the game without slaving. I respect the opinions expressed here, so I'm going to see if it can be useful, but so far it just hasn't been.
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Dec 8, 2006 0:40:49 GMT -5
Well you are valuing your population too much it seems.
You simply have to work out the maths of it.
You have a city bringing in 60 gold (12popx5gold). You are at 100% research so it gives 60 beakers. The city is at the maximum it can grow with the amount of happiness/health you can give it (it can grow bigger but the unhappy faces won't work). You don't have many hammers coming in so the city will take 20 more turns to build the library (it's currently built 20 of 60 hammers worth).
Slaving will cost 2 population that'll take 20turns to regrow.
So after slaving you have 2 less tiles so it's 50 (10x5) gold coming in. You are at 100% research so that 50 beakers. Library gives +25% beakers so you end up with 62.5 beakers.
That's a net gain both in the short term and in the long term from slaving and you've also finished the library much earlier so you can start on something else. Slaving 2 pop actually increases happiness by 1 (overcrowding penalty goes down 2) and only last 6 turns anyway.
There are many other examples than just this but you can work out the maths on your own. I pretty much always slave out granaries, settlers and workers. Get them out asap and your city can catch up in growth again very quickly.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Dec 8, 2006 2:07:10 GMT -5
It's worth noting that during the period of time you can't work the cottages, they cannot grow, but you should still slave the library.
|
|
|
Post by willburn on Dec 8, 2006 6:08:58 GMT -5
Food aka growth is one of the greatest snowballers. Slaving is cashing in early on the food growth. When do you want to cash in early? when the added "money" can give you a bigger end return - like say a worker who will proceed to build two +3 improvements. ANother is for 4-5 more millitary units on a critical turn before an attack to make sure your millitary investments pays off.
|
|
|
Post by tamijo on Dec 8, 2006 8:44:44 GMT -5
War win (teamer) : Off course slave slave slave
Point win (cton): Seems to me too, that slaving crippels me too much unless its done early in game. (few exceptions like having RED population, but that is not often due to HR;or absolutetly impossible to grow.)
But i will try to do as y pros suggest and see what i can make of it.
|
|
|
Slaving
Dec 8, 2006 14:31:00 GMT -5
Post by islandia on Dec 8, 2006 14:31:00 GMT -5
OCC games are one of the rare times when it may not be profitable to slave. With modified maps such as the c4f ones and the number of resources you get, it is sometimes better to have that extra population working that 5 food or 5 hammer tile rather than getting the immediate 20 hammers for it.
|
|
|
Slaving
Dec 8, 2006 16:56:22 GMT -5
Post by willburn on Dec 8, 2006 16:56:22 GMT -5
Slaving is good as long as you know what the hell your doing. Doing slave if it will set you back. Basically you should think of what you loose vs what you gain. If you loose 2 pop thats usually 5-6 turns of 2 tiles not worked. So usually around 30 hammers, in such cases its usually done for a 4 turn faster worker who will have chopped 26 hammers and then have 2 turns on a resource. A decent deal.
|
|
|
Post by diadem on Dec 9, 2006 3:47:08 GMT -5
Slavery becomes less useful the later the area you start in. In ancient and classical though, slave as much as possible. Always slave growth-enhancing buildings. So slave granaries, llighthouses (for water maps, rare in multiplayer), etc. Furthermore always slave when your city is in danger of growing over the happiness cap. And slave when you run out of good tiles to work. In a city with a good food situation, this often means stacking whip anger. Don't worry about this too much. Stacking ain't so bad.
Whipping is most useful for small cities. This is because the amount of food needed for each growth increases with city size. But the number of hammers remains the same. So in bigger cities you get less hammers per food. A granary doubles you whip effectiveness, so this is a must-have build.
Whipping because more useful on higher difficulties. Because your happiness and health caps are lower, your cities will be smaller. Thus whipping is more useful. You really need to whip a lot to keep those cities small enough to not be unhappy, at high difficulties. Because small cities grow so fast, you often need to whip 2 or 3 pop each time though, to keep your pop down.
What tiles are not worth to be worked, and better off being whipped? This may surprise you. Every population point gives 20 hammers. Meanwhile with a granary at size 4 every population takes 8 food to grow back. Having one of your population working a plains hill gives you 4 hammers a turn. Whipping him gives you 4 hammers less per turn for 4 turns - 16 hammers less. But you gain 20 hammers.
Basicly, working plains hills on cities of size 6 or lower is not worth it! Whip instead! The same is true for any 1/2, 1/1, 2/0 or even 2/1 tile. Whip those!
One further fun fact about Civilization 4 to end this post: Whipping your population to death increases both your Life Expectency and Approval Rating!
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Dec 9, 2006 4:27:19 GMT -5
One further fun fact about Civilization 4 to end this post: Whipping your population to death increases both your Life Expectency and Approval Rating! LOL. It's the only reason I use slavery. ;D
|
|