WLTKD in Civ2 is cheesy and cheap

[Pembleton]

Well I just made a subtle criticism about whining but I guess I might be doing that right now with this post. Oh well.

Anyway, does anyone know if WLTKD (We Love The King Day) still increases population? This was such a cheap way of exploiting ICS to its fullest since you would ignore any semblance of balance in production and trade in your city. You would just get WLTKD in cities at any cost just to increase its pop to reap its imbalanced number later.

[red_jon]

Not true, when all the city tiles are full, you can only have entertainers/ scientists or taxmen. These count as content. So you couldn't ahve a WLTKD in a city above size 40ish.

I liked the feature, it represented 'baby booms' (like in the 60s).

[Pembleton]

I'm talking about in the early stages of a city, say from 3-12. It doesn't really matter after that if all your cities have grown to over 12 or so when your opponent's are still around 6-9. The game is over. You've won.

[red_jon]

I know it was a bit skanky, but I loved controlling my population explosions, giving me an edge over the computer (as I rarely go to war).

[Provost Harrison]

Well it would probably balance things up if the pop booming was removed. I wonder what the strategic implications of this would be

[Triped]

Preferably more war, especially for our friend red_john

[Soren Johnson]

The population boom from WLTKD does not exist in Civ3. There are now other benefits, such as lower waste and a reduced risk of city conversion.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
The population boom from WLTKD does not exist in Civ3. There are now other benefits, such as lower waste and a reduced risk of city conversion.

Cool

[Pembleton]

Excellent!!

[Provost Harrison]

Hey cool, that should be good. I reckon it would certainly level the playing field between the AI and the human player if the human player can't just rocket into the distance in terms of population!

Also, rather than have a 'We Love The King Day', does it work on a sliding scale, ie, the more happy the city, the lower the corruption and waste?

[Akron]

Hey, I liked that pop boom!!!

I hate the idea of ICS though, its the most boring strategy IMO... cities too small, too much micromanagement, cheap, etc. I usually tried to limit myself to about 12 cities on the large maps. But I never really pop boomed much until later in the game.

If it only decreases waste and conversion, I don't think I'll be putting any money into luxuries.

[Soren Johnson]

There is, however, a new Great Wonder (Longevity) which provides a similar pop boom.

[Inverse Icarus]

the pop boom was great, but it DID unbalance the game A LOT.

early in the game, go into a republic, and set luxuries at 80 for like 10 turns, and all of a sudden you have a ton of size 12 cities, while your enemy is running around with his 4 and 5's. then pop into Monarchy/Communism/Fundy and you got a WAR MACHINE.

also, shouldn't it be hard, or near impossible to go from a democracy or republic into a Communism, Monarchy, or Despotism? do people really not care that much?

THE PEOPLE UNDER MY SHOE?

[Inverse Icarus]

great wonder.

32 wonders (rumor)?

16 great 16 minor (rumor)?

soren? count em please?

[d_dudy]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
There is, however, a new Great Wonder (Longevity) which provides a similar pop boom.

1st to post worthless and obvious reply post!


wow, that's really interesting. thanks

[Steve Clark]

Don't you think that this would be a much better Civ3 News item than the [fill in the blank] Trivia item masquerading as news?

[d_dudy]

uberkrux managed to post 2 times form when i read soren's post to the time i wrote my reply

but atleast his replies weren't worthless

and yes, steve clark, it would be

[Provost Harrison]

NEW WONDER!!! NEW WONDER!!!

[dainbramaged13]

Originally posted by UberKruX
great wonder.

32 wonders (rumor)?

16 great 16 minor (rumor)?

soren? count em please?

12 major, 24 minor

yes i am quite certain

[Triped]

I do think there is such a thing as too many wonders...

[SITS]

How does the wonder Longevity fit into the Civ world? Is there going to future wonders as well as future techs?

[PGM]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis The population boom from WLTKD does not exist in Civ3. There are now other benefits, such as lower waste and a reduced risk of city conversion.

Great decision, great info, thanks.

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis There is, however, a new Great Wonder (Longevity) which provides a similar pop boom.

Wow, this would be a must-have in civ2 but let's see what happens in civ3. And the fact that it is not a Small Wonder gives its owner a biiiiig boost.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by SITS
How does the wonder Longevity fit into the Civ world? Is there going to future wonders as well as future techs?

It could be related to better sanitation/drugs development/medicine and surgery.
Modern, not necessary future wonder, if longevity is meant pushing the life to the century line, not the thousand of years a la SMAC.

[SITS]

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith


It could be related to better sanitation/drugs development/medicine and surgery.
Modern, not necessary future wonder, if longevity is meant pushing the life to the century line, not the thousand of years a la SMAC.

I thought of that but why not call it the Human Genome Project or Anti-biotics etc. As far as I'm aware there isn't a technology that we have that could be called Longevity. It's the name that I think is unreal rather than the concept.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

the wonder seem to come late in the game, and what is the point of increasing pop points when your cites are probably around the full size already? Does it have any other function?

Or if it comes earlier the one who would build this wonder would most likely win the game as well since the civ would have much more people than its competitors.

[Earthling7]

Originally posted by SITS
I thought of that but why not call it the Human Genome Project or Anti-biotics etc. As far as I'm aware there isn't a technology that we have that could be called Longevity. It's the name that I think is unreal rather than the concept.

Human Genome and Penicillin are both used by Activision. I wonder if there is legal stuff to consider. But this is a valid point. We can expect to live for 75-80 years average, as a 100 years ago, this was closer to 50-60. The Romans were lucky to reach 45.

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
The population boom from WLTKD does not exist in Civ3. There are now other benefits, such as lower waste and a reduced risk of city conversion.

I wonder if this will be THE wonder to get. whoever gets it will have incredible power! unless it's at game's end and all the cities are maxed out anyway...

except that while conquering, you can beat your enemy cities to dust almost, then have them boom after you take them over...

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by SITS
I thought of that but why not call it the Human Genome Project or Anti-biotics etc. As far as I'm aware there isn't a technology that we have that could be called Longevity. It's the name that I think is unreal rather than the concept.

I'd go for World Health Organization, dated say 1907 (Paris, OIHP).
Longevity is a ridiculous name for a wonder.

[Earthling7]

Originally posted by Ribannah


I'd go for World Health Organization, dated say 1907 (Paris, OIHP).
Longevity is a ridiculous name for a wonder.

Spot on!

[Triped]

Yes, but World Health Org. brings on visions of inneficient beauracracy and red tape.