Comparing civs

deity · April 10, 2002, 05:32

Quote:

Originally posted by markusf :

The PG is meaningless.

I don't think there is a single person in the world other then you that would consider our civs even.

The stats in this graphic are what I would think most folks here would use to guage each others civ.

What do you think?

Is there anyone in the world that would agree with me that our civs are rather evenly balanced?

Or do you agree with Markus assessment?

finbar · April 10, 2002, 08:25

Are you two STILL at it?

Rasputin · April 10, 2002, 08:30

You missed the city & unit numbers!!!

rah · April 10, 2002, 09:46

Yeah, city and unit counts, but more important, techs and wonders (if you are playing wonders)

What? you didn't have an embassy with him so we could see if he was first in the categories that you were listed as second?

RAH

drake · April 10, 2002, 10:06

Thats the only thing that truly can test a civs strength.

This little swordfight youre having isn't like you Deity. Who cares?

markusf · April 10, 2002, 11:33

I think poll is a good idea, it gives an idea if people considered a civ with many wonders a threat or not in a game or if they just use demographics to guage..

Here are the straight facts, i fail to see how these 2 civs are equal???

Diety 18 cities, 1 wonder GW, 19 techs.

Markus 24 cities, pyramid, HG, GL, Sun Tu,lighthouse,marco polo, magellans. 29 techs

Markus
30% lux, 70% science 0% tax

$18 income $11 expenses
123 science beakers.

Diety
10% tax 30% science 60% luxery
$17 income $16 expenses
47 science beakers.

markusf · April 10, 2002, 11:36

Oh, and a comment on the demographics , your GNP is higher because you need 60% luxeries to keep your people happy. My civ is only using 30% luxeries, although i could go to 20% and only one city would be unhappy, but i didn't want to starve that city.

Ming · April 10, 2002, 11:57

Hmmmm... based on the stats markus included, it's not even close. I'd take his position anytime.

rah · April 10, 2002, 12:11

Agreed. A much stronger position. Even if you just consider techs alone. Markus will cruise to Dragons and Rifles and then the rush will be on.

There is truth in Drake's post. War determines the true level of strength.

But I am surprised that Markus has HG, 24 cities, 30% lux, and he's not number one in POP.

RAH

markusf · April 10, 2002, 12:30

Quote:

Originally posted by rah
Agreed. A much stronger position. Even if you just consider techs alone. Markus will cruise to Dragons and Rifles and then the rush will be on.

There is truth in Drake's post. War determines the true level of strength.

But I am surprised that Markus has HG, 24 cities, 30% lux, and he's not number one in POP.

RAH

Actually, i only needed pysics and magnitism. Which would have taken about 13 turns to get. Then i would have rush built frigates and blockaded diety, then bombarded all his costal cities. Just ask AH

Frigates are vet with one attack, and they are nearly impossible to lose when the other guy doesn't have gunpowder.

Going number one in pop would have been stupid, my civ would have ended up like dieties, i would need 60% lux just to keep them from rebelling.. Its far better to just have a bunch of 4's and 5's with 5-9 shields of production and good science. If i grew them i would have half the science and production..

drake · April 10, 2002, 12:33

You called him "diety" markus....

He hates that when people do that

rah · April 10, 2002, 13:50

Quote:

Originally posted by markusf
Going number one in pop would have been stupid, my civ would have ended up like dieties, i would need 60% lux just to keep them from rebelling.. Its far better to just have a bunch of 4's and 5's with 5-9 shields of production and good science. If i grew them i would have half the science and production..

For me the pop growth is just the prelude to Communism. The extra trade arrows help the caravan bonuses to get the techs for democ and SOL. (and I know you know how to take advantage of Caravans

) Once in Communism I can drop the lux down to 10% and still generate the same if not better tech growth. The production bonus from the larger pop allows a great base for war.
The 10% will sometimes allow my larger well developed cities to stay in WLTKD status.

So, no, I don't think growing the pop is stupid.

RAH

markusf · April 10, 2002, 14:19

Quote:

Originally posted by rah

For me the pop growth is just the prelude to Communism. The extra trade arrows help the caravan bonuses to get the techs for democ and SOL. (and I know you know how to take advantage of Caravans

) Once in Communism I can drop the lux down to 10% and still generate the same if not better tech growth. The production bonus from the larger pop allows a great base for war.
The 10% will sometimes allow my larger well developed cities to stay in WLTKD status.

So, no, I don't think growing the pop is stupid.

RAH

Let me put it another way, its stupid to grow unless you can go back to a 30% luxery rate after growing. You need marketplaces and some trade routes in place or colloseums. If you grow to size 6 or 7 and need to maintain high luxery rates its going to take you forever to get to democracy. The goal is to have the highest science rates possible at all points in the game as well as the highest tax rates & production.

rah · April 10, 2002, 15:26

Quote:

Originally posted by markusf
Let me put it another way, its stupid to grow unless you can go back to a 30% luxery rate after growing. You need marketplaces and some trade routes in place or colloseums. If you grow to size 6 or 7 and need to maintain high luxery rates its going to take you forever to get to democracy. The goal is to have the highest science rates possible at all points in the game as well as the highest tax rates & production.

Agreed. But I'm willing to take the hit for a few turns if it serves the longer term purpose. (but just a few turns)

And I'm used to 2x where it's a lot easier to keep them happy at 20% or 30%.

But by that point, YOU always have 3 trade routes in all of your core cities. Or at least in every game I've played you in, unless you got off to a real ugly start.

RAH
And enough trade caravans will offset a low science rate in the interim.

deity · April 10, 2002, 19:33

I guess my original point has been missed.

If we keep going into all the stats and the fact that I'll be Democ first with Colosseums in super cities ready to grow.. blah.. blah then we could both put up a full case for analysis of each civ and then a verdict. I'm at work so I can't look at the save just now.

But my point is that as a general rule we use the above mentioned facts to compare civs, ie the ones I posted plus cities and units to some extent and of course Wonders - but Wonders do show up quite heavily in the pg. This is why a top pop civ is just running slightly second in the pg.

pg is pop+techs+Wonders as the main factors.

I think it fair to say that at the end of a session we all look at the pg and a quick consensus is developed about how we are all faiting. We don't go into the above exhaustive analysis followed by hypothetical scenarios that might follow.

Does anyone undestand me? LOL

Hey drake, I miss you!
I'm just having fun here and this is turning out to be a good thread.... maybe it will swing back my way.... who cares!!!! It's just fun!!

markusf · April 10, 2002, 19:39

Quote:

Originally posted by deity
I guess my original point has been missed.

If we keep going into all the stats and the fact that I'll be Democ first with Colosseums in super cities ready to grow.. blah.. blah then we could both put up a full case for analysis of each civ and then a verdict. I'm at work so I can't look at the save just now.

But my point is that as a general rule we use the above mentioned facts to compare civs, ie the ones I posted plus cities and units to some extent and of course Wonders - but Wonders do show up quite heavily in the pg. This is why a top pop civ is just running slightly second in the pg.

pg is pop+techs+Wonders as the main factors.

I think it fair to say that at the end of a session we all look at the pg and a quick consensus is developed about how we are all faiting. We don't go into the above exhaustive analysis followed by hypothetical scenarios that might follow.

Does anyone undestand me? LOL

Hey drake, I miss you!
I'm just having fun here and this is turning out to be a good thread.... maybe it will swing back my way.... who cares!!!! It's just fun!!

PG = cities + pop count (not population) + units

Wonders have no effect on the PG, nor does infustructure. that is why the PG is useless for comparisons.

Frank Johnson · April 11, 2002, 16:26

Even if wonders are counted, they arent weighted correctly, how can they? Mikes is much more valuable than say.....lighthouse.

Anyway, its really easy to "fool" the powergraph with WLTPD.

I'm no master of WLTPD and it's reprecusions yet, but its definately better than waiting on the citys to grow, and sometimes those excess citizens can be made into scientists to make up for the increase in luxuries needed, which can be great if you have libraries and unis.........

I've seen both makeo and rah do this strategy, only to find their capital, sporting 4 or 5 scientists, as the #1 city.

rah · April 11, 2002, 17:26

True, but they're the #1 city due to the amount of wonders

But it can be very viable. Celebrate the pop up. Once they're size 7 or 8, (or larger in your cap) if you have some full food boxes in your core cities, you can starve them for quite a few turns without losing pop. You can crank down the lux since they can't be unhappy if they're scientists. (variation of the XIN YU 5 pop scientist strat) A couple of food caravans from your support cities mean you can keep this up for up to 20-30 turns. And if you lose a pop or two in your fringe cities, no biggie. This and a normal supply of trade caravans will easily bridge the gap while you're racing to SOL and Communism. If you win that race, your civ will be an instant dynamo, and you pop lead can be put to great use finishing your infrastructure and creating the army to continue the expansion. Keeping your science percentage maxed will mean new techs every two/three turns (without a single trade caravan).

All it takes is temples, libraries, and trade routes (and markets and univ. in your core cities). HG makes it easy but without it, you do the same thing but with size 5 and 6 cities instead of 7 or 8.

And if that doesn't work, use and early pyramid to get the pop up where you can start doing this.

RAH

And it does look good on the PG, but I do completely agree that the PG is not exactly a good measurement of power/potential

deity · April 12, 2002, 07:30

What amazes me is that in reality all of you use the pg as a quick guide but then when it's brought up you all deny it! LOL!

rah · April 12, 2002, 08:30

I don't see anybody denying that they look at it. Geeze, it's about all you see when you retire. But all the old timers know it's limitations. There have many games that I was way ahead on the PG but acknowledged to the other player that he was kicking my butt when we finished. By now, most of us know how to make the PG look good.

RAH

Smash · April 12, 2002, 14:37

point of order>

The pg reflects only population,tech and gold.Andu Indoran proved this beyond any doubt(his study is at CF).Units and wonders play no part whatsoever.

carry on

SlowwHand · April 21, 2002, 11:05

Population skews the graph big time. Why Pyramids render it useless.