The 'size six' strategy

[La Fayette]

Most experienced players probably remember the 'size five' strategy designed by Xin Yu for civ2.
I have chosen the title of this thread in honor of Xin, our master.

I started looking at civ3 very recently (in fact a week ago) because it seems that the French version of the game is not going to be available before 2002.
I must heartily say thank you once more to another civ2 master, namely solo who, knowing that, sent me the game directly from the US by airmail.
Anyway, here is my first proposal as far as civ3 is concerned:

Winning at civ3 (just like many many other strategy games) is very much a matter of growth rate. If you grow faster than the AI, you win, ...
In the early game, the growth of your cities is related to food surplus (1 food = slow growth, 2 food = 'normal', 3 food = highly desirable). This has been very much described and stressed on this forum AFAIK.
Later on, civ2 gave us settlers (able to join the city up to size 8), food caravans and WLT*D (if Republic or Democracy).
civ3 gives us workers and settlers, able to join the city any size.
Specializing some cities in 'worker-nursing' and sending those workers where needed, and especially joining the other cities, is a nice strategy.
My proposal is to build those nursing cities UP TO SIZE 6 and let them work at that size.
There is a huge advantage doing that:
instead of building a worker once in a while (according to the food surplus in your nursing-city), your size-six-nursing- city will build one worker/turn (if your city is able to produce 10 shields/turn, food surplud at least one) or one worker every second turn (if your nursing-city provides at least 5 shields/turn and has at least a food surplus of one).
I have done that over 100 times in my current game and it works like a charm. IMO it is not a bug. It is a threshold effect due to the fact that the size of the foodbox changes at size 6 (there was the same kind of threshold effect in Xin Yu's 'size five', due to the fact that, from size 5 on, you can have specialists in your city in civ2).
Have a try, my friends. IMO it's a winner.

(La Fayette, looking at a nursing-city size 6)

[zedar]

I can understand the 1 worker per turn from a sheilds point of view, there must be something i haven't noticed with the food box though.

size 6 city builds worker and shrinks to size 5
at this stage what exactly happens to the foodbox? is it fully empty in which case you'd need alot of extra food to get your pop point back in the same turn.. or does something else happen?

At work at the moment so i cant test it.. but thinking alot about the optimal ways to build workers and settlers.. if this can somehow be applied to have a city roll between size 4 and size 6 building a settler every 2-3 turns it will be great

Zedar

[barefootbadass]

With a granary and a few good food squares(like floodplain with wheat) you could pump out settlers about as fast as you could get the shields.

Not sure about workers though, but that could go pretty fast too. I sense an 'exploit' coming up here

[Aeson]

Try building your workers once the city reaches size 7. This will bring it down to size six, with a full food box. It will grow back to size 7 the next turn, so if you also can build the worker in one turn, the city will float at 6 with a full food box.

[zedar]

was just thinking of a further possible benefit to this.. which 'end' of the population do the workers come from? if they come from the 'unhappy' end and if 'we cannot forget the whip' unhappy people are furtherest on the end this could be a way to replace unhappy ppl because of whip with unhappy people because of population (easier to fix).
eg.
H=happy,C=content, UP=unhappy population, UW=unhappy whip.
size 6 city
H,H,C,C,UP,UW
builds worker goes to size 5
H,H,C,C,UP
jumps back up to size 6
H,H,C,C,UP,UP..

it will be good if it works like this
im still at work and cant test this though...

Zedar

[La Fayette]

IMO Aeson gives a good summary of my proposal.
I attach a savegame, so that those wishing to see how it works with their own eyes can do it.
Look at the Chinese empire. The city of Xinjang builds one worker/turn and remains size 6. The city of Tatung builds one worker/2 turns and remains size 6.
... just some kind of cheap Wonder, I tell you!... and much more powerful than many costly wonders you didn't manage to build.

[sophist]

Originally posted by zedar
was just thinking of a further possible benefit to this.. which 'end' of the population do the workers come from? if they come from the 'unhappy' end and if 'we cannot forget the whip' unhappy people are furtherest on the end this could be a way to replace unhappy ppl because of whip with unhappy people because of population (easier to fix).
eg.
H=happy,C=content, UP=unhappy population, UW=unhappy whip.
size 6 city
H,H,C,C,UP,UW
builds worker goes to size 5
H,H,C,C,UP
jumps back up to size 6
H,H,C,C,UP,UP..

it will be good if it works like this
im still at work and cant test this though...

Zedar

Happiness and unhappiness are attached to the city, not to the individual workers therein. If you pop-rush twice, you will have 40 citizen turns of unhappiness, not 20 turns of unhappiness. If you keep the city at pop 1, the unhappiness won't go away faster; in fact, it will last longer because it's spread over fewer people.

[DrSpike]

Cunning. It is certainly good to have worker factories, but I would be loathe to use any core cities for this purpose. As slow as it is, packing cities in gaps between core cities and producing a worker every 10 turns may be preferable. You can keep a steady stream of workers coming, for both pop-booming and improvements, and don't need to disband the worker factories till after sanitation is discovered.

[solo]

This is clever, but I think an aqueduct and granary are needed to get a worker every turn. The food from half of a size 7 box (left by the granary) will refill all of a size 6 box. Only 1 surplus food and 10 shields are needed for another worker the following turn. It's too bad that each one produced costs another gold to support, but I suppose any surplus workers could trot over to your capital and be traded to the AI for 30 or so gold each, as needed, to make up any deficit.
With the same sized food box up to size 6, it makes sense to wait a bit to make workers and settlers in CivIII. In contrast, CivII's changing food box made it more efficient to produce new settlers early in a city's life, since early city growth was quicker with smaller boxes.

[Aeson]

If the city is built next to a fresh water source (definitely something you should consider when placing worker factories) then there is no need for an aqueduct. A granery is needed, just forgot to mention that. Usually I forgo graneries altogether and just try to conquer the city that built the pyramids if at all possible. The time needed to build the granery in the first place (missing out on 2 units if pop rushing, 2 settlers if not) can negate its advantages later on, and if later on you can get all the graneries for free, then there really isn't any point to building them.

[La Fayette]

solo
You give a very clear explanation of the threshold effect I mentioned. Thank you. Aquaduct and granary are in fact required (except if the city has fresh water nearby,... agree with you Aeson). But I don't quite agree with the 1 gold cost: most of the time the worker will be used to grow another city and the cost will be nil.
Aeson
If one or several 'nursing-cities' are in use, no granary will be needed elsewhere, since all cities will grow with help of the workers who join them, built by the 'nursing-city'.
This is a very important secondary advantage of my proposal: cities can grow without any food surplus.

[Aeson]

The one problem I have with worker factories in general is the time it takes to set one up (granery, grow to 7), and the fact that an almost inexhaustible supply of workers is already available by military expansion (which is almost required on higher difficulty levels). I do usually set up a "mini" settler factory or two. These are set up to be able to grow to 3 in the time it takes to build the settler. Later on in the game it's worth it to try to use the 7 to 6 food box feature in settler production as well, but again it takes too long to set up in the early game, at the expense of having 2 more new cities building settlers before the first can be produced. Having just 2 of mini's allows me to continue my expansion quickly when coupled with the 1 default settler each new city with any food production will make. And later on gives me a surplus of settlers so I can raze enemy cities and rebuild instantly, avoiding any potential reversion problems. In recent games I have razed everything, excepting the AI city that builds the pyramids, and usually by the early AD's I have at least a hundred or so captured workers. Adding captured workers to cities is a little bit tricky, as going to war with their former nation can cause happiness troubles. Once I have cut down one Civ to a point were further war isn't necessary (or they are destroyed), then that nations workers all get assimilated. Usually these worker factories can produce a horseman every 2-3 turns with almost no modifications or pop-rushing needed, and not requiring a granery. Workers are great, but a single horseman unit can easily be worth 5 - 10 captured workers in many cases.

One warning, make sure to add captured workers to cities in a rotation of nationalities. Just wholesale and random addition can sometimes lead to high numbers of a single nationality in a city. In a recent game with domination disabled (civfanatics GOTM), I had a size 35 city revert to the Civ (England) I allowed to keep one city. At the time I had no idea how this city reverted, as my people were in distain of their culture, and it was 8 spaces from my capitol, and over 50 from their 1 remaining size 5 city. It turns out in my mass assimilation, this city had recieved a disproportional ratio of English workers (I think 10-12).

The point about the upkeep was intended for those situations where population points are "stored" in workers or settlers for a future time (after hospitals) when they can be re-added to the population. In this case, it certainly can be better to use settlers, as the upkeep will be half.

Also, having a surplus of settlers is always something I try to achieve, as they come in handy during wars, building temporary outposts in enemy territory for healing your troops or claiming valuable resources in allied campaigns. these towns hold the territory/resource until a more properly placed town can be founded, and then can be turned back into a settler again. It's important to remember to quickly create a culture gap between these outposts and the opposition, or rush a quick culture improvement that can later be sold. If pop-rushed, this improvement actually gives you a $ return on any excess population that may be accumilated during the lifespan of the outpost when it is sold.

Perhaps if these surplus settlers aren't going to be needed for many turns, this would be a way for them to add value instead of require upkeep. Build a dummy city on worthless terrain, and pop-rush, then sell, improvements. Even a completely corrupt city will also add 1 commerce to your coffers, instead of the settler requiring 1 upkeep. The unhapiness effects would be negated once the city is turned back into a settler as well. The one drawback would be if a garison unit was needed to keep the happiness high enough to opperate (lack of luxuries). This would also work with the production of military, but that side has already been covered. This would just be a use for those "stored" population points in times of peace.

[La Fayette]

Aeson
My experience at playing civ3 is much too short to discuss your proposals about the use of settlers.
At least I like the idea of razing enemy cities and immediately rebuilding. That one might prove very useful, especially when coming close to the core of a culturally strong civ.

[solo]

I'm liking these worker and settler ideas more and more, La Fayette and Aeson. As for early exploitation of worker/settler farms, it might be worth it to build a granary very early, in the 1st or 2nd city if it has extra food and is also located on a river. I can see this growing very quickly to the magic size of 6, where it would quickly pump out workers and settlers to speed expansion and growth.

Later in the game, nothing grows a city faster than adding workers, so these farms can pay off throughout the game. I have also discovered that sometimes adding a few workers to a proposed trade that "can't be done" sometimes tips the balance so the trade can be done, when the other ingredients of the trade are just right, too.

Aeson's ideas for keeping a spare settler or two around are excellent, too. Nothing bugs me more than seeing aluminum I need NOW just outside my borders and just inside a neighboring "can't be done" AI's, or to have a conquered city revert when it contains an assortment of my favorite attackers.

[DrSpike]

Further to my last post which generated no comment: this idea is interesting, but after consideration I feel it is too slow for early game settler churning, and not optimal for worker churning. In the early game settlers in 20 turns is the norm, or 10 turns if you take the time to build/rush a granary. This investment is usually warranted. Making the effort to carry out this plan to churn settlers fast is probably not, however, unless the map is very large. The plan has more chance of being useful for worker churning, but even here there are early game difficulties. Take emperor/deity level as an example, you aren't getting to size six without 2 MP, a temple (more investment) and 3 luxuries (I assume the granary is rushed). Probably easier is to continue with the settler churning after your expansion is complete, and build cities in gaps between other cities, and use these as worker factories. You only need two squares, the founding square and one producing 2 food - no overlap problems for ages - and you can churn workers at least 1 per 10 turns, but maybe even every 5 is the city is sufficiently close to the capital to be producing 2 shields. 4 such worker factories will keep a steady flow coming, more than enough to make improvements and pop boom later when more infrastructure is in place.

Overall La Fayette's plan above, IMO, is valuable for a midgame worker factory if the method above isn't generating enough workers for timely pop booms. The early AD infrastructural lull suggests itself.

[La Fayette]

Dr Spike
This is a free world. Some people like to fight, others prefer to make money... IMO you are perfectly entitled to prefer other methods than the one I propose in order to churn out workers.
Nevertheless I would advise you to try it once because, for me, it gives very nice results.
solo
If the French version of civ4 comes out first, you get it from me the day it comes out .

[DrSpike]

I will indeed try it, as I said before IMO the strat has a place in the early AD (post early war) infrastructural lull. I'm past that in my game now, so I'll have to wait a few days. I similarly urge you to test my methods and comment.

[La Fayette]

DrSpike
If I were you, I wouldn't say it's too late to apply 'size 6', because when your cities grow past size 6 (and even more when they grow past size 12) the size of the food box is increased and 'natural' growth is that much slower.
Therefore 'size 6' is even more performing in the end game (just like food caravans in civ2, much more performing to grow from size 25 to 26 than from size 5 to size 6).
Up to you, ...and good civing anyway.

[solo]

I just gave this a try in an OCC game. I started on a river and when I got near size six, I built a granary. Then I pumped out about 8 workers in a row, who went around irrigating, mining, and roading like crazy. Shortly after the last worker was produced, 6 re-joined the city bringing it up to size 12, instantly. So, in 10 turns, I doubled my city's size and more than doubled its production, and continued the game by quickly building many city improvements. I doubt all of this could have been done as quickly, growing the city in the usual way. For OCC, "Size six" may very well replace the WLT_D kind of growth we were used to in CivII OCC. It's that changing food box that makes it work so well. This strat is a real find.

[DrSpike]

La Fayette


There is certainly a window for this strat, and in OCC it may be killer, but I don't think using a core city generally for churning workers in the endgame is optimal

Our methods combine quite nicely though, as i'm finding in my current game. The trick is finding the level of pop rushing that works globally (you don't want to hinder later growth). When you try deity I think you'll appreciate my ideas more.

[Aeson]

About the endgame..

This actually becomes very useful for those size 20+ cities later in the game. If you have a lot of them (as you should) there will probably be a few that have nothing better to do with their production. One option is to just turn all specialists into workers, and add them to fledgling cities. Adding 10 of your own workers to a newly captured city really cuts down on cultural reversion as well. Size 6 to 7 isn't the only range that allows for population hovering. Will have to check and see what other transitions allow for it.

[Travathian]

Aeson,

I always keep my captured workers out in the field, unless their parent civ is destroyed. Sure they only work half as fast, but then you don't have to worry about defections/unhappiness from them being in a city. I slowly reassimilate my own workers into my cities, saving other nations workers for late in the game when I can sprinkle them throughtout my core cities, which by then have plenty of happiness to spare if I do go back to war.
And I always have a size 'six' city producing workers. I specifically try and find a good location for a city to do this. I am big on infrastructure, and likewise roadbuilding to the newest "additions" to my empire.

[darthx86]

I, too, have used this approach in my current game, but I discovered it accidentally.

For me, the Babylonians, my first two cities ended up being as developed as they could for the tech level, so I had each one crank out a worked. Each produced said worker in a couple turns, then I noticed that each was ready to gain its pop point back the very next turn. Natch, I set each to produce another worker, and the cycle began. Both cities did have granaries and bordered rivers, so this may be the crux.

But for me, being in the late ancient age, it was an absolute boon for expansion.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by solo
This strat is a real find.

Thank you solo.
Have you already won OCC in civ3 at deity level?

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by DrSpike
La Fayette

There is certainly a window for this strat

Thank you, DrSpike.
Of course I shall try your proposals. All of us (especially myself) are rookies at this game. We will learn by playing and trying.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by Aeson
About the endgame..

This actually becomes very useful for those size 20+ cities later in the game.
Size 6 to 7 isn't the only range that allows for population hovering

Thank you, Aeson.
I agree with you that 'size6' is certainly not the one and only method. Guess what playing civ3 will be like within a few months when all rookies will have turnes veterans!

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by Travathian

And I always have a size 'six' city producing workers. I specifically try and find a good location for a city to do this.

Thank you, Travathian.
River (which spares an aqueduct) and hills (in order to get a shield production of 10 at size 6) are nice to have.

[DrSpike]

Hmm, if there are other pop levels that allow this strat as Aeson suggests it's more versatile than I thought. We may have size six for the midgame, and size (fill in appropriate number here) for the endgame. Of course, in the absence of an appropriate pop level close to 20 this strat wont work well, which is one of the reasons I advocate keeping specialist worker factories at size 1 and plonking them in those nice gaps in your empire. I think the one indisputable point that comes from this thread is that you can never have enough workers at most points in this game.

Also, spot on with the comment about adding workers to conquered cities to reduce cultural reversion. This is critical on emp/deity where the tendency for reversion is _ahem_ quite high, as I'm sure a lot of people have experienced (whilst staring in disbelief at your now not quite so burgeoning empire and muttering curses about the damn Russians not having any bloody culture anyway)

[GeorgeWang]

Wow. Nice trick.

[Aeson]

I think that size 20 21 is one of the transitions that work. I'm not sure, as I currently don't have any save games to check, but I am resonably certain that there is a low 20's point that will result in hovering. I did have a 20+ city that was building a worker every turn and not losing population in a recent game, not sure what size it was exactly. This may be an effect of a very large food surplus per turn though, rather than the change in food box size. It was a city with 20 railroaded and irrigated grassland tiles with a couple of wheat even. In the same game, a city much like it was able to produce a settler every other turn (corruption is nice sometimes), and with longevity (or whatever the +2 population per food box wonder is) it was growing by 2 population every 2 turns. This is much harder to set up, as it is dependant on having 15 shields per turn, enough food to grow in 2 turns, and the wonder.