Ideas for Playing the Game Long Term

[solarscreen]

I'm at nearly 400. I've already accepted nomads twice. I have a hospital in each of my three main clusters along with wells that I think are well positioned. If a tornado doesn't somehow roll through all three clusters I think it won't be so disastrous either. They appear to be self-sufficient. I also have more than a dozen buildings and the accumulation of further buildings will be little more than repetitive, as stated. Balancing food and fuel with further housing also doesn't appear to be too much of an issue as it's a matter of smaller additions along with repeating a "design" that already appears balanced.

That first plateau of success is where many leave the game and claim it's boring and simple and too easy.  They never challenged themselves and their claims ring hollow here where many of us have achieved far greater and have actually played the game to its fullest.

Anything else you'd like to back this up with? I can take my town to 1400. Nothing better to do and that colonial charter mod, which appears to be the best hope, might be as hollow as your post.

Thank you, by the way, for giving me a further reason to play. What a reason.

Looking forward to seeing screencaps and a historical recap of your 1400 pop town when you achieve that!

All of us here that are in the 1,000 plus club did it with no mods and before Luke fixed the so called starvation spiral bug.

[snapster]

Speaking of starvation spirals, I just experienced it. Took some time after I really overextended in accepting a nomad group of 50+ without much of any surpluses although with further development coming figuring that some of them would merely die off and sooner or later a balance would be reached. Ultimately I would just absorb some of their number. At first things weren't too bad and at a point even seemed to stabilize, but after around three years I think, despite my new farming capacity, a chain reaction occurred that didn't seem to be slowing down. I think my last save was before accepting the nomad group and I will be reverting to it.

And all this, by the way, with some food available.

I'm obviously doing it with no mods that make the game easier too.

[A Nonny Moose]

50 nomads means you have to have housing for them and about 6000 food units per year surplus for some considerable time before they become productive.  It is a big step and can easily lead you down the primrose path to perdition. 

Wouldn't it be nice if you could just accept some of them.

[irrelevant]

Actually they can survive indefinitely without housing; they eat out of barns, and warm up in other peoples' doorways. The housing problem always gets solved, even if you never build another house, eventually houses empty out through deaths, and the homeless are first in line. But food, they gotta have, and coats, and tools.

[snapster]

Seeing the yields for the space taken I'm starting to question irrelevant's opinion of farms. For maximum sized farms (15x15, 225 tiles) with three farmers (more than one farmer per 120 tiles, which is supposed to work) I'm getting around 1000 food per harvest, although it should be exactly 1575 so I wonder what's going on there. As has been brought up, the space taken is significant. A gatherer's hut brings in 2k or over in food every season, and you can couple it with a hunter's cabin that adds another 800-1000 per season. In reaching 1400 it is starting to seem smart to me to not go away from gatherers and hunters as I have been.

[irrelevant]

Seeing the yields for the space taken I'm starting to question irrelevant's opinion of farms. For maximum sized farms (15x15, 225 tiles) with three farmers (more than one farmer per 120 tiles, which is supposed to work) I'm getting around 1000 food per harvest, although it should be exactly 1575 so I wonder what's going on there. As has been brought up, the space taken is significant. A gatherer's hut brings in 2k or over in food every season, and you can couple it with a hunter's cabin that adds another 800-1000 per season. In reaching 1400 it is starting to seem smart to me to not go away from gatherers and hunters as I have been.

Don't know how I missed this. Oh wait, yes I do. But this cannot be the final post in this thread, and so for anyone who may stumble into this thread looking for insight:

There are two different considerations for food production. There is food per worker, and there is food per committed tile. In the early going, and even somewhat into the mid-game (where this person still is, or was) food output per person might be the important consideration. But at some point you have more guys than you have jobs for them, and then the limiting factor becomes output of food per square, as there is only so much space available.

Yes, your gatherers' hut can produce 3500 food with 4 guys, but it takes up the space that could produce 10,000-15,000 if it were made into farms.

I'm getting around 1000 food per harvest, although it should be exactly 1575 so I wonder what's going on there.

I wonder how far away from your fields your barns and houses are? There's a reason I lay out my farms like I do, in those "neat grids which are pleasing to the eye" (and that is not the reason).

[salamander]

The lower than expected yield might be distance, but I think if the fields were not being completely harvested, I'd think that would have been mentioned.  I don't think it was said whether or not the farmers working the field were educated, and if they weren't, that might have affected the yield, too.

[irrelevant]

@salamander  That's true. Either of these factors might have escaped his attention. But he did post a few screenshots, his barns were poorly placed. He couldn't bring himself to put them where they needed to be because of his scorn for my "neat grids."

But you're right, he had accepted a couple groups of nomads and was only 86% educated; that probably was a factor as well.

I don't toot my own horn much, but I will say that anyone who thinks I'm doing food production wrong should be prepared to demonstrate that by doing it better than I do, not by doing it worse.

[chillzz]

it could be distance house to field, field to barn, early onset of winter, and do not forget full barn.. walk to the next one might be twice as long.
education of course does play a role too.
Worn out tools (getting replacement), cold (get new coat), hungry (get food), idle (happiness), fire (help fire fighting), ^^ prioritize all could be factors too.

don't forget about field sizes, 15x15 might be highest yield, but 15x8 / 8x15 fields do a lot better per worker.
http://banishedinfo.com/t/Size_calculator is a neat tool. 2 times a 15x8 will definitely be better

[irrelevant]

@chillzz, lol, yep, that's pretty much everything!  Farming is so easy, and so hard.

[chillzz]

absolutely! planning ahead to placement of multiple barns and surrounding fields with roads is a strategy. learning from 1 game to do it differently in another game.
Getting almost all achievements (97%) wasn't all that hard. just getting the tenure one is dreading.. everthing goes so slow...

now playing with mods that balance things out is a bit better, especially the corn/wheat fields with RedKetchup silo's
less space wasted on default barns, but still a challenge

[snapster]

I just got some poorly stated advice previously. It's also questionable if there is indeed an early point at which you would value output per worker, especially considering when it comes to farms it is liable to variability if you try to be very efficient due to weather, more than sheer output of food but whatever.

Yes, your gatherers' hut can produce 3500 food with 4 guys, but it takes up the space that could produce 10,000-15,000 if it were made into farms.

This is significant. I guess I would take it on faith that the 10k-15k figure is correct for the same area. What doesn't appear factored in here is that the output of huts is per season rather than per year.

As for my progress, my first game ended at 400 citizens as I was careless. I quickly got back up to 500+ citizens on hard, harsh, and disasters on. One of the main challenges the game offers, at least to the conscientious gamer, is keeping up with the multiplying population, which speeds the game up and may also transform the experience to something less appealing for some. I ultimately failed to see a point to going further (this time I was more or less stable even though I had to build an entire market surrounded by farms along with three woodcutters, which remarkably was not very problematic when it came to distribution), especially surrounding the circumstances of my ban and my impression of this forum echoing what one user wrote to me in a pm about what the rule is when it comes to such forums rather than the exception.

I would be curious to learn how others don't run out of space and how they approach the "late game" to providing sufficient firewood and food, but my verdict on this game overshadows that curiosity. As is well attested to elsewhere, outside of this forum, along with the size and activity of this forum ironically, the game is limited. The posters collected here are more of an oddity. Their perspective is interesting and significant, although you have to make an effort to draw it out of them, but not preponderant in any way. The person who claimed this game is full of possibilities is quite simply a fool. It is also not to be expected of them to push for change. They just play.

[solarscreen]

I just got some poorly stated advice previously. It's also questionable if there is indeed an early point at which you would value output per worker, especially considering when it comes to farms it is liable to variability if you try to be very efficient due to weather, more than sheer output of food but whatever.

Rather than poorly stated, I would say you just didn't understand and the conversation went off the rails rather than trying to get an understanding.

I guess I would take it on faith that the 10k-15k figure is correct for the same area. What doesn't appear factored in here is that the output of huts is per season rather than per year.

Doesn't take much faith when some of the most knowledgeable and accomplished players have documented everything for you if you take time to read and look at the screencaps and spreadsheets.

I ultimately failed to see a point to going further (this time I was more or less stable even though I had to build an entire market surrounded by farms along with three woodcutters, which remarkably was not very problematic when it came to distribution)

This is where you differed from those who like to play the game for what it is and enjoy it.  I would move on to something that you enjoy.

I would be curious to learn how others don't run out of space and how they approach the "late game" to providing sufficient firewood and food, but my verdict on this game overshadows that curiosity.

It has been explained and well documented in the challenges and other posts here on the forum.  Some have even tried to explain it all again in response to your questions.  I think you would like to understand but really don't care as you have lost interest in this game.

As is well attested to elsewhere, outside of this forum, along with the size and activity of this forum ironically, the game is limited. The posters collected here are more of an oddity.

Some people have found it is not the game they thought it was a many cannot get past the first or second winter.  The only thing odd here is that we concentrate on understanding, helping, and not offending so that as many can enjoy as possible.  Oh, and having the best players in the game all on this forum could be considered odd!

Their perspective is interesting and significant, although you have to make an effort to draw it out of them, but not preponderant in any way.

No drawing necessary just patience, practice, and much reading all the good info already documented here,

The person who claimed this game is full of possibilities is quite simply a fool. It is also not to be expected of them to push for change. They just play.

This is why you were put on a time-out for the last week. 

You are entitled to your perspective but personal attacks and name calling is not what we agreed to on this forum and quite frankly accomplishes nothing of value anywhere it is used.  As for pushing for change, Luke is over on his forum, ShiningRockSoftware.com, and you are welcome to push all you want.  If you read the posts here you will see that we have all had our attempts made to converse with the author about things and we ultimately respect his wish to do as he pleases.

You are certainly welcome to participate here but if this latest post after the break is an indication of your tone towards the forum and its members, I would ask you to please move on to a place where you feel at home with like minded members.

[snapster]

I also wonder whether an apparently proficient gamer like irrelevant exploits the fact that a non-growing town is sustainable. Being able to control the pace of this game, in light of my greater experience now, strikes me as a very big deal. I even wonder, considering how houses are stocked with food and firewood, whether keeping up with population growth after a certain point is even possible. The third thing that makes me wonder is how very large populations are fit on a map. Even reaching 1400 came to seem ambitious to me on a large valley map. Not quite sure what I'd be doing so wrong.

[salamander]

One of the main challenges the game offers, at least to the conscientious gamer, is keeping up with the multiplying population, which speeds the game up and may also transform the experience to something less appealing for some.

You're right, that is an on-going challenge in the game as the town grows.  How you handle it can take several forms, depending on your preferences for playing the game.

I would be curious to learn how others don't run out of space and how they approach the "late game" to providing sufficient firewood and food...

Well, you can either cut more firewood and grow more food to keep up with the demand -- but as you say, there's a limit to the space you have for continuing to do that -- or you might possibly turn to trading to bring in what you need, using high-value goods to purchase what you're short of.

The person who claimed this game is full of possibilities is quite simply a fool...They just play.

Quite likely that would be me, although I think that opinion may be held by others as well.  As for 'just playing' ... it is a game after all.