Just discovered that if you have a dowry and try to use it on a double sized farm as a result of the city having 17+ population, the dowry does not give a double sized benefit. Tried to add this to the wiki, but I do not have permission to edit the pages. If someone could add this to the wiki who does have permission, I think this could be important.
I think the whole Dowry thing should be abandoned...it's a reminder of the horrible evil (of arranged marriages) inflicted on the Indian subcontinent!
...and a lot of other places, if you wish to get technical!
One could also add that the value if the both players are in the same civ is 250% of the base value.
It does give you some incentive to visit friendly cities more often. Though "dowry" doesn't bother me, I understand. Maybe it should just be called 'royal wedding" or something. But also note that slavery and other historical realities we'd like to forget are concepts included in RealCiv, and justifiably so--unpleasant, but they're part of history and had an impact on world development.
Lol slavery hasn't disappeared, it has just become more refined. If you carefully read Adam Smith's treatise on economics, he describes the economic benefits of slavery in very clear and quantitative terms and the methods employed there have only changed in appearance in the last 250 years.
Okay back to the OP's comment. Just because there are two people in a double house does not allow you to get a double dowry by marrying both of them. Polygamy is not implemented! Further, without exploiting barbarians I don't see how you will get to 17 population in the current iteration. If you are using this exploit, shame on you for even bringing this up as you are tainting the beta with bad data that will hopefully soon be corrected as the devs are aware of the problem. If you really are a glutton and spend all your resources on food instead of helping your nation defend itself with armies or GPs, well then I guess that is your choice but you are not really helping your team that way. This strategy is a bit selfish.
The dowry only working on one of the two house inhabitants makes sense.
Also, as was just pointed out, 17 population does indeed seem unlikely in the current form of the game.
We should also get rid of references to monarchs as well, those were a terrible blight on humanity for way too long and still are today in some backward countries.
Hah, all that and your population is 22. Did you end up making the 24 population achievement?Originally Posted by BoMbaStiXxX
This is a legacy picture. There is not that much wealth in the game anymore since the compound interest exploits were closed. I think the dev team needs to stay focused on the current and future state of the product. Btw you seem to be out of great scientists and engineers. Right about now in that game they must be getting pretty expensive. Have a nice day.
Legacy picture? What do you mean with that term? From an old game? No, it is my from currently running game #213.
This shows the market:
And NickV, no, not yet, I have 23 citizens and got 28600 food of 42320 for the achievement.
Cute.
But you're missing some of the point, which is that high populations are both unusual and have diminishing returns in the current state of the game. Not that I expect allowing double dowries would have much impact on the game either way, though randomly getting 17k food added to one's civ does seem a little unfair.
There should not be that many resources on day five of a game on the current patch. The only way I could see it happening would be from a seriously dedicated barbarian chasing exploiter with no one countering. Once that exploit is taken care of this thread, as I pointed out, will be irrelevant unless another economic exploit pops up. I am a bit surprised that so many people are selling you prophets. No one uses them for any purpose in your game?
Also, I won game 209 with about 900 fame on day 5. What are you guys doing in game 213 that the top person only has 246 fame on day 5? You don't have enough military to do barbarians. If you spent some on military instead of food/prophets, your game might have been finished by now.
Wow, nice Bombastixx/Daniel! You got yourself so many prophets! I tried the all out farmer thing before too, only got to 22 houses by the end of the game. Have you gotten your 24th house now? Obviousely that's not the way to play to win, but it's still quite a nice screenshot!
You mean like EnglandLOL
I only killed barbs until 9 or 10 population.
It was a very tight game for a long time until a buddy and I decided to part ways with our civ and found a new 2 player civ and win the game with it. He has most our military, namely about 30,000 attack power.Also, I won game 209 with about 900 fame on day 5. What are you guys doing in game 213 that the top person only has 246 fame on day 5? You don't have enough military to do barbarians. If you spent some on military instead of food/prophets, your game might have been finished by now.
The game is so slow-paced now because we can neither get domination, economic or culture victory now (as there ain't enough wonders that can currently be build).
I'm a 26 now. Roughly getting sufficient food for +1 citizen every 24 hours. Five era wins left in this game, 3 of them definitely being science ones. I might reach 32.
How do you do that! It boggles my mind how people get high populations while still doing research and culture.
Erm I'm not doing alot of research and culture, all I got is from trickles (I try to be at 0 harvest when I'm at my PC) because then you get resources every 2 minutes. And then I try to use what I got as effective as possible. Which means I try to search the easiest mazes (sometimes you can even go out with more moves than you went in with) and use my puzzle moves at a time when I'm the only one at it.
Back to the original discussion...dowry shouldn't be doubled. What you see semi-detached house instead of a cottage is in fact 2 workers/families living there. So you should still only marry to one of them
Another "experiment": (It was accidental.) Two cities that are independent can have the full dowry multiplier. Is this intentional?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
