Ok, I'm reviving this thread because I've been trying to figure out the optimum moment to start training workers.



It might depend a bit on how many workers need to be trained, but I did just simulate a scenario in which the player wants/needs to train 2k workers, with a maximum population (non-military) of 10k.

In that case it was optimal to start training workers (1-hour batches) at 55% of max population (about 11 hours before population would get maxed otherwise).

Compared to start training at 80% of max population, the difference was about 5k gold. So better start training already at 55% max population ; it will get you like 30 offense for OOP more

yay! I can now make 0.04 more attacks on OOP. Thats just awesome .

Other than that, either for a specific amount of workers or max workers, training hourly at 24 hours in-game than training in 12 hour batches when pop maxes always works best for me.

Edit* Just noticed my fail . I meant OOP-24 which used to be in-game 24.

_________________
Well, bleh.

Reviving to ask a question which has bugged me for ages...

In the guide, it says Peasants pay 3.2 gph in taxes, and workers make and pay 3.5 gph in taxes and revenue. That being said, wouldn't it be more cost-effective to max out workers when training military? Especially if you're playing with a lower land total. And on that same note, it seems like the less peasants you have, the less slaves that people nab during kidnap or raiding.

That's what I think anyways, then I'm farsighting random people in the game, and I see super low amounts of workers compared to the peasant population. Is this because the more peasants you have, the more you get per tick? Or is there some other reason for this?

_________________
Kyal says: you're like an abusive boyfriend
abusin me and shiz
both verbally and physically
and emotionally
*slits throat*
JK

You say: lmao
hey, I haven't beat you!
...yet
........today

The guide says 2.6 gold for peasants.

_________________
In his last Budget as chancellor in 2007, Gordon Brown said: “We will never return to the old boom and bust.”

That is right, peasants produce 2.6 base gold while workers produce 3.5. They each use one population space out of your maximum population, so a kingdom with 20k workers and 10k peasants will produce around 9k more than a kingdom on the same acres with the same build but with only 10k workers.

And yes, you are also correct that having a lower peasant population reduces the efficacy of kidnapping and so training a lot of workers is a decent method to avoid having others kidnap from you.

The reason you so often see kingdoms (doing well) with low worker population is because workers present you with an opportunity cost. Yes, workers will produce more gold over time than peasants, but they cost something upfront. Many kingdoms will benefit in the short-term by cutting worker production to achieve better military power by avoiding the (usually 100 gold) worker cost.

You can therefore plan out a worker strategy that fits with your growth strategy. Since (on average and before economic modifications) workers opportunity cost takes about 4 days to yield a military benefit, if you know you will be training for an attack before 4 days you can simply train enough workers to cover your military train population figures.

_________________
The empty handed painter on your street..
is drawing crazy patterns in your sheets...
The sky, too, is falling over you...
and it's all over now, Baby Blue.

Ah, my mistake, you're right. I was thinking slaves, which produce 3.2 gph ^_^"

And I see what you mean, I forgot that training workers cost money. So, If I'm hearing you right, going with a higher workforce would mean that I gotta switch around my building percentages, pretty much? Or, since I've kept up with max training workers the whole round, I can afford to lose out on a few GM/homes in favor of more combat related structures?

Also, my question about the population growth has yet to be answered, does less peasants mean less growth? Or are the workers welcome to have little babies too haha

_________________
Kyal says: you're like an abusive boyfriend
abusin me and shiz
both verbally and physically
and emotionally
*slits throat*
JK

You say: lmao
hey, I haven't beat you!
...yet
........today

What exactly do you mean by changing your building % around? As Robes said, having more workers earlier will yield benefits in 3-5 days (depending on your improvements), so if you plan to attack in say 2 days, try to estimate how many workers you will need for that military push + incoming. When you're planning on sitting (i.e. not attacking for a while) then just pump workers around the clock.



By combat related structures do you mean Taverns? If so, then no, don't use these until the end of the round or take out a specific target early on. There's nothing wrong with pumping lots of workers now, it just means you'll be growing a little slower than those who haven't trained so many. Still need to maximise gold though so in a sense, workers are not a substitute for Homes/GMs. Also, if you keep training workers, your peasant population will decrease, so you do need to keep increasing your population otherwise your kingdom will "die" or if you're hit substantially you'll overpopulate. Further, when training military, you use workers which then reduces your gold economy anyway, so if you stopped making Homes your economy would continue in a downward spiral.



The more peasants you have, the greater the growth, yes. So by that logic, training workers dilutes peasant count which slows down population growth.

_________________
150.100.80.

doy, I forgot training workers [EDIT] into military [EDIT] means less gold. Okay, I think I have an idea of a strategy to use regarding workers. Thanks for the help guys.

_________________
Kyal says: you're like an abusive boyfriend
abusin me and shiz
both verbally and physically
and emotionally
*slits throat*
JK

You say: lmao
hey, I haven't beat you!
...yet
........today