I know how to make it work, and have had success with it the couple times I've seriously tried it, but I found it really boring juggling all those specialists around for best output, and I hated waiting around for those periodic explosions of growth granted by a great person while being inferior to a CE during the between-GP periods despite my microing of specialists.

I'm not sure which type of economy is outright better for optimum play but CE > SE because it allows you not to put up with that crap and instead lets you focus on the aspects of Civ4 which are good.

Smart people base

instead of bulbing your specialist, settle them in your science city. its far better in the long run.

What's CE and SE?

What's CE and SE?

CE = "Cottage Economy", which is typified by cottage spam... creating lots of cottages, which will grow in to towns. Especially good with Financial trait.

SE = "Specialist Economy" - typified by farming over cottages... more pop means more specialists. Allows you to keep teching even though your science slider may be very low, because you are assigning Scientists to your main science cities

I know how to make it work, and have had success with it the couple times I've seriously tried it, but I found it really boring juggling all those specialists around for best output, and I hated waiting around for those periodic explosions of growth granted by a great person while being inferior to a CE during the between-GP periods despite my microing of specialists.

I'm not sure which type of economy is outright better for optimum play but CE > SE because it allows you not to put up with that crap and instead lets you focus on the aspects of Civ4 which are good.

Smart people base

Play human opponenents... One of those "good" elements of Civ IV you'll end up focusing on with a CE is how much money your opponent is going to make running around your territory with cavalry units pillaging all your cottages. Farms aren't nearly as lucrative for him or as hard to replace for you.

Play hybrid instead. Much better in the long run. You don't decide on no specialists when doing CE, so why should you do the other way with SE?

:)

Play human opponenents... One of those "good" elements of Civ IV you'll end up focusing on with a CE is how much money your opponent is going to make running around your territory with cavalry units pillaging all your cottages. Farms aren't nearly as lucrative for him or as hard to replace for you.

Multiplayer 4x games are the most tedious, clunky, boring crap ever. Civ is part of an exclusively single player genre and no one with a triple digit IQ is going to pretend otherwise.

Also, opponenents.

Multiplayer 4x games are the most tedious, clunky, boring crap ever. Civ is part of an exclusively single player genre and no one with a triple digit IQ is going to pretend otherwise.

Also, opponenents.

I think you'll find a very large portion of this forum has IQs well into the three digit range, and a large part of that group plays (and enjoys) multiplayer games.

Besides, if your argument against my point is "Well, multi player games are boring, so we just won't count them when considering how useful SE's may be in certain circumstances"... Anyone with a three digit IQ can see that you're burying your head in the sand as to a very real benefit of SE's.

See what I did there? I preemptively insulted the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with me, making any future objectors seem like they are speaking from stupidity before they even make their statements. I'm so clever.

If you don't like doing it then don't do it. Both can be used to gain victory, both are effective at providing a working economy. Use the one you like.

This thread has turned into a fungas not unlike one that lives under toe nails.

To me, one of the most exciting part's of Civ is warring. SE's generally allow you to war longer and sooner than a CE. SE's are far better for aggressive early expansion (whether by war or REXing) because your primary research isn't tied to your commerce with an SE, unlike city matinence and unit upkeep.

My style isn't everyone's though - I second the comment that, if you don't like SE's, don't run them.

Are you playing a pure SE? No cottages at all? When I play SE I Generally Cottage my Capital and areas where Irrigation after Civil Service will either take too long or is impossible.

Working unimproved tiles is not a good thing, I Also tend to delay caste system until constitution for Representation. Working with 2 Scientist and 2 Merchants from Libraries and Markets in the mean time should be ok, Therefore you only need to have enough excess food for 4 Specialist and not over grow.

But that's just my play style.

Have you noticed that if you force assign 1 specialist that the city governor will only assign that type of specialist automatically?

That should help with the Mirco-management if you didn't notice, instead of constantly adding and removing specialist.

Multiplayer 4x games are the most tedious, clunky, boring crap ever. Civ is part of an exclusively single player genre and no one with a triple digit IQ is going to pretend otherwise.

Also, opponenents.

Fascinating observation, even if very far off the mark. Multi-player games are infinitely more difficult than single-player games. Other players are not bound to the same restrictions that the AI is. Human opponents will take crazy risks at times or do things completely unexpected. By your extreme dislike of them, I gather you haven't won too many of these have ya?

I've tried playing other Turn Based strategy games multiplayer, and they've all been terribly dull. I think the last one I tried was in the Heroes of Might and Magic saga.

I know how to make it work, and have had success with it the couple times I've seriously tried it, but I found it really boring juggling all those specialists around for best output, and I hated waiting around for those periodic explosions of growth granted by a great person while being inferior to a CE during the between-GP periods despite my microing of specialists.


On the contrary, I find running CE boring after doing it game after game after game since vanilla. Every game is the same for me. SE offers so much more variety.

Since a lot of people are missing this:

I like quite a few multiplayer games. They don't all suck. It's just turn-based multiplayer games that do.

I'm not good at MP Civ4, no, but you guys have the cause and effect mixed up. I don't hate multiplayer civ4 because I suck at it. I suck at it because I, like all intelligent people, hate multiplayer civ4 and would never bother becoming good at it.

Since a lot of people are missing this:

I like quite a few multiplayer games. They don't all suck. It's just turn-based multiplayer games that do.

I'm not good at MP Civ4, no, but you guys have the cause and effect mixed up. I don't hate multiplayer civ4 because I suck at it. I suck at it because I, like all intelligent people, hate multiplayer civ4 and would never bother becoming good at it.

So you're stating that intelligent people don't care about multiplayer civ at all?

I love these kind of people who think that all who disagree are with them are idiots :sarcasm:.

OK, now, let's all get along.... One of the neat things about Civ is the large number of different ways to play - so, hey, if you're playing your style and enjoying it, you're doing it right... :)

Personally I've never played mulitplayer, either, but that's mostly because the computer does a fine job of roughing me up at anything higher than noble, so I figure I have enough of a challenge right now...

To tie this idea to the original topic - if you hate running a SE, don't do it. There are lots of choices, and you're clearly experienced enough to know of them - so run the way you like!

Oh... any intelligent people realize that Civ4 multiplayer is bad? I... uh... always it was not good! See, I'm smart too :)

This thread has turned into a fungas not unlike one that lives under toe nails.

Hopefully it hasn't destroyed one of our improvements in doing so... it so annoys me when it does that.

Hopefully it hasn't destroyed one of our improvements in doing so... it so annoys me when it does that.

Centauri Empathy for the win - harness that fungus!

Centauri Empathy for the win - harness that fungus!

Never! I plan to terraform-eradicate from the entire planet! For that reason, I always have a few spare terraformers late game to clean up any mishaps (although the locusts can get pretty heavy for my defenders).

Never! I plan to terraform-eradicate from the entire planet! For that reason, I always have a few spare terraformers late game to clean up any mishaps (although the locusts can get pretty heavy for my defenders).


Ewww... Morganite rednecks like you are the reason they put in an auto-remove fungus, aren't you? ;)

Ewww... Morganite rednecks like you are the reason they put in an auto-remove fungus, aren't you? ;)

Morganite minions are weak. It is the University that is the strongest! And with the proper technologies and base facilities, forests are the answer to everything (though everyone loves a borehole here or there).

...and the thread hijacking continues at full power :p

I usually make economy basis decision when I pick my leader. If I pick one with Financial, I'm going CE all in. Philosophical, obviously SE rocks. Otherwise, terrain and game play events will determine whether to run pure SE, CE or hybrid and to what degree. I read a lot about transitioning from SE to CE, I haven't figured out that one out yet.
Personally, I enjoy both economy types. A good SE makes me :) because I can crank up the culture (to keep my cities partying) because my specialized cities are producing all the :gold: , :science: and :espionage: I need, whilst the SE's optimal civics make for some mad :hammers: slamming workshops. I love CE games, because running all of the most advanced civics makes me feel like a great enlightened leader and a continent covered by cities surrounded by towns just look awesome.