It seems that in games with a lot of sea and a coastal capital, you will be getting alot of commerce from trade routes late in the game.

A capital can have 5 trade routes late in the game for a total of more about 70 base commerce (before multipliers).

If you also make another 70 base commerce in capital (from tiles worked) that make a total of 140 base commerce

So by running bureocracy you gain 70 commerce, Oxford and academy (not counting library, uni and observarory that can be had in any city) makes that 175 beackers.

Now to gain the same ammount of beackers from free speech you need to have about 80 towns (taking roughly into consideration the savings from cheaper civic as well). That is alot, even for a big empire of lets say 15 cities as not every city will be having lots of cottages..

So it seems that bureocracy for such a capital is the best civic till the end of the game...unless you are going for culture of course.

70 commerce should only equal 9 towns if each town gives 8 commerce.

70 commerce should only equal 9 towns if each town gives 8 commerce.

The comparison is free speech to bureocracy..free speech gives +2 commerce per town.

Thats the beauty of Trade Routes. You dont need citizens to "work" them. You dont need citizens to "go pro" (specialists). Population helps increase the value of the TRs, but other than that, they are citizen independent. A crappy 1-pop coastal Tundra city can make money the instant its founded (at ~50% slider) if you have the GLH. Nurturing those numbers with stuff like Harbors is very solid. Bureaucracy is a great civic, but its AMAZING if you have a Coastal Capitol with the GLH, Colossus, a Harbor and the ToA.

You can actually have 6 trade routes. :)

Not even close to worth running bureau, unless it's a quite small empire/map/OCC. 70 from bureau is at the very upper end - and it's true that this does match 35 towns; however that is only about what you would find in 4 cities. Plus you lose out on 100% culture as well. Once again,I know the capital may have much more influence on a smaller map where you may have only half a dozen cities. But otherwise by the late game either nationhood or free speech is almost always better.

Bureau's probably worth it for a financial leader with a good starting city, otherwise the financial gain just isn't worth what you're missing out on.

I'm still a Civ IV n00b, but so far unless I'm struggling for money I stick to the good old Vassalage+Theocracy+one of Char/Agg/Imp/Pro combination.

Any guesses on my playing style? :confused:

I never really considered it before, but I could see running bureaucracy late game not for the commerce but for the production. A big empire could switch a few extra cities to wealth whilst the production bonus in capital could be a significant boost to spaceship construction. I'll have to try it.

Bureaucracy does help production as well. So if your capital is also a good production city, it can be worth it for that, never mind the economic bonuses.

Doesn't your comparison not include the possibility of a city other than your capital being the beaker city?

Free speech is going to boost those towns in your capital too, which are going through the Oxford modifiers etc.

I'm too tired to think of all the factors you need to include but I don't feel that 80 towns is the right conclusion from a proper comparison.

It seems that in games with a lot of sea and a coastal capital

... that bureocracy for such a capital is the best civic till the end of the game...unless you are going for culture of course.
I agree that Bureau is better than FS in this case. Anyone saying otherwise missed the first sentence.

But you might want to consider Nationhood. Sea maps tend to have low production so drafting is even more powerful.

It's high vs. low upkeep on these civics, that cost will offset it to far less than 80 towns with bigger empires. For small empires, bureau is king.

My capitol is often so far beyond my other cities that I delay free speech a long time.

Bureaucracy isn't cheap. Even so, it's frequently worthwhile to stay in it well past liberalism. Especially because oxford and my academy are usually in that city, it takes a long time for any number of towns in other cities to catch up since I have 150% more research in the bureaucracy capitol than anywhere else.

Nationhood and vassalage are alternatives for entirely different reasons than commerce/research.

TheMeInTeam, more generally do you go for civics that complement the traits, or make up for their weaknesses? For instance (I'm not saying financial is a good trait) if you had a financial leader, would that make you more/less likely to opt for bureaucracy?

TheMeInTeam, more generally do you go for civics that complement the traits, or make up for their weaknesses? For instance (I'm not saying financial is a good trait) if you had a financial leader, would that make you more/less likely to opt for bureaucracy?

I don't even give traits a passing thought when I select civics...I select them based on what I see is optimal from the game situation.

Bureau's probably worth it for a financial leader with a good starting city, otherwise the financial gain just isn't worth what you're missing out on.

I'm still a Civ IV n00b, but so far unless I'm struggling for money I stick to the good old Vassalage+Theocracy+one of Char/Agg/Imp/Pro combination.

Any guesses on my playing style? :confused:
Heh, good point. I tend toward US/FS/Emanc/SP/FR. I call it the UFESF system, but since I have lots of cottages I put a C in front of it, then, add an I before E, except on Friday, when we are actually allowed to use 2-letter acronyms!

I don't even give traits a passing thought when I select civics...I select them based on what I see is optimal from the game situation.
There are some cases where my traits can affect my choice of civics. For example, if I am PHI, and I am not pushing for a GP to pop, I can stay in OR instead of using Paci just to generate a decent rate of GPs. Also, when I am AGG or PRO, I may skip Vassalage, and stick with FS or Bureau, or skip Theo, and stay in Paci or OR, etc. Also, with a strong Economic leader (FIN, ORG) I may never go into Rep the entire game, opting for an early US. I have even built the Mids for US/PS rather than a more conventional SE, and cottaged for an early US (Liz is the BOMB for this).

I never said I played perfectly.

That said, you could just make the case that you're getting enough GPs, so you don't switch to pac based on that rather than consciously picking on trait (though that is admittedly a bit semantic). As for the others, I definitely wouldn't give up a 2nd promo just due to AGG or PRO (might want it more depending), I've skipped rep as every trait by now. It just depends. What I can say for 100% sure is I never go with the line of thought "since I'm FIN, i will skip rep" or "I am philosophical so no pacifism is fine".

Others may be different.

I don't even give traits a passing thought when I select civics...I select them based on what I see is optimal from the game situation.

I suppose I agree, what civic is best depends on the VC you're most likely to hit, which has a lot to do with the individual game. So in your opinion the trait is something you use tactically. e.g. the traits might affect (to an extent) what you build, where you settle or how your army is composed, but it won't dictate your strategy before the game has even started?

Bureau's probably worth it for a financial leader with a good starting city, otherwise the financial gain just isn't worth what you're missing out on.

I'm still a Civ IV n00b, but so far unless I'm struggling for money I stick to the good old Vassalage+Theocracy+one of Char/Agg/Imp/Pro combination.

Any guesses on my playing style? :confused:

This actually brings up a good point - unlike what the OP claimed, the culture aspect of Free Speech is not only good for culture victory. By expanding culture much faster into newly conquered territory, it is very good for any warmongering strategy--often better than Nationhood unless you really need to be drafting. And at the time of game that t might be an issue, it's usually preferable to rush units via Universal Suffrage than to be drafting.

This actually brings up a good point - unlike what the OP claimed, the culture aspect of Free Speech is not only good for culture victory. By expanding culture much faster into newly conquered territory, it is very good for any warmongering strategy--often better than Nationhood unless you really need to be drafting. And at the time of game that t might be an issue, it's usually preferable to rush units via Universal Suffrage than to be drafting.

Haven't really embraced free speech yet, but I agree on the point of culture as a warmongering tool. If a particular location is very important and I've got a Great Artist, I'll let it tag along with my army and produce a great work in the strategically important city. Some people would call that wasteful, but the AI doesn't seem to border pinch as much as in Civ III, so you only need to do that for REALLY important locations. It probably "only" costs one golden age in the long run, which isn't a big deal if the GP farm is doing its job.

Am I the only one who likes to use bureaucracy for the production? If you get a nice capital spot with food, hills and grasslands, you can use the city for strong production as well as cottages. Even better is when those cottages mature to towns, go universal suffrage and get awesome production and commerce.

I actually kinda cheat when comparing free speech to bureaucracy- I'll save, then swap civics and check the finance screen... reload if it wasn't a profit.

Am I the only one who likes to use bureaucracy for the production? If you get a nice capital spot with food, hills and grasslands, you can use the city for strong production as well as cottages. Even better is when those cottages mature to towns, go universal suffrage and get awesome production and commerce.

I actually kinda cheat when comparing free speech to bureaucracy- I'll save, then swap civics and check the finance screen... reload if it wasn't a profit.

Doesn't your second part kind of contradict the point about production - that you won't change without a profit (which is also why most switch anyway). Sure, everyone likes the extra capital production in bureaucracy, but it doesn't tend to trump the benefits of civ-wide culture/gold production in the latter parts of the game. Also, if you do go Universal Suffrage, the ability to rush production (helped by the extra gold off FS) can help make up for the :hammers: loss of not running bureaucracy.

Doesn't your second part kind of contradict the point about production - that you won't change without a profit (which is also why most switch anyway). Sure, everyone likes the extra capital production in bureaucracy, but it doesn't tend to trump the benefits of civ-wide culture/gold production in the latter parts of the game. Also, if you do go Universal Suffrage, the ability to rush production (helped by the extra gold off FS) can help make up for the :hammers: loss of not running bureaucracy.

What I meant was after I've gotten everything I want out of the production (usually wonders and science buildings like university) then I still check for the profit cus even later game it's not always more with free speech. I'll still sacrifice a few turns of free speech if there's another wonder I want.

Once we have decent multipliers, using Bureaucracy for commerce becomes more attractive compared to using it for production because the bonuses are multiplicative instead of additive.

Still, I also like to use it to cram all non-artist-producing wonders into one city where they make good use of the National Epic.

The first time I really made the comparison, I was also quite surprised for how long Bureaucracy can keep up with Free Speech, even in a decent-sized empire. Still, I tend to go either very light or very heavy on cottages to make the most out of my civics, and the decision is usually a no-brainer in any given game these days.

What I meant was after I've gotten everything I want out of the production (usually wonders and science buildings like university) then I still check for the profit cus even later game it's not always more with free speech. I'll still sacrifice a few turns of free speech if there's another wonder I want.

Well, sure. I suppose it just depends on what wonders or buildings you're talking about. But if you're really talking about the likes of University--which is unlocked and would normally be queued up or built before Free Speech is even possible--it doesn't even really present much of a question. Looking further down the road, I typically stay in Bureaucracy at least until Oxford is built (assuming that's going in the capital; Wall Street would be a consideration but that usually ends up elsewhere for me) and probably for Statue of Liberty if I were going for it. It would seem more questionable if you were still in it around Industrial Age, trying to let your one city hammer out a bit faster one of the media wonders or a factory at the expense of the significant empire-wide jump in gold and culture.

You can actually have 6 trade routes. :)

I must be forgetting the 6th....

1 base
1 currency
1 corporation
1 free market
1 airport

6th?

I must be forgetting the 6th....

1 base
1 currency
1 corporation
1 free market
1 airport

6th?

Cothon. :)

Single currency via UN gives another.

Single currency via UN gives another.

Touché, England strikes again. ;)

You can get more than that though. Corporation obsoletes the Great Lighthouse but you can still have castles and airports without it.

1 base
2 GLH
1 currency
1 castle
1 airport
1 cothon
1 single currency from UN

So 8 or 7 if you aren't playing Carthage I think. This question was asked in the civ quiz thread in general discussions, but I didn't check to see if my calculation is correct.

You can get more than that though. Corporation obsoletes the Great Lighthouse but you can still have castles and airports without it.

1 base
2 GLH
1 currency
1 castle
1 airport
1 cothon
1 single currency from UN

So 8 or 7 if you aren't playing Carthage I think. This question was asked in the civ quiz thread in general discussions, but I didn't check to see if my calculation is correct.

you can swap economics/free market for the castle too

Once we have decent multipliers, using Bureaucracy for commerce becomes more attractive compared to using it for production because the bonuses are multiplicative instead of additive.

Still, I also like to use it to cram all non-artist-producing wonders into one city where they make good use of the National Epic.

The first time I really made the comparison, I was also quite surprised for how long Bureaucracy can keep up with Free Speech, even in a decent-sized empire. Still, I tend to go either very light or very heavy on cottages to make the most out of my civics, and the decision is usually a no-brainer in any given game these days.

I've also rushed a capital in my best production city and then switched to Bureaucracy right at the beginning of a Golden Age in order to squeeze just that much more production out of my empire's primary producer. This is especially useful if I'm building a single critical item that doesn't get any of its own multipliers. It's not something that I'll do very often, but if I'm about to grab a big tech or if I'm going to build a project (since projects can't be rushed), the extra couple of turns that I can strip off of the production time can make a big difference in reaching my empire's goals.