View Full Version : An Anti-Cottage Economy? (ACE) a.k.a. My culture slider is bigger than yours...


Kulbara
May 15, 2009, 01:19 AM
Obligatory Introduction Thingy

Hello all. I've been lurking around for about a week now, doing my best to inhale all the strategy goodness and playing a few games while at it. =P Just in case it becomes relevant, I own Warlords and BtS. I'm not entirely new to Civ; I've played CivII a while, but a long time ago. My last prince game was a great victory in my humble opinion, so I tried being DANGEROUS and going straight to monarch. So far it's going very well. ^^

What is the meaning of this?

I've tossed the advantages and dis-advantages of a CE vs. SE in my head at great length, resulting in some conclusions and questions for all the strategists here to (hopefully xD) look at.

Alright, basically I contend that a good way to look at specialists is that they in function “replace” what the science/gold sliders do; how many specialists are run decides to what extent the sliders are replaced. Early game, cottages/hamlets are about even in value with the amount of specialists being run. Once hamlets grow into villages and eventually towns they are more valuable than base specialists; conversely, if representation is run, specialists gain early advantage. Towns do eventually become 1-2 commerce more valuable than even a representation specialist, and the tiles it would take to support them... However one musn't count out the GPP specialists produce.

All things considered, specialists vs. cottages can produce nearly the same net results, and either is a viable strategy, depending on your leader and civ's UB. (Financial obviously will want cottages in most cases; philosophical will probably want an SE) It's like I said in the first place: specialists as far as I can tell replace the function of sliders. Scientists replace the science slider. Merchants replace the gold slider. Spies replace the espionage slider. Artists replace the culture slider....

Wait... Do they really?!?

Remember Entertainers from CivII?

The culture slider produces something that no other slider or specialist can: Happy Faces! Certain buildings make happy people for every increase in the culture slider, and most of said buildings are fairly cheap, especially the theatre. In addition, every addition to the culture slider will pop your new city borders faster than a 15-something pops zits, and will help maintain your already existing cities' culture equilibrium with any neighboring cities that might be near. The greatest advantage possible of this, however, would be... Seeing as how scientists/merchants/spies replace the science/gold/espionage sliders, and can hold their own with cottages in most cases, and produce GPP... one could really run 0% in all the sliders except culture quite easily. Furthermore, the culture slider doesn't require ANY commerce to be worked in your civilization for it to give it's culture and (more importantly) happiness benefits. Basically, if you run a CE, running the culture slider is going to take away from your teching and funding. Running a pure-SE makes the culture slider free, and with few drawbacks, afaik.

And that would be the point of an anti-cottage economy, or an ACE. The general gist of it would be to build as few cottages as possible, so that one relies very little if at all on any of the sliders save culture. Theatres at the least would be required for any benefit, yes... but they're dirt cheap and add +1 happiness for every 10% culture alone. That's easily +9-10 happiness for every city without much work. Think off all the luxury resources you could trade away for cash? Think of how much longer you could deal with war weariness whilst smacking ghandi? And that's not even adding in the effects of coliseums and later, broadcast towers.

Qualifiers, Thoughts, and More Text Wall

I know that representation really helps specialists keep up with cottages/towns, especially late-game. Early-game, it propels an SE to almost overpowered levels with the pyramids, imo. It's not a bad civic at all, and nothing in the government civic column completely outdoes it. Representation is great for any SE, don't get me wrong, but I don't think it's vital, especially if one is running caste system.

The thing is, in order for specialists to keep up with a CE, (especially without rep.) you need a lot of them. Just running specialists off buildings might be enough for a while, but when cottages finally DO become towns, I really think one would need the unlimited specialists that caste system provides in order to compete. The main disadvantages to this would be the inability to run the shiny civic of slavery... :( But... I propose the specialists provided by buildings actually would be enough for early game, until cottages mature and C.S becomes more necessary. This means everybody gets their precious whip for early game, which is mostly when whipping is used anyways. The other possible civic complication to this mess would be once other civs start running emancipation. It's mostly a moot point though... The culture slider will probably be able to devour the unhappiness caused by lack of emancipation easily. (nothing like distracting unhappy people with theatre plays and a savage bloodletting at the coliseum! ^^ )

To run such a specialist-heavy economy, and to put as little commerce into the sliders as possible, I literally wouldn't build a single cottage. Farm as much as possible, and build mines/workshops/mills/preserves everywhere else. Another couple hidden advantages to farming everything would be that your populations grows back crazy fast for whipping, and also that farms are easier to rebuild than towns in the case of pillage. (although this is less of an issue in BtS..)

In Conclusion

Unless I'm missing something, or somebody is financial, (and even then, it's only a bit more commerce...) why would you build a single cottage? D: By not doing so, you're essentially letting the culture slider produce 10+ happiness nationwide, for virtually free. This is how I played my last prince game which, without sounding arrogant, was too easy. I'm doing this on a monarch game now, and so far so good. I'm in 1st place on the score list, am out-teching everybody, conquering, and foresee nothing that is going to imminently destroy me (and that's saying a lot considering Montezuma is next door. :P ) Of course I'm playing as the romans with Augustus, but it IS my first monarch game after all. ^^;

Any thoughts?

AlienSexFilth
May 15, 2009, 01:46 AM
You are new to civ so welcome!
I think that what you are talking about is a specialist economy, which is a well known, respected and very viable strategy -especially for Philosophical leaders!

The Culture slider is indeed a great way to deal with happyness issues (especially post construction, with Coloseums and post Drama with Theaters. But the Culture slider should be used for only 2-3 reasons :
1)Negating temporary unhappyness from Civics (We demand emancipation, We cannot forget your cruel whip and HELL NO WE WON'T GO)
2)Negating temporary unhappyness from War Weariness
3)Getting a cultural victory by turning commerce into culture, which is a very strong tactic combined with Free Speach. In the latest strategy, you will utilize cottages...

If you seem to like this economy, my advise would be to get to know of Caste System, Representation, Mercantilism and Pacifism as well as give your next go with a Philosophical leader.

There are some excellent guides about Specialist Economy in the forums (use the forum search engine with SE Guide) which I advise you to read them as well..

PieceOfMind
May 15, 2009, 02:01 AM
I'm sure someone will come along soon and point out that the significance of trade routes on the economy is not to be ignored. Especially if playing as Hannibal, but more generally if you have many coastal cities or have a lot of trade routes, turning these into culture via the slider can be a bit of a drain on the economy. A large part of any empire's commerce can be coming from trade routes (not cottages), even in the relatively-early game.

kingnorxis
May 15, 2009, 02:15 AM
I completely agree with Aliensexfilth on the use of the culture slider, I do the same in my games. Now a few points:

I am pretty sure that your cities will require commerce to gain the cultural benefits of the slider - even on 100% if I build a city in the middle of the desert, it will only gain 1 culture/turn unless I get commerce from working tiles or trade routes.

I also tend to find that trading resources to the AI provides me with very little benefit (diplo aside) and large benefits for them. 5-6 gold for me to enable every city in their empire to grow larger seems like a damn good deal for the AI.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 02:50 AM
Everything is situational ^^, especially on the map. It's not even necessary to run a SE to maximize GPP with a philo leader, especially if the map is low on food. It can be as simple as building the Oracle, picking COL and if you have a decent early city with 1 6F and 4F tile immediately running 4 scientist and then settle the 1st GS and after Alpha/Math bulb Philo and run pacifism, scary!

vanatteveldt
May 15, 2009, 03:03 AM
Like PieceOfMind said, your cities will have commerce regardless of having cottages, from special resources (gold/marble/fur etc), rivers, palace, and trade routes. This commerce will most often be non-trivial, around late classical/medieval times (which you are talking about for theatres anyway), you can easily have 4-6 trade commerce, 0-10 terrain commerce, 0-8 palace commerce, say average 10 per city.

By pushing the culture slider to 100% you are giving up two things:
1) the ability to meaningfully improve the land to increase commerce (ie build cottages)
2) 10 commerce per city (assuming the culture has little value)

You are gaining a LOT of happy faces, I thjink 10 intrinsic, 10 form theatre, 5 form colosseum = 25 happy?

What are you going to do with those happy faces? I sometimes need some more hapiness, say 5-10, but if you have some happy resources, some repr hapiness, etc, you will be hard pressed to grow your city to the population required to consume 25 hapiness. Most cities will never reach this mark, even if you sell away all your happy resources, don't build any happy buildings etc.

So, in conclusion, I doubt that your trade-off is worth it.

DaveMurray
May 15, 2009, 03:12 AM
I didn't read your post in-depth but I skimmed most of the paragraphs. Anyways, there's a few things in your strategy that I would caution you don't get in the habit of doing every game. First thing would be to not always go for the pyramids. Yes it's a very useful wonder and yes early rep is incredibly powerful but being able to obtain more land is paramount to whatever economy you decide to run. If building the 'mids means losing a couple great city spots to the AI then it's not really a great idea to have them in the first place.

Second thing would be to not always be forced to run a particular civic. Diplomacy becomes increasingly important the higher in difficulty you go and coincidentally a lot civs have their favorite civic in the left column. Even more importantly a lot of civs seem to like hereditary rule. Don't get stuck in an economy that forces you to run a particular set of civics in order to keep tech parity with the AI. The most important thing in civ is to be flexible.

Lastly, you have to remember that the only resourceless terrain that will be able to feed specialists in the early game is grassland or flood plains which may or may not be plentiful given the map and your starting position. Often times in food poor areas, cottages will yield the best investment. Also, growth caps aren't unlimited and you may find yourself wasting unnecessary amounts of commerce on a high culture slider. Why have your culture slider at 70% when only one city in your empire would ever be able to grow that high, not to mention it won't happen for another 100 turns or so. There are plenty of ways to keep people happy in this game and keep cities growing all the time. Aggressive trading of resources and planning builds ahead of time will keep your cities growing throughout the game, leaving you to spend your commerce on more worthwhile pursuits such as more research or paying the bills.

Kulbara
May 15, 2009, 03:13 AM
Thank you kindly for responding; the advice really helps, as I'm likely trying what is recommended here later in my current game. ^^

AlienSexFilth:
Yup, I'm pretty much talking about a SE, and I've read some of those guides you mentioned. Most of them recommend building at least some cottages; I'm proposing minimizing the amount of cottages built to an extreme level, so there's less of a "penalty" for running the culture slider as high as possible. Except for that, everything you said sounds like good advice; I'll try it out.

BTW, what a name you have. :D

PieceOfMind:
Eep, you're absolutely right; I did kind of skip over trade routes in what I said. << Partly because with this style of play, mercantilism seemed pretty fitting, for both the free specialists and taking away trade routes so again, there's less penalty to running culture. I'm not sure how viable running mercantilism permanently is, however, especially for BtS. I know I couldn't FOUND a corporation when I was in mercantilism, but it only says ingame that this civic blocks foreign corps. I'll have to check.

I don't know if running the culture slider is a good idea with trade routes. That IS an awful lot of commerce...

kingnorxis:
I admit it. :( I am unsure how much commerce affects the gain of culture through the slider, but my contention was that the happiness benefit from the culture slider is what is most desired, and I'm certain the happiness bonus in itself is not modified by commerce. You're right though; it'd be a bad idea to run the culture slider FOR culture itself, if it is indeed reliant on commerce for that.

As for trading, I can sometimes eek out 15gpt+ from civs with subsidizing and such, but I don't trade anything that will help them too much. Unless either I need a resource desperately, or I'm about to crush them anyways. = P

Crusher1:
:eek: I'm going to have to try that with Abe! I wonder how early one can get tanks...

EDIT:
People posted while I was writing the reply. :P I'll get to responding to vanatteveldt and DaveMurray individually later (it's 3:00am here) but a common consensus seems to be that happiness isn't as big of a problem as I was suspecting it to be. *shrug* perhaps I was fearing the jump from prince to monarch too much. ^^

btgwynn
May 15, 2009, 03:39 AM
The post seems to place more emphasis on happiness than is needed. When trying to max out specialists, health has always been the limiting factor more than happiness. In my experience the culture slider is a temporary fix to overcome war weariness rather than a permanent means to pacifying my citizens, who, while not at war, are usually content with resources multiplied by markets, forges or both.

DaveMcW
May 15, 2009, 03:58 AM
Obligatory Introduction Thingy

Hello all. I've been lurking around for about a week now, doing my best to inhale all the strategy goodness and playing a few games while at it. =P Just in case it becomes relevant, I own Warlords and BtS. I'm not entirely new to Civ; I've played CivII a while, but a long time ago. My last prince game was a great victory in my humble opinion, so I tried being DANGEROUS and going straight to monarch. So far it's going very well. ^^

What is the meaning of this?

I've tossed the advantages and dis-advantages of a CE vs. SE in my head at great length, resulting in some conclusions and questions for all the strategists here to (hopefully xD) look at.

Alright, basically I contend that a good way to look at specialists is that they in function “replace” what the science/gold sliders do; how many specialists are run decides to what extent the sliders are replaced. Early game, cottages/hamlets are about even in value with the amount of specialists being run. Once hamlets grow into villages and eventually towns they are more valuable than base specialists; conversely, if representation is run, specialists gain early advantage. Towns do eventually become 1-2 commerce more valuable than even a representation specialist, and the tiles it would take to support them... However one musn't count out the GPP specialists produce.

All things considered, specialists vs. cottages can produce nearly the same net results, and either is a viable strategy, depending on your leader and civ's UB. (Financial obviously will want cottages in most cases; philosophical will probably want an SE) It's like I said in the first place: specialists as far as I can tell replace the function of sliders. Scientists replace the science slider. Merchants replace the gold slider. Spies replace the espionage slider. Artists replace the culture slider....

Wait... Do they really?!?

Remember Entertainers from CivII?

The culture slider produces something that no other slider or specialist can: Happy Faces! Certain buildings make happy people for every increase in the culture slider, and most of said buildings are fairly cheap, especially the theatre. In addition, every addition to the culture slider will pop your new city borders faster than a 15-something pops zits, and will help maintain your already existing cities' culture equilibrium with any neighboring cities that might be near. The greatest advantage possible of this, however, would be... Seeing as how scientists/merchants/spies replace the science/gold/espionage sliders, and can hold their own with cottages in most cases, and produce GPP... one could really run 0% in all the sliders except culture quite easily. Furthermore, the culture slider doesn't require ANY commerce to be worked in your civilization for it to give it's culture and (more importantly) happiness benefits. Basically, if you run a CE, running the culture slider is going to take away from your teching and funding. Running a pure-SE makes the culture slider free, and with few drawbacks, afaik.

And that would be the point of an anti-cottage economy, or an ACE. The general gist of it would be to build as few cottages as possible, so that one relies very little if at all on any of the sliders save culture. Theatres at the least would be required for any benefit, yes... but they're dirt cheap and add +1 happiness for every 10% culture alone. That's easily +9-10 happiness for every city without much work. Think off all the luxury resources you could trade away for cash? Think of how much longer you could deal with war weariness whilst smacking ghandi? And that's not even adding in the effects of coliseums and later, broadcast towers.

Qualifiers, Thoughts, and More Text Wall

I know that representation really helps specialists keep up with cottages/towns, especially late-game. Early-game, it propels an SE to almost overpowered levels with the pyramids, imo. It's not a bad civic at all, and nothing in the government civic column completely outdoes it. Representation is great for any SE, don't get me wrong, but I don't think it's vital, especially if one is running caste system.

The thing is, in order for specialists to keep up with a CE, (especially without rep.) you need a lot of them. Just running specialists off buildings might be enough for a while, but when cottages finally DO become towns, I really think one would need the unlimited specialists that caste system provides in order to compete. The main disadvantages to this would be the inability to run the shiny civic of slavery... :( But... I propose the specialists provided by buildings actually would be enough for early game, until cottages mature and C.S becomes more necessary. This means everybody gets their precious whip for early game, which is mostly when whipping is used anyways. The other possible civic complication to this mess would be once other civs start running emancipation. It's mostly a moot point though... The culture slider will probably be able to devour the unhappiness caused by lack of emancipation easily. (nothing like distracting unhappy people with theatre plays and a savage bloodletting at the coliseum! ^^ )

To run such a specialist-heavy economy, and to put as little commerce into the sliders as possible, I literally wouldn't build a single cottage. Farm as much as possible, and build mines/workshops/mills/preserves everywhere else. Another couple hidden advantages to farming everything would be that your populations grows back crazy fast for whipping, and also that farms are easier to rebuild than towns in the case of pillage. (although this is less of an issue in BtS..)

In Conclusion

Unless I'm missing something, or somebody is financial, (and even then, it's only a bit more commerce...) why would you build a single cottage? D: By not doing so, you're essentially letting the culture slider produce 10+ happiness nationwide, for virtually free. This is how I played my last prince game which, without sounding arrogant, was too easy. I'm doing this on a monarch game now, and so far so good. I'm in 1st place on the score list, am out-teching everybody, conquering, and foresee nothing that is going to imminently destroy me (and that's saying a lot considering Montezuma is next door. :P ) Of course I'm playing as the romans with Augustus, but it IS my first monarch game after all. ^^;

Any thoughts?

I highlighted the real strategy that is winning you Monarch games.

I'm glad you are having fun despite neglecting a key element of the game.

Negator_UK
May 15, 2009, 05:21 AM
What are you going to do with those happy faces?

Feed them, whip them, draft them, de-emancipate them....

The OP does seem to have had a reasonable idea imho, but I suspect, as Dave implies above, that if the strat was viable it would have been discovered by now.

Still, something to play with I s'pose - should give it a try with a leader that would leverage the strat, like expansive (for the health bonus, you'll need it) or charismatic (for even more happiness)

Shurdus
May 15, 2009, 06:22 AM
I highlighted the real strategy that is winning you Monarch games.

I'm glad you are having fun despite neglecting a key element of the game.Subtle as always I see. :goodjob:

Thank you kindly for responding; the advice really helps, as I'm likely trying what is recommended here later in my current game. ^^

AlienSexFilth:
Yup, I'm pretty much talking about a SE, and I've read some of those guides you mentioned. Most of them recommend building at least some cottages; I'm proposing minimizing the amount of cottages built to an extreme level, so there's less of a "penalty" for running the culture slider as high as possible. Except for that, everything you said sounds like good advice; I'll try it out.

BTW, what a name you have. :DYou are proposing minimizing the amount of cottages built to an extreme level...

I give you all some time to let that one sink in.

...

:coffee:

...

So basically what you are saying is that you try to not build cottages everywhere, but rather that you try to maybe build some where they seem appropriate and leave it at that? Do you mean you are advocating that the player should not build any cottages because you claim raising the culture slider will result in better yields?

One of the benefits from raising the culture slider is also that you produce more culture. From lowering the amount of commerce you can generate by not building cottages, you also lower the amount of culture the culture slider will generate for you.

You become more dependent on specialists by reducing dependency on cottages. In the sideline you also increase the culture slider in order to raise the happy caps - which happens to be something that you should not be required to do after trading and grabbing happy recources aggressively.

It sounds to me like the same old thing with a bit of an unorthodox solution to battle happiness issues. :dunno:

Iranon
May 15, 2009, 07:51 AM
This could be useful in a warlike environment where cities will change owners all over the place. The non-original owner will start with no culture, and you might gain many cities by flipping.

In the late game, it might be worth considering with food corporations. A typical CE has the problem that any more food than is needed to cover the world in towns prettey much goes to waste. A typical SE is likely to be limited by growth caps; unless health is an unsurmountable problem the culture slider is going to help a ton (and food goiing to feed unhealthy specialists with Representation still gets a better exchange rate than food going to feed healthy specialists without Representation).

All that culture might also speed up several victory conditions other than culture... domination will benefit from flipped cities, diplomacy also from your vastly inflated population.
On the downside, doing this in the late game means you're taking the trouble to spread corporations AND giving up trade; simply going for State Property instead and win normally might be faster.

*

While it seems a niche strategy, I don't see anything wrong with it in principle.

Shurdus
May 15, 2009, 08:29 AM
Typically when going for a culture win you will push back the borders of neighboring cities. When doing this you may very well flip a city or two, but gaining 'many cities' is an overstatement. Even going for the cultural win you will not flip cities so easely, and once they flip their cultural output will not be enough to domino-flip all over the place. The AI core cities are therefore pretty much immune to city flipping even if the border ones are not.

Jet
May 15, 2009, 09:23 AM
Using the culture slider with specialists has been discussed here for a long time. It's unfortunate that the extant SE articles don't say enough about it and you had to spend a lot of time reinventing it. (Unless you prefer the no-spoiler approach. Nothing wrong with that.)

I agree with others that other factors limiting pop are important:
- health
- food
- irrigation
- production (if you want early Caste and aren't Spiritual)
If you use the slider you might run 20%, 40% in peacetime. No doubt, if 20% will take your cities from size 8 to 12, that's great. But you can run 20% with cottages.

When the slider shines most of all is when you want to push unhappiness from whipping, drafting, and war weariness.

Paying all your costs with Caste merchants is easier said than done. You probably don't have a ton of food for them, and you might want Slavery or scientists instead. Usually you'll have to lean on commerce, plunder, trading/begging.

noto2
May 15, 2009, 09:31 AM
Kulbara - you really need to try the strategy to understand it. You've missed a million points. There are times when I have ran a pure specialist economy, such as playing as Pericles of Greece and going for a cultural victory, but these times are rare. It's often difficult to do and won't perform as well as using a variety of economic options. Specialists are nowhere near towns in economic output. A city would need to be size 40 to get anywhere near a towned city of size 20. How do you get that big? Before biology, how do you even have that much food? Even with biology, how do you have that much health? Do you run enviro? What do you do before it? Not to mention, your strat depends on caste system. What do you do before caste system? Also keep emancipation unhappiness in mind. Thus, you've locked yourself into REP, Caste, and Enviro. Not very flexible.
In almost all situations I run a mixed economy. I use towns for commerce, watermills/mines/workshops/windmills for hammers, farms for food, etc, and I use specialists for GPP. Sometimes I use specialists for their own output, but that's in specific situations, like a very small empire, the philo trait, nabbing the pyramids, etc. It's very situational.

MkLh
May 15, 2009, 09:55 AM
Unless I'm missing something, or somebody is financial, (and even then, it's only a bit more commerce...) why would you build a single cottage? D: By not doing so, you're essentially letting the culture slider produce 10+ happiness nationwide, for virtually free. This is how I played my last prince game which, without sounding arrogant, was too easy. I'm doing this on a monarch game now, and so far so good. I'm in 1st place on the score list, am out-teching everybody, conquering, and foresee nothing that is going to imminently destroy me (and that's saying a lot considering Montezuma is next door. :P ) Of course I'm playing as the romans with Augustus, but it IS my first monarch game after all. ^^;

Any thoughts?

In Prince/Monarch it's possible to win also without hiring a single specialist or touching the culture slider - just spam cottages and remove all unhappiness with the Hereditary Rule. It will probably need less micro too.

Iranon
May 15, 2009, 10:03 AM
Counterpoint to noto2's complaints: I tend to go for relatively pure economies; with tight city spacing (probably also trying to take advantage of per-city bonuses like religious wonders, free specialists, eventually corporations) there are many maps where tile efficiency matters rather than population efficiency.

The usual bread-and-butter specialists are actually the least efficient; if we make culture an angle, we have the prerequisites and we can deal with the health issues lategame farms supporting specialists can get some rather impressive outputs:

2:hammers:1:gold:3:science:2:culture: from priests
4:espionage:4:science:2:culture: from spies
4:science:6:culture: from artists.

If only health is an issue and we solved our happiness problems, chain whipping with the Kremlin is also sort of nice... whipping would make a farm give effective 90(city size+10) hammers, 3 at size 20. One benefit: we can grow to the high heavens for economic yields, then whip every 2 turns for quick mobilisation.
Continuous drafting is even more impressive, but less sustainable and cuts into our culture if we're actually doing something useful with that (Nationhood = no Free Speech).

I see fewer issues with using a high-culture SE than the investment needed to make it shine. How big a problem this is depends on whether the prerequisites will further our main victory plan.

noto2
May 15, 2009, 10:12 AM
oh yes - Iranon is right - I forgot to mention whipping. The only other time I'd recommend going pure specialists is when you're utilizing a whipping/drafting strategy in combination with them. That can work too. Still, I've found that it's far easier to rely on a mix of things, like trade routes and cottages as well as specialists and hammer improvements. A town even without US and FS still produces about the same research output as a late game scientist. For exmaple, I'm playing a Rome game right now and I built 4 commerce heavy cities at the start of the game. I cottage spammed them. That's because every other city in my empire (except for the GP farm) became a workshop/watermill city. Captured cities get workshopped/watermilled. I knew I needed some commerce and building commercial cities early on lets you mature the cottages. Remember, one of the biggest problems with going pure specialists is the early game. How exactly can you compete with cottages early game?

Kulbara
May 15, 2009, 10:47 AM
*yawn* 0_0 Just woke up; lotta posts :eek:

I'll respond too everybody individually, but after skimming over most of the replies, I'd just like to say it was an IDEA only, not an end-all be-all. What intrigued me in the first place was the ability to manufacture happiness regardless of outside conditions (excepts terrain, which so far for me I've at least had decent food terrain in all my cities... I'm still new though), like the availability of luxury/trade resources, civics, etc... Basically farm everything possible, which except for tundra/desert starts is possible most of the time. Again though, just an idea; something to try maybe, since it seems most here have already played the game most standard ways.. <<

[I]vannataveldt:
You are gaining a LOT of happy faces, I thjink 10 intrinsic, 10 form theatre, 5 form colosseum = 25 happy?

What are you going to do with those happy faces? I sometimes need some more hapiness, say 5-10, but if you have some happy resources, some repr hapiness, etc, you will be hard pressed to grow your city to the population required to consume 25 hapiness. Most cities will never reach this mark, even if you sell away all your happy resources, don't build any happy buildings etc.
Well, I seem to be able to find a way to use them. XD Drafting 3-5 times in a row in every city maybe. Whipping too. Plus, with this "strat" one doesn't need happiness resources of course... not saying they're all that difficult to get at all in the first place, but not relying on them or anything else for happiness wouldn't be a bad thing, would it?

As far as city size and total happiness, you are correct if we're talking about the full 25 smiley faces possible with the slider, but most of the time it won't be that high... more like in the range of 8-15. With no cottages, there's going to be that many more farms, and that much higher a pop in every city. Granted, health would still be a limiting problem, a *huge* problem to be specific, but to me the losses from unhealthiness aren't unlivable at a reasonable level.

[I]DaveMurray:
You're absolutely right; the 'mids are highly situational and aren't something to expect every game, and I'm guessing even less so at higher difficulties. I didn't build them this game; it's not killing me.

The only civic I said was probably essential was caste system, and even that's not set in stone. The larger the empire, the less c.s. appeals. Hopefully a player would be able to still adapt for diplomacy, especially if the government column is free.

Can't argue with the terrain argument. If you don't have the terrain for specialists, you don't. No need to try and force some strategy that cannot work.

btgwynn:
You're right, there are other sources of happiness, and health does limit. Usually I can live with a little unhealthiness in moderation, but unhappiness is crippling no matter what. What this idea does though, is remove the need for auxiliary happiness buildings and happy resources. Yes, one would still want markets for their +25%, but there'd little need for jails or temples, though they still have uses.

And one can't say that there'll be luxury resources every game, just as one can't say they'd have ample food tiles to support an SE every game. I never said any of this was not situational. Every strat is.

DaveMcW:
LONG LIVE CAESAR! :D

I've played a few prince games with other leaders, such as babylon and portugal, and won, so meh. I DID say I was only playing as rome because I was jumping up to a higher difficulty, right? D:

Also, my start in my current game is on what appears to be some forsaken peninsula of the planet with no opponents' cities in sight to "liberate" with lolpraetorians. *cries*

Negator_UK:
Exactly. Just something to play with.

Shurdus:
One of the benefits from raising the culture slider is also that you produce more culture. From lowering the amount of commerce you can generate by not building cottages, you also lower the amount of culture the culture slider will generate for you.

You become more dependent on specialists by reducing dependency on cottages. In the sideline you also increase the culture slider in order to raise the happy caps - which happens to be something that you should not be required to do after trading and grabbing happy recources aggressively.

The increased culture itself, ironically enough, would not be the main draw of raising the culture slider in this idea. :crazyeye: It's more like having a luxury slider from CivII again, or entertainer specialists.

The happy resources are never a guarantee, and I think it's doubtful there'd usually be enough to match the sheer amount of happiness the slider can produce. And virtually for free to boot, since one isn't losing anything in the process. The problem with trading for resources is you have to give something to get something. The diplo-bonus for trading resources alone often isn't that great imo.

Iranon:
Thanks. Corporations would only amplify this strategy, as they did in my last prince game, where I admit I was letting the game go on a long time to try stuff in the modern age. ^^ One of the positives I can think of is this "strat" would work at any time in the tech tree, and with any terrain that isn't rubbish. Farms are always there to fall back on.

Jet:
It hasn't been to difficult to cover expenses with merchants once I reach cs. Usually until I do that, I'll actually work a few cottages if needed, or preferablly a high-commerce resource, and switch to farms ASAP. Actually, it's easier to keep up finances than science. O: Early/Mid-game there's only libraries and universities in most cities, for +50% science, whereas there's markets, grocers, and banks for +100% gold total.

noto2:
First, I have tried that strat and am still trying it at higher difficulty. Second, this isn't an argument for a SE, as much as it might seem like one. This really is in essence an observation of the culture slider's ability to produce happiness regardless of commerce put in to it, and how viable it would be to incorporate that singular ability into any other strategy.

Maybe nobody in their right mind NEEDS that much extra happiness in all situations, but... perhaps having all that happiness available might open up new strategic avenues, no?

MkLh:
IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT WINNING!!! <<

Hey, I'll try it. :P Unno how it'll work on monarch and above until I do try, however. Sounds quick and efficient.

Jet
May 15, 2009, 11:56 AM
It hasn't been to difficult to cover expenses with merchants once I reach cs.

Caste System or Civil Service?

Do you really mean merchants alone or, say, a few merchants but mostly commerce with only 40% culture?

Anyway if you have a save of this I'd be interested to see.

fed1943
May 15, 2009, 12:25 PM
IMO, the point OP noticed is the difference between % and real amount.

Just think 2 cities, one with 100 commerce, other with 10 commerce. The real quantities
of science, gold, culture and espionage are different. But not the happy faces generated
by the culture, just the % counts, not the real numbers ( of the commerce).

And that point is an advantage of SE over CE. But far from being the whole story.

Best regards,

TheMeInTeam
May 15, 2009, 01:01 PM
Passive commerce from non-cottage tiles and trade routes (especially with bigger cities) is not insignificant. Regardless of what you're doing, you want to use the culture slider as little as possible unless you're going for a culture victory. Resources, civics, and buildings will usually cover requisite happiness, allowing you other options than culture with passive commerce.

That is all.

budweiser
May 15, 2009, 01:19 PM
Fact - the culture slider is available at Drama.

Fact - The culture slider raises the happy cap which allows verticle growth.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 01:23 PM
Agreed Bud, but only if I'm running a FE with Rep scientist where I can get big raw beakers.

scyt4l3
May 15, 2009, 01:59 PM
Fact - Cottages are overrated and weaks!
:crazyeye:

Though I do like your lateral thinking tangent.

Attacko references FTW!

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 02:09 PM
Reagano disapproves.

The culture slider provides no health, can waste a significant amount of money, and requires heavy investment in tech and buildings. Specialists provide much lower yeilds until the late-game, without Pyramids, which are broken anyway. Tear down this article.

budweiser
May 15, 2009, 02:21 PM
Fact - the path to Drama goes through Aesthetics which is trade bait. No messy religious techs wasted without an actual religion.

The extra pop allowed by the slider do not have to live in cottages they could instead work in a mine or get whipped into soldiers or live on a farm. If you have alphabet, the hammers can become research. Specialists are not required or advised.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 02:26 PM
=D. Too funny bud, lol. But yes, very true! Rep scientist with mass farms, mines, and whipping provides superior production to cottages for an extremely long time - and even then elites can make them quite equal. People like Iranon from what I understand are quite successful on Deity with rediculously tight city placement which do very well with the above. Throw in a leader like Monte and his UB to the scenario and unit production verges on cheating.

Kulbara
May 15, 2009, 02:29 PM
Exactly Budweiser! Most peoples here keep mistaking this post as a pro-SE rant, when in reality it's more questioning the worth of cottages and the culture slider. Specialists have synergy with building farms of course, but aren't required.

Even +15 happiness in each city with nothing but farm improvements is some truly insane whipping/drafting potential imo.

Who cares if you're unhealthy, if you're too happy to notice! :crazyeye: (Culture sure is a funny word for getting stoned...) Also, theatres require heavy investment?

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 02:32 PM
Also, theatres require heavy investment?

Of course they are. 25 :hammers: with a CRE leader is the most expensive building there is. Besides, although cottages are viable and probably the "noob" improvement of choice because it's the only way a lot of people can win, they are certainly not the only way. I've played too many games where I have never built a single cottage and been at zero slider the entire game and easily owned the AI. Sure research isn't spectacular, but hell, 500 beakers at 1000 AD is good enough. 2000 beakers at 1500 AD is good enough.

Edit:

Ok, I just looked at a game I played with Early Mids with Hatty on a standard map and I had 17 cities at 970 AD (12 @ 1AD) with 769 beakers per turn - I had less than 6 cottages combined empire wide. Mids can work just fine.

TheMeInTeam
May 15, 2009, 02:48 PM
Exactly Budweiser! Most peoples here keep mistaking this post as a pro-SE rant, when in reality it's more questioning the worth of cottages and the culture slider. Specialists have synergy with building farms of course, but aren't required.

Even +15 happiness in each city with nothing but farm improvements is some truly insane whipping/drafting potential imo.

Who cares if you're unhealthy, if you're too happy to notice! :crazyeye: (Culture sure is a funny word for getting stoned...) Also, theatres require heavy investment?

The major investment loss is losing around 20-30 commerce/major city that could be going into research or gold. That's commerce without cottage improvements, by the way. If you're running the culture slider you need a very good reason to do it even if you don't touch cottages. If you're already @ pop 15 with representation and basic resource trading, is it worth 20% on your slider to get pop 20? Only if the city has enough food to support more specialists or those 5 tiles are more productive than more science %. By the way, if you go past 1 city then the output has to be on AVERAGE big enough to justify the culture slider.

I have seen and fielded some pretty big early-game cities. The slider is usually not the answer for doing that, unless you have no alternative and really need the GPP.

By the way, building wealth/research is also slider-independent and without representation, can be superior to using specialists in the majority of your cities.

Unless a player is screwing around, he/she should probably not be intentionally avoiding any tile improvements unless the situation calls for it.

Pratrape on monarch (regardless of speed, but slower = easier) is not impressive and can be done using virtually anything, including ignoring slavery entirely and just working some mines and as the city gets bigger plains forests/caste workshops.

There is no magic economy, and no magic way to gain oppressive amounts of hammers, short of fielding more cities of course.

Iranon
May 15, 2009, 02:55 PM
How much commerce is our average city likely to have if we deliberately neglect it (farms, mines, possibly workshops, possibly Mercantilism...)? 40 seems generous.

With the right infrastructure, two ticks of the commerce slider would sacrifice 8:commerce: for 5:) *assuming commerce channeled into culture is useless*. This seems more than fair if happiness is an issue on an empire-wide scale (and if we like to whip or draft, we have plenty of opportunity to cheese off our population for fun and profit).

I see no reason to overdo it and run the culture slider at 100% unless we have immediate culture-related goals; turning it up until most cities have no happiness issues will usually be stronger than having them unhappy or leaving perfectly good land idle.
One could eliminate food-yielding improvements in favour of something else... but maybe we simply don't want to do that (maybe we want high population for score or voting).

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 03:01 PM
There is no magic economy, and no magic way to gain oppressive amounts of hammers

LIES, lol :) ! Nah, lot's of good stuff i there. I agree with building research/wealth, unless the comparison is vs Representation scientist. Besides, if you got the Mids early then you will most likely not be running Monarchy so you are going to need some happiness, and if you are unable to get decent land or trade for it, the culture slider with some cheap buildings are your friend. Besides, the earlier you get GT set up the quicker you can create your army. I see no problems with a permanent 20% culture slider - as long as you have REPRESENTATION.

budweiser
May 15, 2009, 03:03 PM
It's really about the pop, not the land. The other thing is, you can't count on what resources you will draw, happy or health, but you can count on Drama always being in the tech tree.

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 03:22 PM
50 :commerce: from trades, regular tiles, etc... by the mid-game is easily a good estimate, remember that putting it all into culture is also a large opportunity cost, since with multipliers it could be 100+ beakers/wealth. So a 100% slider is easily a loss of hundreds of gpt nation-wide, just take whatever percent you want of that, and extra culture in inner cities really is pretty useless. Keep in mind that apparently we're not considering an early game scenario, bio/drafting/civics etc... are all in place.

Another thing, which I know has been said and proven before, but whipping is horrendously useless past the early game, in the majority of cities. It costs significant production/commerce unless you're at tiny city sizes, which you shouldn't have much of by that point anyway. It also goes against running over civics, Caste being a very useful one instead for instance. Drafting seems rather independent of any need for consideration here but I do agree it's one of the best benefits from high culture slider - however just turning the slider up and drafting anyway when you really need it isn't much of a loss, in return for a much better peacetime economy.

Also, you can also always count on Monarchy being in the tech tree. The only way this works, as most already seems to recognize anyway, is early mids to Representation, a gambit which everyone already knows.

TheMeInTeam
May 15, 2009, 03:27 PM
LIES, lol :) ! Nah, lot's of good stuff i there. I agree with building research/wealth, unless the comparison is vs Representation scientist. Besides, if you got the Mids early then you will most likely not be running Monarchy so you are going to need some happiness, and if you are unable to get decent land or trade for it, the culture slider with some cheap buildings are your friend. Besides, the earlier you get GT set up the quicker you can create your army. I see no problems with a permanent 20% culture slider - as long as you have REPRESENTATION.

I don't disagree fundamentally, I just felt the need to point out that even for a 0 cottage game, shifts on the slider have a cost (and when trade routes start getting to be 8+ commerce each, pretty material).

So raising culture slider then becomes another simple cost/benefit idea: do you get more from the higher cap than you do from the higher science slider? If you have pyramids/rep and some good tiles, that is quite possibly the case. However, the higher that culture slider goes, the less likely that the next 10% is as useful as the last.

I also feel it pretty important to point out the impact of resource trades, ESPECIALLY at high levels. Immortal and especially deity the AIs are going to have even the calendar :) resources in the BCs very very often. If you have representation, went drama, you have at least 1 from buildings. You might also have 1 from religion, and usually 3 from civic in the cities that need it most. If you got a forge, each mining resource is +2 (you can usually get or trade for one of them, sometimes 2-3). Similarly with markets and fur/ivory/silk/whale for another +2 each (though unlikely for whales, the others are often doable). If you're getting something like +8 from resources and 3 from civics, your :) cap is around 16. If you have a lot of cities that can still run more specialists after that (given they eat food and running more than what you can get @ pop 16 early game is quite rare), great, mail the game in as a win. Otherwise, the culture would be better spent elsewhere.

On anything but deity, +6 to +9 from resources alone is pretty common (on deity you need enough of your own resources to trade so it MIGHT be harder, maybe), so this isn't out of the question. Resource trades are obviously preferable to the slider or even HR garrison warriors if you have the resources. In some of my war crazy games I've been able to keep :) high enough with these alone...no mids, no HR, pop 12+ cities off mass resources, religion(s), and buildings.

budweiser
May 15, 2009, 03:39 PM
Also, you can also always count on Monarchy being in the tech tree.

Sure you can, but who wants to waste a dozen turns researching religious techs if you dont have a religion. It's better to get Aestethics. At least that's what I read around here.

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 03:45 PM
Try out the next LHC and beeline Aesthetics. Emperor or Immortal would be fine. I'll make time to play it my way too, we'll see who does better.

If you don't have Monarchy before Drama, ahem, you're doing it wrong. I didn't say you couldn't trade for Monarchy - after all, Aesthetics is only good because of it's trade value.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 03:52 PM
50 from trades, regular tiles, etc

Now take 8 cities who have the Mids and therefore are running representation. Now give them theaters and a 20% slider. Every city is now able to work 4 additional tiles which can easily add up to 10 beakers/10 gold per city. That gives us 80 raw beakers or 80 raw gpt compared to potentially losing 50C which goes through the slider.

Another thing, which I know has been said and proven before, but whipping is horrendously useless past the early game, in the majority of cities

We have a huge disagreement here. Imo slavery is one of the most powerful civics in the game and I try to stay in it whenever possible. Exceptions being when running a pure Hammer economy and when going for GPP for necessary bulbs. Keep on whipping and keep on pushing the culture slider.

Also, you can also always count on Monarchy being in the tech tree. The only way this works, as most already seems to recognize anyway, is early mids to Representation, a gambit which everyone already knows.

With stone or Industrious it's never a gambit but a simple matter of precise timing. Not everyone has enough skill to play w/out cottages.

TheMeInTeam
May 15, 2009, 03:55 PM
Sure you can, but who wants to waste a dozen turns researching religious techs if you dont have a religion. It's better to get Aestethics. At least that's what I read around here.

A dozen turns? You can frequently research or trade into meditation/priesthood in a matter of <5 turns (sometimes I trade for poly instead of fast researching meditation, since it's on the lit path and will get me there faster too). Then you can just trade aesthetics or alpha for monarchy, which is a guaranteed +1 for the basic garrison you need.

If you have religion that you can use, it's even less useless.

But, you're not going to prove anything by pitting players of differing strengths against each other in a tech or "do well" race.

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 04:02 PM
We have a huge disagreement here. Imo slavery is one of the most powerful civics in the game and I try to stay in it whenever possible. Exceptions being when running a pure Hammer economy and when going for GPP for necessary bulbs. Keep on whipping and keep on pushing the culture slider.

It's been proven that slaving does not net you hammers in the long run - there's some working out the math here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=250927&highlight=efficiency+slavery). At any rate it's less efficient than drafting so when you get to the point of the game where you can draft it's obsolete.


With stone or Industrious it's never a gambit but a simple matter of precise timing. Not everyone has enough skill to play w/out cottages.

It's always a gambit in the sense that you sacrifice your expansion and military. It's purely an abuse against the AI that wouldn't fly against human players, much like the CS-Oracle slingshot. Relying on stone is itself kinda gambit.

And yes, I do remember how someone went through a ton of work to set up a SE/CE comparison game, where no SE players showed up to compete. Not going to be putting effort into that myself again.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 04:02 PM
Addresses issues such as farms, vertical, horizontal, tech patch choices, whipping, not whipping, smaller cities real output vs larger cities output, etc.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=268007


It's been proven that slaving does not net you hammers in the long run - someone worked out the math here. At any rate it's less efficient than drafting so when you get to the point of the game where you can draft it's obsolete.

Nonsensical. You can only draft 3pt. Depending on how your land and civics are set up you can whip from every single city you have for 6-9 turns straight. That could easily translate to 15 cities at 1000 AD X 5 units = 75 units in 6--9 turns. Tell me, how in the hell is someone w/out farms and a high culture slider going to be able to match that? The same strategy with MONTY would be really scary.

It's always a gambit in the sense that you sacrifice your expansion and military. It's purely an abuse against the AI that wouldn't fly against human players, much like the CS-Oracle slingshot. Relying on stone is itself kinda gambit.


If you're IMP (w/stone) you can easily get 6 cities + by 1000 BC Mids which is no sacrifice at all. If you have Stone or are Industrious you can easily get 5 cities by 1000 BC which considering you have the Mids doesn't put you in a bad position.

The vast majority of people play SP, MP is irrelevant imo.

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 04:16 PM
Depending on how your land and civics are set up you can whip from every single city you have for 6-9 turns straight. That could easily translate to 15 cities at 1000 AD X 5 units = 75 units in 6--9 turns. Tell me, how in the hell is someone w/out farms and a high culture slider going to be able to match that? The same strategy with MONTY would be really scary.



If you're IMP you can easily get 6 cities + by 1000 BC Mids which is no sacrifice at all. If you have Stone or are Industrious you can easily get 5 cities by 1000 BC which considering you have the Mids doesn't put you in a bad position.


I can easily draft 5 units per turn even without the culture slider. I can easily rushbuy 10 units a turn around 1000 AD. If I'm IMP I can easily have 10+ cities by 1000BC which is looking much better. If I'm DARIUS I can easily have conquered a neighbor or two by then.

You're making ridiculous assumptions here with specific scenarios, even plain old game settings. Industrious/Imperialistic is exactly one trait combo. Having stone is a 1/4 or 1/5 chance. This doesn't mean this is a good general strategy. Moreover, the OP himself said he wasn't thinking of rushing the Pyramids, so this argument does nothing for the fact that it would be absolutely abysmal without representation.

Also, the man's a genius:
It is always inefficient to kill a citizen working a mined grassland hill.

At size 6, it becomes inefficient to kill off a mined plains hill.
At size 6, it becomes inefficient to kill off a plains forest.

At size 10, it becomes inefficient to kill off a mined desert hill.

At size 20, it becomes inefficient to kill off an engineer.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 04:24 PM
I can easily rushbuy 10 units a turn around 1000 AD.

I have games on this site in other threads demonstrating my talk in practice. I would love to see you produce more than 75 units in 8 turns by 1000 AD with Rush buy - good luck with that :).

I can easily draft 5 units per turn

OH? The game only allows me 3 per turn on standard size maps. Small maps is 2pt. So if you are playing a HUGE map then take all the numbers I just gave you about drafting/whipping and push them way way higher making your argument less valid than it already is.

If I'm IMP I can easily have 10+ cities by 1000BC which is looking much better.

My personal best is 16 cities by 1000 BC, but then again game size and speed changes everything. You're simply talking semantics now. The basic element of my previous post stands squarely on its own 2 feet in normal circumstances.

Edit:

I suggest you follow this link which I gave previously who was started by Iranon, a much better player than me who has a better understanding than any other people in this thread to date.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=268007

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 04:30 PM
I have read the thread, and believe Iranon and whoever else in it still agree with what I've posted - whipping is simply not an efficient conversion. It's useful when you need something fast, eg. there's some benefit towards getting the unit/building out that has nothing to do with city yeilds. It doesn't give you more hammers/commerce or anything in the long run. Care to cite where Iranon states whipping a size, say, 15 city gives more hammers than just working tiles? You're doing him an injustice by implying that. It's also not worth my time playing out a game to prove something which is very obvious, and you would likely complain out/discount anyway. But I guarantee I can start a random Noble game and at 1000 AD rush 75+ units in 8 turns. And it wouldn't cost me 10 population per city that would cripple me for a long time.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 04:40 PM
whipping is simply not an efficient conversion. It's useful when you need something fast, eg. there's some benefit towards getting the unit/building out that has nothing to do with city yeilds. It doesn't give you more hammers/commerce or anything in the long run.

That's what you do in some FE's. It's no secret that their are cycles of research and cycles of the whip, then it's repeated over and over. Whipping infrastructure at any size is faster in most circumstances and is perfectly fine as long as the food is there. It doesn't have to be the best mathematical conversion to be the best choice.

I.E. Whipping a crap load of units out lets me take over a huge amount of land much sooner.
I.E. Whipping Universities out in every single city allows me to get Oxford up much sooner where over 50-70% of my empire wide research might come from. Who cares if I am getting a bad conversion if I am reaping a better long term advantage by doing so? I don't think I'm doing Iranon a disservice at all. The only disservice I am doing is by having a very "abrasive" tone in this thread but that was started by your initial post asking for this thread to be removed for this and that :)

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 04:42 PM
I did not ask for this thread to be removed, I don't know where you're talking about. People have been joking about Attacko and such from page one, and indeed poking fun at the OP. I'm sorry for the abrasive tone too, I'm also not the one ignoring the OP's points since I'm still trying to point out the merits/lack of with this idea.

PS: Whipping infrastructure is also NOT faster, rushbuying is way, way better when its available. Early game it's due to cities being small in size/infrastructure being cheap. Of course there are specific things like Oxford but that's still not even really late game, where you seem to be arguing the whip maintains efficiency. (Of course we all know workshops/watermills are way the most efficient late game anyway though hammer wise, but still, no need for slavery)

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 04:56 PM
You're quote below my friend.

Specialists provide much lower yeilds until the late-game, without Pyramids, which are broken anyway. Tear down this article.

My discussion fits perfectly with the OP because I am discussing why I think the culture slider can and should be used in some games to put the player in a stronger position.

But I guarantee I can start a random Noble game and at 1000 AD rush 75+ units in 8 turns. And it wouldn't cost me 10 population per city that would cripple me for a long time.

I'm talking about normal game settings at Emperor/Immortal.



Some of Iranons quotes:

When setting up a SE keyed towards permanent gains (whipping infrastructure, settling specialists, slowly setting up a superior economy) I rely heavily on the 'mids.

I find Slavery much, much more powerful.

I'll use Caste System to complement Pacifism (for an ambitious lightbulb/liberalism plan. Steel I can usually get without such concessions) or State Property (grudgingly, as I prefer corporations if I have the breathing room to set them up)... but generally speaking I prefer to solve my production needs with slavery and to whip some specialist-enabling infrastructure rather than use the unlimited slots.

Sometimes, efficiency isn't the main factor. Slavery allows emergency garrisons, whipping a city into oblivion for getting an army fast and mass infrastructure whipping of new acquisitions, getting rid of unproductive striking citizens and keeping excessive maintenance down until the infrastructure to balance that is in place.

Representation works well with either... for me Representation synergises even better with Slavery because you can't channel all of your food surplus into the whip and better specialists ensures decent returns on spare food.



Etc, etc, etc.

The whole point? No this thread doesn't need to be removed. Yes the culture slider is a very strong game tactic which puts players in some of the potentially strongest positions possible, i.e. - huge amounts of troops + massive land grabs.

Edit:

If your reading this Iranon, sorry ^^. You may not like it =/. But what can I say, either way the important thing remains that you're game knowledge is easily one of the strongest of any active users.

In no way am I "saying" Iranon agrees with anything I am saying, but on the contrary, I am using the knowledge I have learned from him and then implemented into my own game play as the basis for why I believe what I do :)

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 05:00 PM
I believe you're confusing my words with Reagano's. I'll accept your mistake.

Also, again, perhaps you should ask whomever it was in this thread who suggested disregarding the mids/specialist economy in general? Do you honestly think that plain old farms + culture slider without this synergy is an ideal economy?

Edit: Nothing you've said has proven any point. Of course the whip is useful for getting stuff out fast or in wartime situations. That still doesn't mean it doesn't grow horribly inefficient by the late game. And it hardly makes a Drama/culture slider beeline a good economy. And disregarding all of MP shows a nice disdain for balance, I might as well just infinitely repeat that the Quechua rush is ideal if we're just focusing on gambits. But obviously that's not the whole story of the game.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 05:22 PM
I'll accept your mistake

That wasn't you? =D. It certainly sounds like something you would say ;) . Right now after listening to you speak a while the vision I get is you "stoned" and trying to get past level one on Atari's "Pong".

Do you honestly think that plain old farms + culture slider without this synergy is an ideal economy?

Here is a previous post of mine: Agreed Bud, but only if I'm running a FE with Rep scientist where I can get big raw beakers.

Nothing you've said has proven any point. Of course the whip is useful for getting stuff out fast or in wartime situations. That still doesn't mean it doesn't grow horribly inefficient by the late game.

Everything I have said has proven a point. Proven the point that it is a perfectly viable strategy and works well and guess what? It actually wins games! Honestly! I pinky swear! If someone does have the Mids and is running Rep. then how do you suggest they increase their happiness after luxuries and trades?

And disregarding all of MP

This is the largest Oxymoron I have ever seen. MP is a joke. Their is no balance in MP. Do you wanna know what MP is all about? Here it goes...................

Starting position is > skill and therefore game balance is impossible. Take 2 people of identical skill - the 1st player has 3 fresh water corn, 1 pig, 2 gold, and 6 plain hills. The 2nd player has 1 plain cow with no hills. HUM? Who will win?

@ OP

The culture slider should be implemented in games where it will reap you the most benefits. Using a FE/SE is the toughest economy to run and imo the vast majority of people who think they suck simply lack the necessary skill to use them effectively, otherwise, why would they shoot them down? Their are plenty of people who have great success with the slider and Farms. So keep at it and good luck with improving your game - something you will definitely do if you can step out of the cottages shadow.

As to the Earthling and I comments - sorry to offend anyone if that has happened. Some people are simply a bit off and need correcting. Remember, I am not saying cottages are not viable - I am simply saying Representation/Farms/Specialist/Whipping/Culture slider is a perfectly acceptable strategy and has had a lot of success. Their is more to playing the game then simply "cottage spamming" and saying every other strategy sucks :) .

After all, check out my "Cottage Spam" walkthrough in my signature. :) - being able to play the game more than one way is a good thing =D.

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 05:47 PM
It's alright Crusher. This is roughly the vision I have of you: the user page on youtube of way21337.

You can also get happiness through religion, and civics, and future tech in case you didn't know.

There's nothing about starting positions that changes between single player and multiplayer btw. So you've basically just called the whole game a joke since it all depends on the land. You're entitled to an opinion, I know I can't change your mind.

BtW I routinely use other strategies as well. One of the first things I said in this thread was that everyone should know that using Representation with mids should work fine. I have never used anything like this OP's strategy without it though, and I still don't think it would be successfully.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 05:53 PM
This is me in Reality :)

http://www.myspace.com/cseanny

Edit:

There's nothing about starting positions that changes between single player and multiplayer btw. So you've basically just called the whole game a joke since it all depends on the land.


I have made a previous post around here somewhere about how much I hated randomly generated maps because they fail miserably at game balance and negatively effect the game. I believe every single game and opponent should have identical surroundings like in many RTS games. If you wanted a different atmosphere you simply play a different map. So yes, you are right, the whole game does a very poor job at "game balance". The only way to overcome this aspect is to stick to SP and suck up "luck" factors.

Iranon
May 15, 2009, 06:18 PM
Oh gods... Whipping is such a complex topic that I'm getting lost half the time myself. Fortunately I'm not the only one. That quote from DaveMcW for example is not good advice; if we followed that all food-neutral tile with something else (like grassland forst) would be too strong to be ever whipped away.

What he did is compare the exchange rate of whipping (1:food: = 30:hammers:/size+10) with the apparent exchange rates of using tiles (1:3 for grassland mines, 1:2 for plains mines or forests etc). However, he neglected to address that the privilege of using the latter conversions takes up a citizen for each instance.
Incomplete refutation, but one that is actually possible to understand without tying one's brain in knots: A grassland mine (let's assume an equivalent workshop for a reason that will soon become apparent) needs a grassland farm to support for food-neutral 3 hammers. If we had farms on both tiles, we'd have 2 surplus food to play around with... according to the whip formula we'd break even at size 10 rather than size 6 as he stated.
There is also another oversight: the relevant size for the whipping formula isn't the size at the end of the cycle but the average during regrowth; size 10 in this example would mean a whip from 12 to 9 as we regrow once at size 9, 10, and 11 - average of 10.

That, however, only demonstrates that the whip is more efficient than many people think; it is, however, limited in scope. We can't use all of the surplus food for the whip without growing into unhappiness.
We can't use an all-farm as a pure production city well, but if we use an all-farm layout and grow some specialists to whip away we will get a combination of specialistturns and hammers that we can't reach until double digit sizes if we replace any farms with mines.
Whipping, regrowing with all farms to the cap, then stifling growth with mines would, in theory, beat an all-mine setup... but that requires a conspicuous amount of land that'll be left idle most of the time AND mostly pointless micromanagement unless it's an emergency where we need the production NOW.

I hope this makes it clearer... it would be a first.

Generally, using the whip well without specialist is a pain in the neck because we need to shuffle tiles around; in an SE whipping away specialists is usually fine. By the same token, the whip is strongest if land is the limiting factor instead of caps, especialiy in the late game. Improvements got so many bonuses and GPP have lost their value to an extent that most tiles are worth working even over REP specialists

***

Now to actually answer the quesitons:

Earthling: Ok, let's assume a size 15 city doing a 3-pop whip - effective size as per the whipping formula is therefore 13. Whipping gives 30/23 hammers per food or 45/23 with the Kremlin. That makes a post-Biology grassland farm give 2.61 or 3.91 net hammers when channeling its output into whipping.
A grassland farm can support 2 railroaded grassland mines (if we considered revolting to CS, we could assume workshops instead - more elegant comparison as it's on the same base terrain), for 2.67 hammers per tile. A grassland workshop under State Property gives a flat 3 hammers or 4 if you revolt to Caste System.
Note that we can't put all of our surplus food into production without accumulating anger, but assumming we stay in Slavery and have the Kremlin it's our best option of straight production. The good part: A city normally dedicated to economy - all farms, supporting specialists - is actually stronger than a production city (and not much weaker if we lack the Kremlin) until the accumulating unhappiness puts an end to the rampant slavery.

@ Crusher1: Wait, why should I be upset again? Sorry, head spinning from all this, and I see no contradictions... :)

ABigCivFan
May 15, 2009, 06:21 PM
Unless I'm missing something, or somebody is financial, (and even then, it's only a bit more commerce...) why would you build a single cottage?
Any thoughts?

When you move up to Immortal/Deity you will see that with the small land mass you could possibly get, the CE/SE discussion is often not that relavant.

For starters, not all your city might have food/irrigatable land; so what do you do on a dry grassland? Build a cottage.

When the Currency/Alphabet/COL/Music are not available, what do you do to keep your economy afloat? Build some cottages.

When you are happy-capped and have nothing to whip? Work cottages.

Most importantly your BEST bet to keep up with the AIs (in addition to bulbing/trading) is to maximize the commerce/research in your capital. And that is best achieved by combining cottages+Civil Service. Library+Academy+University+Palace+Trade routes+Oxford+150% commerce is by far the most significant stacking multiplier in the (early-mid) game. And this often results in more than 50% of your total empire beaker output.

I do agree about early emphasis on farms/mines/whip in most of the support cities.

Edit: Eathling, in general, I dont whip my capital. But for the other cities, whip them. Granary/Momument/Library/Courthouse/AP buildings/Forge/lighthouse/Market/Universities. This will keep your cities relatively small. And when you have these crucial improvements, you are free to switch to Caste/workshop or Emancipation/cottages and never whip anymore since you have much more hammer output with the newly avalialbe techs/civics. I can not see why you would not whip an AP temple for +2:hammers: when your city is pop 4 and working farms.

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 06:38 PM
Now to actually answer the quesitons:

Earthling: Ok, let's assume a size 15 city doing a 3-pop whip - effective size as per the whipping formula is therefore 13. Whipping gives 30/23 hammers per food or 45/23 with the Kremlin. That makes a post-Biology grassland farm give 2.61 or 3.91 net hammers when channeling its output into whipping.
A grassland farm can support 2 railroaded grassland mines (if we considered revolting to CS, we could assume workshops instead - more elegant comparison as it's on the same base terrain), for 2.67 hammers per tile. A grassland workshop under State Property gives a flat 3 hammers or 4 if you revolt to Caste System.
Note that we can't put all of our surplus food into production without accumulating anger, but assumming we stay in Slavery and have the Kremlin it's our best option of straight production. The good part: A city normally dedicated to economy - all farms, supporting specialists - is actually stronger than a production city (and not much weaker if we lack the Kremlin) until the accumulating unhappiness puts an end to the rampant slavery.


I appreciate what you've said here but the numbers still don't seem all that impressive for Slavery. First of all, the Kremlin is a huge benefit. Without it farms + slavery come nowhere close at all to flat out workshops (4 hammers/tile). But if you do grant the Kremlin, it's equally excellent for rushbuying as well; the same 15 pop city, if we made them all towns: each town gives 1 :hammers: 7 :commerce: which equals 4.5 :hammers:/tile under the right civics. Even if it's only say, 10 towns, and the rest a couple farms and mines, it still holds up rather well. And when you're not channeling straight production the city is way more useful for other means. Even better this isn't static production - you can put that money into ANY city on the map for whatever you need (airports in newly conquered cities anyone?) You can also effectively produce units in your cities with the most settled GG/other necessities (like naval cities), while whipping can't. So the numbers don't even flat out win even if you could whip infinitely without unhappiness.

DaveMurray
May 15, 2009, 06:39 PM
I have made a previous post around here somewhere about how much I hated randomly generated maps because they fail miserably at game balance and negatively effect the game. I believe every single game and opponent should have identical surroundings like in many RTS games. If you wanted a different atmosphere you simply play a different map. So yes, you are right, the whole game does a very poor job at "game balance". The only way to overcome this aspect is to stick to SP and suck up "luck" factors.

It's very easy to go into world builder and make your own maps. Also, I believe there's posts on these boards that will tell you how to edit the saves so that AI and barb starting techs and units are exactly what they're supposed to be in a normal game.

Also, without stone or industrious, mids are 500 hammers which can translate into a plethora of axes, settlers, workers, etc. Sure early mids is powerful like anything in civ it's all map dependent. You may only have room to expand to 2-3 cities before you hit vast desert or you're on a peninsula blocked in by the AI and then the mids doesn't seem like that good of an investment. Nothing in civ is set in stone so to all players out there, don't become convinced that one particular opening is going to be the best for all scenarios and situations.

Finally, saying one particular type of economy takes more skill then the other economy is kinda dumb considering all the random factors that take part in any one single game. The only true barometers of skill in this game are the leaders/civs you play and the difficulty level you play at.

Crusher1
May 15, 2009, 06:55 PM
Personally, when I happen to have the Mids I usually stick in slavery and only run 2 specialist in each city while building research/wealth/whipping as needed. Usually I can start a very successful 1st war with a combination of the whip/mines/drafting/and the slider - much faster than cottages which don't even have access to US yet.

However, my late game transition normally tranfers to Caste/workshops/wm/wm/specialist because I also believe their is a point in time where I lack the expertise needed to effeciently use slavery.

However, in my experience I always get more production from FEs of any type which makes war a lot easier. I have always found the most important factor is city numbers and placement.

If I am able to settle cities 3 tiles from each other across my conquered land I can easily have over 40 cities on a marginally medium sized space shortly after Communism. It takes more time to get started of course, but if you start early enough and whip + use overlapping tiles from cities you can find yourself in a very strong game position.

And of course, early use of the culture slider can help get you there :)

Iranon
May 15, 2009, 07:07 PM
@ Earthling: Agreed. For things that can be hurried, rushbuy is hard to impossible to beat... and we get free shipping of units/infrastructure to wherever we want them.

I mentioned I prefer pure economies, for exactly that reason. Mature towns are excellent for anything and let me skip smelly production multipliers until health is no issue. Regular production only compares if I need something that can't be hurried (many things on the way to a space victory) or I have production multipliers that far outstrip local gold multipliers (Heroic Epic or Ironworks city. I will want to produce a unit every turn in cities with xp/promotion bonuses; here relying on rushbuy would cause me to pay the markup for no hammers invested quite often). Still, total cottage spam is an entirely different approach with its own strength and weaknesses. It's easy, ruthlessly efficient and imo the best approach unless you really know what you're doing and why... but that wasn't the topic of this thread.



Note that to get 4 hammers per tile from workshops I need Caste System AND State Property; otherwise I'll need a farm for every 2 workshops resulting in the stated 8/3=2.67 hammers per tile. Forgoing corporations can be a big sacrifice in itself... which approach I go for depends on the overall strategic situation.

Earthling
May 15, 2009, 07:20 PM
Yeah, I'm a bit washed up arguing about economies lately, this one combined with the FfH forums, where ironically I'm the one arguing that (more food) => (slavery and similar production mechanics) is better. I do respect everybody who's really researched into the slavery mechanic; I've said it before that misunderstanding it is just one of the bigger pet peeves I have with strategies on the forums. I agree slavery is useful in the short term, can save you a ton of situations or help towards a specific goal. But it's not efficient, even more so when you have 3 food farms and other early game civics - all the time I see players wreck what could be a better economy whipping for the sake of whipping. And I know it's just random people, but every time I see a, say, 18 pop captured city whipped to size 4, I cringe. And the thread has veered off enough from the OP, I don't need to be messing more with it.

Edit: had to come back and add this in since I couldn't let myself be stupid enough to let it go. Grateful to that other thread that's been around today about Golden Ages to remind me.

-The above calculations are also neglecting another very huge opportunity cost of slavery - namely, that tile yeilds are often a lot better than we've been giving them credit for. In the early game, when you should almost always be working river tiles, you lose an extra commerce or two with every whip as your city has to regrow. Definitely advancing the no-whip rule of thumb with grassland hills, and it's still significant enough in general-whipping does cut into your early game commerce. But late game, this deficit can be even greater - I was wondering why the hammers/tile with mines seemed so low, and realized it was leaving out levees! So whipping away your pop can often lose you another hammer/pop/turn if you're not working a river tile. And then of course there's also the simple fact that vanilla farms are some of the worst improvements at all for Golden Ages, and as a player who tends to use Golden Ages later (Medieval +) rather than earlier, having a ton of farms which don't benefit from them either is another drawback. Towns/workshops/anything else does better. I can't see these factors doing anything but detract from the whip. Though with Cristo/Spiritual one can't say it absolutely always has no use, if you're desperate in war or something, I still really don't think it should be your late game economy. Unless you really have the urge to be cruel to your ungrateful citizens.

noto2
May 15, 2009, 07:32 PM
But aren't there already a billion and a half ways to provide happy faces? Why are you writing an article about reducing your civ's economy just to get more happy faces? What is the use of all that happy cap without health?

Zeiter
May 15, 2009, 07:59 PM
Being able to have free reign with the culture slider while using a SE is nice mainly when going for a cultural victory, I've found.

The idea is to cottage up your 3 soon-to-be legendary cultural cities, and then use an SE/religious economy for the rest of the empire. (You'll be running representation/free speech).

That way, you can still get decent research and stay afloat on gold even when going with 90-100% on the culture slider. The slider only mostly affects your 3 culture cities that are getting commerce from cottages (true, the other cities have their commerce siphoned off that they would get from trade routes and stuff, but at least you will be able to beat back your opponent's borders, so it won't go totally to waste).

Compare this with a straight cottage economy. You could never go 90-100% on the culture slider, which means your 3 culture cities won't be able to squeeze as much culture out of their cottages. With a culture victory, you want, preferably, nothing but culture and culture-enhancers in your 3 cities, and then the rest of the empire is made up of "helper cities" that shoulder the burden of research, production, defense, etc.

PieceOfMind
May 15, 2009, 08:18 PM
My head hurts... :p


For what it's worth though, going back to the OP's topic, I agree with the very succinct point made by TMIT:

Passive commerce from non-cottage tiles and trade routes (especially with bigger cities) is not insignificant. Regardless of what you're doing, you want to use the culture slider as little as possible unless you're going for a culture victory. Resources, civics, and buildings will usually cover requisite happiness, allowing you other options than culture with passive commerce.

That is all.

Using the culture slider more than is necessary is wasteful. It would be rare in most games to have a situation where running 100% culture was worthwhile. Excepting going for culture win of course.:D

mirthadir
May 15, 2009, 08:32 PM
Being able to have free reign with the culture slider while using a SE is nice mainly when going for a cultural victory, I've found.

The idea is to cottage up your 3 soon-to-be legendary cultural cities, and then use an SE/religious economy for the rest of the empire. (You'll be running representation/free speech).

That way, you can still get decent research and stay afloat on gold even when going with 90-100% on the culture slider. The slider only mostly affects your 3 culture cities that are getting commerce from cottages (true, the other cities have their commerce siphoned off that they would get from trade routes and stuff, but at least you will be able to beat back your opponent's borders, so it won't go totally to waste).

Compare this with a straight cottage economy. You could never go 90-100% on the culture slider, which means your 3 culture cities won't be able to squeeze as much culture out of their cottages. With a culture victory, you want, preferably, nothing but culture and culture-enhancers in your 3 cities, and then the rest of the empire is made up of "helper cities" that shoulder the burden of research, production, defense, etc.


That depends upon how you setup your late game culture push. One insidiously effective trick is to bribe and help one AI to take over land near your borders, a CE running at 100% slider (cash coming from banked cash, tech trades, shrines, or corps) can chain flip huge swathes of territory (my record being something like 20% of the total landmass on a Pangea); this nets you more resources which nets you more culture resources directly (for the Sushi/CreCon/CivJ/AlCo quadfecta) and more resources you can trade for culture. Depending upon the map/diplo/corp setup this can actually be a quick shot at a culturmation victory (works best with vassals off).

Even without using distant cities to culturally acquire new resources for better corps performance it is trivial to run at 100% slider for a pure CE. CivJ, alone, can fund an entire empire with ease. With a good WS setup (shrine, lots of food for merch specs, and corps) you can fund everything.

TheMeInTeam
May 15, 2009, 11:40 PM
You can also simply build wealth and trade resources for gpt (especially luxury resources) for a late culture push, like I did in IU stalin. No corps, mostly cottage and hammer cities other than 1, and easily stayed 100% culture slider for about 60 turns, where I won.

Incidentally, it's often trivial to protect oneself for 60 turns, either through leftover tech war bribes, good basic diplo, or just having enough units from a HE city.

Deep_Blue
May 16, 2009, 08:33 AM
Economy types and the comparisons between them was debated many times before, I don't want to go into this in detail but I have some notes:

Why to adopt one type of economy and make all your empire dependant on it, name whatever economy you want to use (Cottage Economy, Specialists Economy ...) and you will find that the adopted type of economy will definitely not be suitable for all you cities.

Better is

Specialized cities:
Basically a hybrid economy which is very popular and well known amongst civ players, and IMO it is the most effective way to manage you empire, specialize every city for it is best potential.
- Commerce/science cities: make some cities commerce only cities and cottage every tile in them
- Production cities: mine every hill and farm elsewhere
- Specialists cities: turn some cities into GP Farms (can also be called SE cities)
- Oxford city: with SE economy only you cannot have this super science city
- Wall street city: with SE economy only you cannot have this super Commerce City

Why limiting your self to one type of economy, the game allows you to do whatever you want so feel free to do whatever you want. If I am running SE economy and found a city on all flood plains location will I say "I wish that I am not running SE economy to be able to cottage all these pretty plains"?

Frodus
May 16, 2009, 10:30 AM
Running representation will already give you more than enough happiness for your largest specialist cities. Health will pose a much larger problem. I don't see a need for this strategy.

Ghpstage
May 16, 2009, 11:07 AM
Sounds interesting for the massive :mad: sink for whip and drafting, and a solution to other :mad: created by mass warmongering
However, as Caste is pretty much a must I can only see SPI leaders gaining much from it.
Monty and Justin might prove very effective in this strategy, mass settled scientists, merchants and prophets might be another thing to consider.


but enough of that.... I'm amazed noones asked yet!

Kulbara please show us some saves!

jesusin
May 18, 2009, 02:32 AM
Going back to the original post:

- What about Bureaucracy?
Without a single cottage in the capital you've killed (one of) the best mid-game civics.

- Raise the culture slider to sell your happy resources? It's a mistake.
You'll get more money by keeping your happy resources and raising the money slider. Try buying happy resources from the AI for gpt!

Iranon
May 18, 2009, 03:32 AM
True to my maxim of 'anything that's worth doing is worth analysing to death'...

As much as I normally love Bureaucracy, it's not even worth considering here; not only does commerce go to waste but we're having considerably more population than normal, which makes the high upkeep status bite us in the rear.

By contrast, Nationhood has no upkeep (saving us 3 gold + inflation for every size 15 city compared to Bureaucracy), its happiness from barracks save us almost a whole tick of the culture slider if we use it 'as needed' rather than 'all-out' and it allows chain drafting which, with generous happy caps, is awesome.
Midgame example: Any Rifleman we draft instead of whipping saves us 72.5-80 hammers depending on whether the city has a forge.

Alternatively, Free Speech speeds helps us exert crushing culture pressure and might help us on the way to a cultural victory.

*

Seeling resources... hmm. As I noted above, we're unlikely to pay more than 1-2 commerce per city for every happiness if we base our economy on this. 2-3 final gold seems realistic. Since a happiness resource is likely to have a doubling building where we need it most, the final cost for compensating for a lacking resource with the slider ends up at 4-6 gold.

Will an AI pay us more than 5(# of cities) per resource? Personally, I've only seen AIs pay through the nose for strategic resources even if they have the cash. This seems something to do if we're cranking up the culture slider anyway (cultural victory, border pressure), not something to do for a profit.

noto2
May 18, 2009, 03:38 AM
One way I have used a pure specialist economy is to expand via culture. I don't want to threadjack here but it's very fun to use this strategy. Expanding peacefully has diplomatic advantages, and you don't need to spend resources on a superb military. I played as Pericles of Greece and what I did was run core cities with scientists and merchants for my economy, and my fringe cities ran artists. I started with 6 cities and ended the game with 18 I believe, all by cultural takeover, it was very fun. I won by diplo, IIRC, but I could have won by space too, since the AI's economies had been battered by my stealing their cities and land.

RRRaskolnikov
May 18, 2009, 07:32 AM
- Oxford city: with SE economy only you cannot have this super science city
- Wall street city: with SE economy only you cannot have this super Commerce City


While i agree with your general message ("why limit yourself?"), i wanted to point out that those two are a bit off... best science cities are made with settled specialists (can reach 1000+ bpt in one city) so I don't see why a SE (or whatever the name) can't have a nice science city. For Wall Street, it's best to put it on a shrine/corp headquarter city anyway, so this has very few to do with specialists/cottages.

Cheers,
Raskolnikov

popejubal
May 18, 2009, 08:04 AM
I've done this in the past and pushing your culture up to 100% does cost you some gold/science/espionage, but it obviously doesn't cost you nearly as much under a "pure" specialist economy as it does under an economy that is driven by lots of cottages.

It's certainly true that lots of cottages will win out over an equal number of specialists if you ignore the Great People Points, but grabbing massive number of the correct Great People Points can let you drive ahead quickly through the tech tree to let you grab a military lead over your neighbors and give you a vast empire under the right circumstances. Then it's no longer a comparison between x cottages and x specialists, but rather a comparison between x cottages and x + two neighbors former empires specialists. :)

The big benefit to the Anti-Cottage economy is that when you start to suffer from serious :mad: during your big push for expansion, you can drive the culture slider up big time and still not crash your economy (even with all those new cities). The extra :) lets the cities keep working and of course the extra culture pushes out the boundaries a lot faster than not having that culture. Are you going to lose out on some commerce that ends up "wasted" as culture in cities that don't need it? Of course. Having a ton of specialists means that you're not going to completely ruin your economy, however. Also, all of those specialists can be turned into :hammers: when you whip and draft like crazy as soon as you hit those military techs that you've been pushing toward. That's going to generate a lot of :mad:, but you have an extra 20 :) to make up for it from Theatres and :culture:. Bulbing can also let you trade like crazy if you have the right neighbors at the right level in the tech tree and if you're bulbing a path that your partners are ignoring.

Is this going to work in every game? Obviously not. Cottages are often better than specialists for an empire's needs. Completely neglecting cottages is a terrible idea in many games. If you're isolated, then the bulbs that you get from your specialists aren't going to have nearly the same impact as a cottage's sustained growth because you can't leverage those bursts without a backwards neighbor to decimate.

Just remember that you're not just ignoring Cottages. You're replacing them with something better suited to a particular game. If the farms you're building aren't better than the cottages you aren't building for that game, then obviously that was a bad call. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that one strategy is better than another. I'm just saying that each strategy is good for particular games. I guess I'm just saying, "play the map" :)

Deep_Blue
May 18, 2009, 09:57 AM
While i agree with your general message ("why limit yourself?"), i wanted to point out that those two are a bit off... best science cities are made with settled specialists (can reach 1000+ bpt in one city) so I don't see why a SE (or whatever the name) can't have a nice science city. For Wall Street, it's best to put it on a shrine/corp headquarter city anyway, so this has very few to do with specialists/cottages.

Cheers,
Raskolnikov

I agree with you but you missed my point, I am referring that anti-cottage strategy limits the commerce and sceince output considerabley for wall city and oxford city. Settling Gps is not against cottaging I still do wall street city with many settled GMs and Oxford city with many settled GSs (And yep I settle wall street in my best srhine city but that is not related to the subject). Representation may compensate a bit the lost science from base commerce in oxford city, but it will not compensate the lost commerce in wall street city. And agin what will I do if I want to change my civics lets say to Police state for example to boost military production, I will be limitied and tied to representation all the game !

RRRaskolnikov
May 18, 2009, 09:59 AM
Sorry then... different ways of playing... :) I generally workshop my Wall Street city to spam missionaires/suits guys/build money after that...

Cheers

Iranon
May 18, 2009, 12:34 PM
I see no problem with our main science city... we might be slightly limited by health, but here straight farming for specialists is actually fairly attractive with Representation.

Wall Street loses some attractive options, like being the lone city with cottages under Bureaucracy and close to 100% gold. Cottages under Free Speech might or might not be more attractive than Merchant specialists, but are unlikely to be exciting.

@ RRRaskolnikov: That makes little sense to me. Your shrines/corporation HQs don't care where the missionaries/executives came from; after spreading them to a few production cities those take over in my games.
Wall Street also does not affect workshops building gold.

RRRaskolnikov
May 18, 2009, 01:06 PM
@Iranon: I agree with your points... I guess my production cities are usually too much busy with military :). But I still think cottages/specialists debate has few to do with where WS should be. It's possible to make so much money with shrine/corps that saying a "SE can't take advantage of WS" seems weird imo.

Cheers,
Ras

Crusher1
May 18, 2009, 01:41 PM
Oxford city: with SE economy only you cannot have this super science city

A SE Oxford Capital is going to be stronger in almost every case.

popejubal
May 18, 2009, 02:17 PM
A SE Oxford Capital is going to be stronger in almost every case.

If you're referring to settled Great Scientists, you can always run towns in your Capital with Bureaucracy and settle all the Great Scientists that your GP farm is generating. I think that there's only need for one seriously hardcore cash city (shrine + Corporate HQ) even in an enormous empire, but there's always room for another Science city. If you have to put Oxford in just one city, the Bureaucracy Capital with lots of Towns is the obvious choice.

Even if you have a very small empire, there will still be room for 1 GP farm dedicated to Scientists and another city with Cottages/Towns out the wahoo. The Town city gets Oxford and all Great Scientists that you plan to settle go into that city as well. Move the Palace there under Bureaucracy and BAM! Scienceopolis.

Crusher1
May 18, 2009, 02:41 PM
Empires at Biology.

Theoretical 20 grassland Oxford city. Cottage economy has 20 of them. Specialist economy has 20 specialist. Cottages are 20*8(F) = 160 while Specialist = 20*6 = 120 - before even counting settled GP. A specialist economy will typically always have produced many more GP anyways which makes up the difference.

In my typical Super settled SE Oxford I have around 600 bpt (10+ specialist + 15+ settled GP) around 1500 and clost to 1000 bpt (15+ specialist + 19+ settled GP around 17- 1750. This is accomplished by lots of wonders and or specialist usually started around 500 ADish by which time I am pulling in 160-190 GPP/t ? I think, lol - i forget exact details! Could be a bit off! Or a lot!?

I said in almost every case because I have gotten phenomenal success with Beth by settling a lot of scientist, however - most cases a SE will have many more settled GP because they typically have more GPP from Wonders and other specialist.

Edit: Yea, my GPP/t by 500 AD a bit inflated. Sure, I have achieved over 180 GPP a turn by that date with Augustus before but the norm is probably more like 100 gpp/t by 500 AD and 165-180 gpp by 1100-1200 AD. These numbers, if my feeble memory serve me well enough give me around 9 GP before 1000 AD and around 20+ GPP by 1750 AD +.

DaveMcW
May 18, 2009, 03:20 PM
Oh gods... Whipping is such a complex topic that I'm getting lost half the time myself. Fortunately I'm not the only one. That quote from DaveMcW for example is not good advice; if we followed that all food-neutral tile with something else (like grassland forst) would be too strong to be ever whipped away.


My quote assumes you already have a good reason for working a food-negative tile. (too much food, lack of grassland forests)

There are certainly whipping strategies that do not involve food-negative tiles, and they are often more powerful if you avoid happiness problems.



Specialist = 20*9 = 180

Since when do scientists give 9:science: ?

Using math to disprove the existence of cottages will never work.

Crusher1
May 18, 2009, 03:31 PM
They DO NOT. You posted before my edits were made.

Using math to disprove the existence of cottages will never work.

I prefer cottage economies because they are easier to use and my favorite leader is Beth, however, I'm keeping it real. SE are perfectly viable and I enjoy them in many games, and in the games I do use them they almost always have a better Oxford Capital.

Edit:

Using math to disprove the existence of cottages will never work.

You see the link in my profile right? I am not Anti cottage at all - simply anti people who are anti SE - big difference. There is more to the game than...........

"random new thread"

Dave:

Cottages.

Of course, I do find you quite amusing so we do have that :)

popejubal
May 18, 2009, 04:39 PM
Empires at Biology.

Theoretical 20 grassland Oxford city. Cottage economy has 20 of them. Specialist economy has 20 specialist. Cottages are 20*8(F) = 160 while Specialist = 20*6 = 120 - before even counting settled GP. A specialist economy will typically always have produced many more GP anyways which makes up the difference.


...except that the "specialist economy" will generally bulb their specialists while a "cottage economy" could do either. In any case, a "specialist economy" will probably only have a couple more Great People by the time that Oxford is built compared to a "cottage economy". Go ahead and settle the Great Scientists in the Oxford city. It makes sense in the right games. Don't pretend that "cottage economies" can't do the same, though.

Also, at 40 population, how are you taking care of :mad: and :yuck: in that city? 20 is manageable (with effort), but 40 is a nightmare. Running a Great Person farm and settling Great Scientists in the Cottage city is much more efficient and effective than just running a Great Person farm alone.

I am ignoring the commerce slider in this debate and running high culture or cash does hurt the town-city more than the specialist city, but you weren't really size 40 with 20 scientists in the first place either.

Crusher1
May 18, 2009, 04:50 PM
except that the "specialist economy" will generally bulb their specialists while a "cottage economy"

Not in a Mid super settled strategy where long term gains are the goal. What you wrote will generally take place in a SE w/out the Mids geared at a specific early military advantage with less emphasis on fixed beakers - something which they plan to rectify once they gain a lot of land.

Don't pretend that "cottage economies" can't do the same, though.

I have never said this, not even remotely close to saying this. Perhaps you are confused and thinking about someone else? I have even said my favorite player is Beth and in many cases have done quite well with her because PHI/FIN leads to a strong super capital.

Also, at 40 population, how are you taking care of and in that city? 20 is manageable

It's just hypotheticals. The main thing is what happens during typical games. My typical SE Oxford capital, as I have said before has around 600 bpt at 1500 AD and close to 1000 bpt in the 1700s. My CE (which I play a lot more of) Oxfords are usually no where close to that - of course they make up for it in other places.

DaveMcW
May 18, 2009, 05:05 PM
You see the link in my profile right? I am not Anti cottage at all - simply anti people who are anti SE - big difference. There is more to the game than...........

I am anti SE and anti CE.

Stop using those stupid crazy terms (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=309988).

Crusher1
May 18, 2009, 05:09 PM
Not like you care ^^ but I actually think highly of you in terms of skill but lowly of you in terms of usefulness (like me :) - although I have no where near your skill).

That being said, I have never made a single post in that thread because I think it's funkuliciously .

SE and CE are great terms and anyone trying to change them should be muzzled and sent off to a remote island =D - for real though.

Deep_Blue
May 18, 2009, 05:23 PM
A SE Oxford Capital is going to be stronger in almost every case.

With representation yes, but I hate being limited to a specific civic, I like to switch between civics like from representation to universal to buy building then to police state for military production then back to universal, and sometimes to HR during wars to fight unhappiness.

noto2
May 19, 2009, 11:16 AM
I actually think the main difference between the strategies that most call "se" and "ce" or Dave calls...well I can't remember what he calls them - is your civics choices. Remember that if you cottage spam you're going to want to win the liberalism race and get to universal suffrage ASAP. You're going to run US and FS, probably emancipation and in terms of economy...well, you have flexibility there but free market would probably synergize the best as it maximizes commerce output. You won't be getting happiness bonuses from rep or nationalism, and so you'll probably want free religion to boost the happy cap and not need the luxury slider, as a CE luxury slider is very expensive. Things to note about this strategy is that you'll have a horrible hammer output until you reach democracy, so you won't have an easy time warring early. Also without nationalism or police state you'll have a tough time warring late game as well. You'll probably be 1st place in GNP, but not hammers.

If you're hiring a lot of specialists and settling many GP, you'll need to run representation for the beaker boost. You'll probably also need caste system. You might need environmentalism to deal with the health cap and possibly nationalism for the lower cost and happy cap boost.

Both of these strategies lock you into specific civics. That's the way I look at it, anyway. I think about what advantages my civ/leader has, I look at the map, at my neighbours, and start playing. As the game goes on I start to think about how I can win and what civics I will use, and begin to set up my economy accordingly. In most of my games I use a mix of different improvements to get the job done. Mixing is underrated, in my opinion. I mean, think about it, even for a space win, you need hammers, right? Substituting some towns for workshops will probably help you build that spaceship sooner. Or for a military win, even without free speech a town after printing press gives you the most beakers per population and is usually better for research than using a representation scientist.

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 02:05 PM
Culture or not culture, and if we do use the culture slider then how much should it be used? I'll stick with those saying you should stay away from it unless absolutely necessary. Running at a huge slider in general seems like a bad Idea w/out specific and immediate goals and even then, those goals should contribute something significant to your empire. Exceptions being under early Representation w/ no other happiness resources available besides +3.


@ Noto

The problem is everyone on the face of the earth has a different opinion of what constitutes a cottage or specialist economy - but just because some people are easily confused doesn't mean they aren't good terms for general use :) .

But yea, everything is map/leader dependent. Obviously, in most cases (map) FE > CE for War just like ORG is > FIN for War. It just depends ^^. And O, I typically stay in slavery while running a SE because I find whipping superior for a very long time.

TheMeInTeam
May 19, 2009, 03:35 PM
I actually think the main difference between the strategies that most call "se" and "ce" or Dave calls...well I can't remember what he calls them - is your civics choices. Remember that if you cottage spam you're going to want to win the liberalism race and get to universal suffrage ASAP. You're going to run US and FS, probably emancipation and in terms of economy...well, you have flexibility there but free market would probably synergize the best as it maximizes commerce output. You won't be getting happiness bonuses from rep or nationalism, and so you'll probably want free religion to boost the happy cap and not need the luxury slider, as a CE luxury slider is very expensive. Things to note about this strategy is that you'll have a horrible hammer output until you reach democracy, so you won't have an easy time warring early. Also without nationalism or police state you'll have a tough time warring late game as well. You'll probably be 1st place in GNP, but not hammers.

If you're hiring a lot of specialists and settling many GP, you'll need to run representation for the beaker boost. You'll probably also need caste system. You might need environmentalism to deal with the health cap and possibly nationalism for the lower cost and happy cap boost.

Both of these strategies lock you into specific civics. That's the way I look at it, anyway. I think about what advantages my civ/leader has, I look at the map, at my neighbours, and start playing. As the game goes on I start to think about how I can win and what civics I will use, and begin to set up my economy accordingly. In most of my games I use a mix of different improvements to get the job done. Mixing is underrated, in my opinion. I mean, think about it, even for a space win, you need hammers, right? Substituting some towns for workshops will probably help you build that spaceship sooner. Or for a military win, even without free speech a town after printing press gives you the most beakers per population and is usually better for research than using a representation scientist.

Civic choices are based on tile composition, not the other way around. Representation is a perfectly valid choice even when using a lot of cottages in some cases, as is caste (your cottages were grown early and relatively few captured/grown cottages remain immature). Using mostly specialists does not preclude free speech or emancipation (:mad: penalties and the existence of spec infrastructure may make emancipation desirable).

The only "locked" civic is that specs need representation to be worthwhile for anything other than GPP. Cottages are only somewhat less useful under rep, missing out on hammers and rush buy only.

Favorite civics of key AIs can dominate anything else, too. If you can make 4-5 extra tech trades past WFYABTA due to friendly AI(s), the gains usually far outstrip setting the civic based on some archaic economy term.

SE and CE get really old and I've done to death why they're useless terms because they mean nothing without further clarification (which would have been fine without the terms). I might as well create something called an "RE" or resource economy. Spam settlers/capture land and use the resource deals to get 50+ gpt and raise your caps. That can easily contribute more to an early game output than any one set of tile improvements, so why isn't it considered a legit economy too? What about "military economy"? It sure as hell works with civs like Rome or war elephants. Extort EVERYTHING for half the game.

"ME" and "RE" share the same usefulness. None, because only the most pure, LATE MID GAME ON economies are so dominated by one tile improvement that claiming what you're doing based around that one improvement is sufficient to give anybody else even a remote inkling of what you did.

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 03:46 PM
@ TMIT

Don't forget about one of the best early economies in the game! WPAGDSTE which always translates to the highest possible scores and earliest victory dates!

TheMeInTeam
May 19, 2009, 04:01 PM
I wasn't forgetting, but I'd appreciate if you avoided posting such a powerful and gamebreaking economy until everyone else is ready.

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 04:24 PM
Very true! Not everyone is ready for consistent 300K scores with some random 750K+.

Deep_Blue
May 19, 2009, 05:04 PM
SE and CE get really old and I've done to death why they're useless terms because they mean nothing without further clarification (which would have been fine without the terms). I might as well create something called an "RE" or resource economy. Spam settlers/capture land and use the resource deals to get 50+ gpt and raise your caps. That can easily contribute more to an early game output than any one set of tile improvements, so why isn't it considered a legit economy too? What about "military economy"? It sure as hell works with civs like Rome or war elephants. Extort EVERYTHING for half the game.


What about EE (Espionage Economy)? Put your espionage slider high all the time at 70% or higher and steal all needed techs without any research, you can steal cash regularly also. You will spend hammers on spies and espionage beakers on missions, but with the survival rate of spies and the 50% discount for stationed spies the spent hammers+beakers per stolen tech is a bargain. Also you will save the huge hammers that are needed for libraries, universities, observatories and even banks because you will not need these buildings anymore.

I tried this strategy once and it was very enjoying and fun, all my techs were stolen including computers :crazyeye: the positive thing here also is that you can see all AIs cities and troops and you can screw them with continuous poisoning and unhappiness from espionage missions.

Or we can have Religious economy controlled by shrines and missionaries.

We can also have Sea Economy: play Islands Build The Colossus and The Great Light House. Beeline astronomy and get rich from ocean trades long before anybody gets astronomy. Then beeline chemistry and build tons of privateers and get constant cash from pillage and blockage.

You can do whatever you want in this game. The possibilities are endless here.

RRRaskolnikov
May 19, 2009, 05:28 PM
Don't forget about one of the best early economies in the game! WPAGDSTE which always translates to the highest possible scores and earliest victory dates!

wait... what??? :lol:

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 05:35 PM
War, Pillage And Gold Deficit, Sell Technology Economy

It revolves around being in a constant state of war and using gold from conquest and trade to fuel deficit research. Scientist and especially conquered Mids are ideal. Organized is king. Farms, luxuries, mines, the whip, and an early academy are your friend. Cottages are a last resort to pay for maintenance when you don't have enough gold or luxuries. Priorities are currency (cash for techs), col (2 pop CHs), asthetics (shineys), literature (shineys)

RRRaskolnikov
May 19, 2009, 05:44 PM
Organized is king.

Ah ok :) some have overabused it for hof purpose... :mischief: Stabbing the COL founder is particularly usefull when organized, he will give it to you once reduced to few cities...

edit: I see you have edited your post... I think currency, aesthetics, litterature are not necessary... when organized. the 2 pop whip courts are all you need. Agreed otherwise :) (Julius is the king ;))

Cheers

Deep_Blue
May 19, 2009, 05:45 PM
War, Pillage And Gold Deficit, Sell Technology Economy

It revolves around being in a constant state of war and using gold from conquest and trade to fuel deficit research. Scientist and especially conquered Mids are ideal. Organized is king. Farms, luxuries, mines, the whip, and an early academy are your friend. Cottages are a last resort to pay for maintenance when you don't have enough gold or luxuries. Priorities are currency (cash for techs), col (2 pop CHs), asthetics (shineys), literature (shineys)

Ahh so you know my secret for 300k+ games :lol:

Edit: Seriously that is my favorite strategy .. writing->Math->Currency very early and stay at 1500+ cash all the game from wars and selling techs, 100% deficit research all the time.. sell old techs to recover cash .. more wars ..

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 05:50 PM
Currency is an absolute must and should come before COL. In a warmonger game by 500 BC you can already have 15+ cities so getting currency is automatically +15g + you can now trade cash for techs. You want to be at deficit research as long as possible. Currency does that for you better than CoL. CoL is extremely important but takes 2 pop whips and a bit more time to give immediate effects. I'll take Currency before CoL in my warmonger games all day - I know it seems backwards but it isn't because it actually leads to higher research. Not to mention AI's favor CoL higher than Currency so I can either trade for CoL very quickly or get a reduced cost on researching it because more AI's have it.

You'll have minimal cottages for as long as possible so you can whip/mine more hammers so Shineys are important. TP is great for GPP since we have more scientist. SP is great for running Theocracy/Org Religion. TGL/NE/HE are great w/ no reason needed to explain why :) - plus this leads to drama (GT + bulb Philo) music for more trade bait and or starting a golden age etc etc.

P.S. Julius isn't king and doesn't lead to the absolute highest scores ^^.

Edit: Seriously, I know ^^. It's by far and away the strongest strategy available on any map with decent land mass. Even if you're going for a space race - having 30 cities at 1000 AD will get you there faster.

RRRaskolnikov
May 19, 2009, 06:01 PM
I don't see things like this... what I need to win the game is to reach construction or construction/HR (if ivory), or IW if I am Cesar (I assume we are still talking of your crazy economy/domination style game)... then I need to substain the max number of troops (0% science). courts (COL) are enough for that. I can detour by currency, but it's a detour... you can't support 30+ cities needed to have domination in normal map with just currency (no monarchy, no calendar, so no size 16 cities working cottages, no/few foreign TRs), you can with courts and organized.... even on the higher levels.

edit: if you are going for space... forget my post ;) :lol:

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 06:16 PM
Heh - you don't have to see them for them to be true ^^. I am simply a copy cat like so many others of a tried and true method. Of course you get COL - after all, it's the next tech after Currency! It comes quick and sometimes you can trade for it! The point is Currency always puts you in a stronger position from the immediate +1 trade route and ability to sell techs for cash.

Who says you won't have Monarchy? Who says you won't have calendar? I'm talking about Immortal btw, not a noob level. You can easily be researching Education in the BC's from this strategy while already having Monarchy, calendar, etc etc.

Edit:

A quote from Killer who has scored over 1,000,000 points on Immortal:

I have 17 cities at 500 BC, just revolted to CS, and am running at about 10 turns to acquire paper if the gold holds up. Still no courthouses as we are not at 0 gold flow yet. Currency is really a key tech, and allows for 100% research for quite some time selling to the AIs.

and other relevant info from his 1,000,000 point game on Immortal:

techs researched at 500BC in my game were CoL, Literature, Calendar, Currency, and Monarchy + CS.

P.S. In some of the other truly high scoring games I have seen 500K - 750K + they were using a SE with a 20% cultural slider! Matter of fact, in the vast majority of the highest scoring games I have seen, a SE with Mids (conquered) has been used - and some love from the culture slider.

TheMeInTeam
May 19, 2009, 06:23 PM
Tech fleecing is truly powerful. The only things that nerf it are:

1. The AIs researching too slowly, but this is compensated on lower levels by less maintenance and easier conquest, so it's more an adjustment based on level rather than a true nerf.
2. Running into problematic AIs (sitting bull)
3. Crappy resource distribution making it hard or impossible to get metal
4. The target vassaling to somebody in between wars
5. Getting dogpiled thanks to DoW mechanics
6. Your target getting dogpiled and actually losing cities to somebody else.

A lot of these can be mitigated with careful planning and experience, but they're worth noting because someone trying unit spam FTW approach for the first time will probably hit one of them as a snag.

RRRaskolnikov
May 19, 2009, 06:32 PM
Heh - you don't have to see them for them to be true ^^.
So true, I confess I am a COL addict ;)
I'm talking about Immortal btw, not a noob level.

George would say: "what else?" (in short, me too)

You can easily be researching Education in the BC's from this strategy while already having Monarchy, calendar, etc etc.

indeed... but what for? (we are still talking of trash domination here?)
And yeah, KillerCane is a great source of inspiration for all of us ;)

Cheers,
Ras

PS: I am not sure we'll agreed tonight :lol::p
edit: to be fair, please confess that Killer was talking of Sushi milking... thus he needs to tech at least medicine.

DaveMcW
May 19, 2009, 06:42 PM
Matter of fact, in the vast majority of the highest scoring games I have seen

Playing below your difficulty level for a high score doesn't really count as a normal strategy.

TheMeInTeam
May 19, 2009, 06:45 PM
Playing with ridiculous settings/civs for a high score doesn't really count as a normal strategy.

Fixed for you. My Deity domination on normal speed is a good example. Deity is NOT "my level". Deity with pratrape vs soft AIs however...

RRRaskolnikov
May 19, 2009, 06:54 PM
Deity is NOT "my level".

Don't be too hard with yourself :lol: congrats again for this game :goodjob:

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 07:02 PM
Playing below your difficulty level for a high score doesn't really count as a normal strategy.

Just because I have limited success on Deity doesn't mean I am going to play that level as my standard. I am perfectly happy with playing a wide variety of Strategies and leaders on Immortal.

Besides, take 2 Emperor level users and place them on Noble and the person with the best strategy will have the best game either way - their true skill level doesn't take away the effectiveness of their lower level play/effeciency.

Edit:
Playing with ridiculous settings/civs for a high score doesn't really count as a normal strategy

Thats better ^^. Of course, instead of a 1,000,000 K victory on a map finder game, someone could still easily score 400K with standard settings. The point being, if a strategy has any merit to it, it will still work very well w/out rigged settings :)



2nd Edit: coming when I find the link ^^.

Ok, I found the link ;)

DaveMcW's Chieften Space Race Settler Game! http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=90442


Now, in Killers 1,000,000 score game you could still use his strategy under normal circumstances and do quite well, as I and many others have done.


With the above link you are relying on an easy level with popping settlers from huts to be successful. Obviously that strat isn't gonna work on Immortal for a normal space race win :)

DaveMcW
May 19, 2009, 07:09 PM
The point being, if a strategy has any merit to it, it will still work very well w/out rigged settings :)

You're wrong. If you ever manage to dominate Noble optimally, you will realize there is very little in common with your normal level.

TheMeInTeam
May 19, 2009, 07:12 PM
Don't be too hard with yourself :lol: congrats again for this game :goodjob:

It's less about being hard on oneself and more about pragmatically realizing limitations in one's own play. My "pace" is a bit too slow to compete in deity games that others can win, even as diplo and tactics/strategy seem good enough.

This means that I have to start improving micro...taking games slowly until I have done it enough times to know certain optimum choices. Obviously I've gotten better at this as it was the bulk of my jump from emp---->immortal, but I still have work to do ;).

RRRaskolnikov
May 19, 2009, 07:14 PM
Ok, I found the link ;)

:lol: What have you done??? :lol: It's good to see old civ3 pics though...

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 07:16 PM
I'm simply keeping it real =D.

You're wrong. If you ever manage to dominate Noble optimally, you will realize there is very little in common with your normal level

I'll give you that Dave :) . You cant get the cash necessary, etc etc, and with levels things change. But the point I was making was that a WPAGDTE on Immortal will work perfectly fine w/out a rigged map - you just wont get a 1,000,000 score, but you could easily get 300-400K. It's a perfectly viable and winning game strategy.

Earthling
May 19, 2009, 08:40 PM
You know what, I bet you can get hugely high scores with Quechua rushes on huge Pangea maps. What's that, they're banned in the HoF? :rolleyes:

I have to disagree that such is really perfectly viable strategy, when it revolves around choosing a few particular civs and map settings. Hence why I repeatedly call such things gambits, and don't approve of them very much at all, if you're an anti- anti-SE people person, I'm an anti- people-who-rush-Pyramids-or-use-Rome-every-game person. Dave is also right that right HoF games aren't really that close to normal games at all, especially at lower difficulties; though of course the players can be very skilled, it's just not the same as regular games. And imo you also probably shouldn't want to put players on noble difficulty to compete multiplayer, if they're of higher skill; it's much better with regards to tech, barbs and everything to use higher levels in MP games if no AI are involved.

TheMeInTeam
May 19, 2009, 09:08 PM
Actually, barring protective targets, spamming units and beating the crap out of nearby AIs is pretty effective on IMM down. Vassal states were probably the biggest thing that slowed down that tactic, since fleecing techs makes it a lot stronger (ever get CoL, Currency, metal casting, machinery, monarchy, calendar, and so on all from peace treaties?). Nevertheless, it is often doable in standard games if the situation is right (no PRO or dogpiling likelihood), and that can be read pretty early in the game.

Crusher1
May 19, 2009, 11:04 PM
'm an anti- people-who-rush-Pyramids-or-use-Rome-every-game person.


Me too ^^. Variety is key. Additionally, conquering the Mids and Darius would produce better results than Rome noobies.


Actually, barring protective targets, spamming units and beating the crap out of nearby AIs is pretty effective on IMM down.

Indeed! The last warmonger game I had on Immortal gave me over 300K score with Asoka, and I was almost at war the entire game. WPAGDTE is very powerful!

Deep_Blue
May 20, 2009, 04:18 AM
A quote from Killer who has scored over 1,000,000 points on Immortal:


What is the link to that game?

RRRaskolnikov
May 20, 2009, 04:24 AM
here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6759886&postcount=143) is a guide written by KillerCane... the thread from which it is extracted is also very interesting :)