specialists

Does anyone use specialists? The yields from working a tile are usually better, and there are no GPPs to collect.

I once had 4 production specs running, just to make sure I got nanopasture the turn before growth, but they were more useful in denying food points than in gaining production! I'd have had the same result from artists, so should have used those.

Could they be made better? Use less food? Give better boosts? produce great people? Buff the buildings? Any ideas?

Any good reasons to use them that I've missed?

Specialists are fairly underwhelming. The scientist specialists can be worth it sometimes, they are +3 unlike the other specialists at +2. If you go down prosperity specialists also get +2 energy each.

Is there someone available to break down the math? I am pretty sure they are less efficient in CivBE than they where in Civ V

Good point, Xenotitan. Even then, an academy sounds like a better option, especially if buffed or boosted by sats, but academy bonuses can come relatively late. Early on, it could make a turn's difference to a critical tech.

Donny Viking said:

Good point, Xenotitan. Even then, an academy sounds like a better option, especially if buffed or boosted by sats, but academy bonuses can come relatively late. Early on, it could make a turn's difference to a critical tech.

Click to expand...

Academy requires a tile while specialists don't. If you use ICS your cities have not too much space and by the second half of the game (where academies appear) it may be worth having specialists instead.

At the moment specialists are just extra place to put population. A back up if you don't have the tiles improvements yet for a yield you want to focus on. Without great people they're not an investment that pays off later, and there's only one virtue that improves them and nothing else.
I miss civ 4 where you could base a whole strategy around specialists. Even civ 5 where specialists were a byproduct of tall cities rather than a strategy to their own.

I'll try out a game with cities minimal distances apart and see how it looks. I usually go for low overlap and big cities, but the ICS has worked well since Napoleon on CivI, so I ought to give it another go.

Related thread
Another one

Pesonally I would bother with scientist specialists only if I had zero useful land for academies (i.e. a hilly/desert city). Then scientists are good, because they appear at the same time as Biowells, which would be crucial.

And then growers are meh; engineers are meh; traders are double meh; artists are somewhat good, but not something I would rush for.

First step I think to making specialists worthwhile is have the colonists choice at the beginning add a point to the corresponding specialist. If I brought scientists why wouldn't my scientists be better scientists than the scientists of someone who brought engineers?

That's an interesting suggestion. I like it. They'd have to balance the specialist yields better though. +3 science is not equal in worth to +2 energy.

Minor Annoyance said:

First step I think to making specialists worthwhile is have the colonists choice at the beginning add a point to the corresponding specialist. If I brought scientists why wouldn't my scientists be better scientists than the scientists of someone who brought engineers?

Click to expand...

I'm strongly against this idea. So what if you brought scientists, your scientists have to be forever more productive than everyone else's scientists because of that?

Perhaps a more sound implementation of this principle could be two slots for a specialist of choice provided by colony HQ.

FaceUnderMask said:

I'm strongly against this idea. So what if you brought scientists, your scientists have to be forever more productive than everyone else's scientists because of that?

Perhaps a more sound implementation of this principle could be two slots for a specialist of choice provided by colony HQ.

Click to expand...

Well, we've been talking about how underwhelming specialists are, so how does getting more slots for something not very useful make them better?
However I also thought so what if you brought scientists, your cities have to forever get more science per because of that? If it's a ship full of scientists then two points per city seems not enough and if it's only some then it wouldn't last through the generations for every city. However it's no more ludicrous than Brazillia forever having better soldiers, or ARC better spies. If being soldiers or spies is a skill passed on through the society and endures forever why would extra science per city endure but not extra scientist per specialist? I don't see how one extra point to one of five specialists from colonist choice is such a bizarre prospect.

Now I will again counter my own argument by pointing out that most sponsor special abilities are in some form duplicated in the virtue trees. The only reason an extra point to a specialist from colonists would seem out of place is because there is so little else to improve them. If there were more enhancements, which there should be, then that extra point would fade in importance the same way two points of food or production per city fades when you can pre-build mines and farms or buy building to get a city started.

Qbix said:

Is there someone available to break down the math? I am pretty sure they are less efficient in CivBE than they where in Civ V

Click to expand...

No need for math to show that. A 5science (+ up to 225% bonus) scientist generating GSs cutting down research times by 7-8 turns is obviously better than a 3science one (+ bonus).

Minor Annoyance, you kinda have a point. Yes, bringing logic into civ games was silly from my side.
Actually, the main problem I have with suggestions like yours is that I believe specialists ought to be decent on their own, without any - ugh...homage (?! dunno what's the best word to use here) to something else.

No need for math to show that. A 5science (+ up to 225% bonus) scientist generating GSs cutting down research times by 7-8 turns is obviously better than a 3science one (+ bonus).

Click to expand...

+3. +2 more with social institute from Rationalism, and +2 more if you are Korea. Also there was no generic tile improvement that provides science, academies required GSes, which in turn required scientists. And GS academies were very, very strong.

My favorite solution to weak specialists is to boost trade yields by the specialists in a city. This would require base trade yields to be brought down a bit but would make those specialist buildings really attractive for our overall economy. It also gives us some options to specialize our cities and micromanage our economy if we like.

Has anyone pointed out yet that Specialist only generate half the pop unHealth?

Idleray said:

Has anyone pointed out yet that Specialist only generate half the pop unHealth?

Click to expand...

It's not the first time I've heard about it. Other people tell that they generate normal 0.75 unhealth per specialist, same as normal.
I will try to confirm it the next time I play the game.
But I need a break, morally tired right now. Siege worm just destroyed my outpost. "I guess you had way too many spice" (c) friend of mine.

Idleray said:

Has anyone pointed out yet that Specialist only generate half the pop unHealth?

Click to expand...

I just checked and they give the regular 0.75 unhealth.

FaceUnderMask said:

+3. +2 more with social institute from Rationalism, and +2 more if you are Korea. Also there was no generic tile improvement that provides science, academies required GSes, which in turn required scientists. And GS academies were very, very strong.

Click to expand...

Everybody takes Rationalism so it's de facto +5.

GS are used more for bulbing than their Academies.

Acken said:

Everybody takes Rationalism so it's de facto +5.

GS are used more for bulbing than their Academies.

Click to expand...

Sure, everybody takes rationalism. Science is king.
Really? I used bulbing only for exploiting overflow bug, or very late into the game. At least until public schools I built academies with GS-es.