Detailed analysis: # of specialist cities needed per era

[futurehermit]

copied from my other thread...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok, I've GOT IT!

I was able to a bunch of times tonight, using Mao, get the pyramids by 1000 BC (Monarch, Normal speed, no stone).

Here is my build:

Tech: Bronze-Masonry (after that, just go by the map)

Capital: Worker-Settler-Pyramids

2nd city: Worker-Warrior-Warrior-Warrior-Warrior-Warrior

Ok, so here's how it goes: worker uses 3 chops to get settler out asap, then develops the land in the capital for the pyramids, then starts to chop the pyramids. once the worker in the 2nd city is done, it comes to help finish chopping the pyramids. once the pyramids are done, both cities should be around size four. poprush a settler in one and a worker in the other. this gives you three cities and three workers to develop them.

the beauty is that i then use the GE that spawns from the pyramids to rushbuild the parthenon. this is huge since it adds additional gp points throughout the course of the game!!!

i played one game tonight where i got the pyramids, parthenon, and great library and then used representation-scientist-specialists to boom my econ. unfortunately i was on an island by myself with coast, not ocean, separating me from cyrus and peter. i was able to trade with them, but didn't bother going to war since i had a large island to myself.

i got liberalism AND circumnavigation of the globe around 1000-1200 AD and had the outright tech lead by this point. i had even outteched the other continent, whom i met all of the inhabitants.

i was then cranking out science infra like it was going out of style and preparing for the transition to cottages once i hit democracy.

from there i would've cruised to an easy science victory since the other continent was at war and i bribed peter to go to war with cyrus.

i'm not going to finish the game since i am pretty confident it was in the bag.

i'm going to keep replicating this build and streamlining it.

i just can't believe it: pyramids (representation) + parthenon + great library + philosophical + (slightly later) pacifism + caste system + (slightly later) mercantilism!!!!!!!!!!!!

this is...HUGE

 

[futurehermit]

Does anyone else think that spacerace is the best victory condition for this strat? I mean, it's all about getting and keeping a tech lead, which seems well suited for space race. Also, because of the initial set-up time for the strat, you're not going to be aggressive as early as you would want if considering a strong aggressive strat. Furthermore, if I was going conquest or domination, I'd want to be emphasizing production, not specialists, and military civics, not specialist civics (e.g., theocracy vs. pacificism). Obviously, you want to plan a cultural victory from the beginning, and once again, I don't know that scientists make the best plan for a cultural victory.

Thoughts?

 

[Zaldron]

My first thought is that as long as you're building up a tech lead, at some point you will have a military tech advantage, which you use to liberate enemy lands. It might be as late as grenadiers or cavalry, but if you liberate an empire, then you use their fully developed production cities to produce the troops to take over the next empire, meanwhile using your main science cities to keep cranking out the research.

 

[futurehermit]

Yeah, this was my initial thought as well, but do you think you can still achieve a domination victory at that point in the game. It seems that by around 1000AD I am only finishing off one civilization...?

 

[futurehermit]

Another question I have:

If science victory is the best, we would want at least 6 science cities for Oxford (iirc).

Since we are generating a lot of great scientists...

Do we want to build 6 academies? That's 50% more science in each of these science cities.

Furthermore, a settled great scientist provides 9 beakers per turn. As we found out in our discussions of this strategy, an academy is superior once there are 4 scientists in the city. Thus, once we get to CS and combine irrigation and caste system (early medieval), the academies are superior to settled specialists.

What do people think?

 

[futurehermit]

After some more reflection, I think that, as others have recommended on these forums, the victory condition should be contingent on the size of the continent: Small continent, science victory; Large continent, domination victory. For the former, use your tech lead to pursue techs and to cause wars to slow down the AI. For the latter, use your tech lead to continue the military campaign.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well in terms of what to do with a GS... assuming Representation
And assuming One super science city which will have Oxford, an Academy, and Any Settled Scientists (remember, those can be Stacked, Academies Can't)

Options:.. assuming Post-Education

Academy=Base Science x50%

Settled Scientist= 9 x (1 +1 (Oxford) +0.5 Academy.. you will put one here +0.5 Uni,Lib + ~0.2 (Monasteries or Observatory))
=9 x 3.2
=28.8...29.25 for Observatory (assuming Sci Method cancels the Monasteries)

So if you stay Representative, the Settled Scientist gives you about 30Flasks per turn

The Academy is therefore better in any city that has 60 Base Flasks
That means either 10 Scientists or (assuming 90% Science) 10 Towns

So except for the largest cities, under representation, Settling is better.



Looking at it Early Game
Scientist=9 x (1 +0.5 Academy +0.35 Library, Monastery)
=16.65

so for an Academy to compensate it has to go where there is ~33 Flasks per turn
this means 5.5 Scientists under Representation (again only achieved in a few Big cities... and only with Caste System)

This is where I think the Other advantage of the Scientist comes in.... the Production, it makes the Super Science City a bit stronger on its productivity, making it more rapid to build its scientific improvements and whatever else it needs.

Also using a Super Scientist focuses even more of your science into one city, which means the other cities (with 5-10 Specialists) can more easily be changed to Gold/Production without affecting your science much.

 

[futurehermit]

So except for the largest cities, under representation, Settling is better.

How can you say this when you're including an academy in your calculations?

Settled great scientist with library will give you: 9*1.25=11.25/turn

Academy with 4 scientists will give you: 6*4*.5=12/turn

Thus, when running representation, an academy will be more beneficial than a settled scientist. Furthermore, the academy impacts every additional scientist you add to that city, whereas settled great scientists do not.

Edit: I forgot to say that the first great scientist goes in your great library city, which has four scientists. The next ones go to cities that will, or do already, have four scientists once you hit CS and can use caste system + irrigation to get your science cities up to at least four scientists.

 

[NaZdReG]

future,

when doing this strat, do you set aside one city for cottage spamming just to keep up with later upkeep costs or do you rely on capturing holy cities to do that for you? if so do you set aside a couple of cities for missionary spamming?

NaZ

 

[KrikkitTwo]

How can you say this when you're including an academy in your calculations?

Settled great scientist with library will give you: 9*1.25=11.25/turn

Academy with 4 scientists will give you: 6*4*.5=12/turn

Looking at Great Scientists AFTER the one used to put an Academy in your Science City

Settled great Scientist in Science City WITH an Academy and a Library
=9*1.75=15.75/turn

Academy in a new city with FIVE Scientists will only give you
=5*6*0.5=15/turn

Now the only way to get 6 Scientists (to beat the Settled specialist)Outside of your science city (which already has an Academy) is
1. Running Caste System
AND
2. having ~12 excess food (requires a city that can reach at least size 12 and have ~ two food resources)
AND
3. That that city Always be involved in Science

As you add multiple Monasteries, Universities, Oxford, and Observatories the Settled Scientist gets better and Better, so that once Sci Method rolls around, you need a city to have 10 (TEN) Scientists for an Academy there to be better than a Settled Great Scientist.


So for the First Scientist, Academy is good, for all Other Scientists, Settle them in the Science City (allowing it to build N.E., Monasteries, Universities, Oxford + Observatories Faster with that Bonus Hammer)


The final bonus is extreme specialization, assuming 4 Great Scientists are what you got, and you are NOT running Caste System, then by the time Sci Method rolls around (to forget about the Monasteries)

Science City Base Flasks=6 Scientists, 3 Great Scientists
= 6*6+3*9
=36+27
=63

Output
= 63*3.25 (1+1 Oxford + 0.5 Academy +0.75 (Lib+Uni+Obs))
= 204.75 flasks per turn

From that one city, with 0% science, no Caste System, and Only 4 Great Scientists that you received in the whole game (1 for Academy, 3 Settled) Each additional Great Scientist gets you 29.25 flasks per turn.

This means that all your other cities could be running cottages ,for Miantenance, or Production for units. (actually this 200/turn is only about 1/2-1/4 off what you want at this stage in the game so you might be running Other science cities too which means running Caste, which means this one has more which means you probably only need 2-3 others)

 

[futurehermit]

So for the First Scientist, Academy is good, for all Other Scientists, Settle them in the Science City (allowing it to build N.E., Monasteries, Universities, Oxford + Observatories Faster with that Bonus Hammer)

Ok, I'm convinced, nice work

future,

when doing this strat, do you set aside one city for cottage spamming just to keep up with later upkeep costs or do you rely on capturing holy cities to do that for you? if so do you set aside a couple of cities for missionary spamming?

NaZ

Once I have enough cities with specialists, I'll cottage my capital. That way if later in the game I run into $ problems, I can switch to bureaucracy. Otherwise, I don't build any cottages, no need to. As for missionaries, I'll just build them as needed, when I'm able.

 

[Calavente]

Hi,

1) I had a question about mercantilisme:
is it really usefull to do it in a specialist oriented strat? as in most case you will have some 2-3 trades routes all giving between 3 to 10, even 15commerce (if harbor). I know that science is not commerce related in specialist strat, but gold is. your trade routes will even more be huge as your cities need/will be more pop important than a cottage based eco.

is it worth 1free specialist and denying commerce to ennemy civs or not?

2) Existing commerce
In all specialist based eco there will still be an existing commerce that we must no forget==> all the gold entry do not depends enirely on pillaging and goody huts

3) loosing the pyramid rush even in specialist oriented economy:
you are not doomed for a cottage economy !!!

I've done some simulations for an optimum cottage city; I have forgotten my usb key so I have not the data/graphs here, I will post it latter on a new thread or on "farm vs cottage" thread. I can still give some conclusions:
experiment results in the spoiler:

Spoiler Optimum Cottage City experiment :

experiment data:
-No commerce modifiers (no palace, no maintenance, no trade routes...)
-Nocivic/tech that improve village/city/farm,
-no ressource in fat cross,
-all buildings giving health/ happy without changing gold or beakers are given at start.
-only 9 commerce tiles (rivers) on 21 grassland flat tiles. river tiles are neutral in commerce produced : 1cpt per worked tile, if farm or if cottage)(game realistic as a commerce city would always be chosen near a river : health + irrigation source for farms + extra commerce)

commerce here is given as : TOTALY produced commerce, from beginning of experiment, and in cpt : commerce per turn

results:
-working only farms up to 20pop then switching to all cottage (xp A) against all cottage (xp B)is a loosing bet for the 50 1st turns then takes the lead (not only on commerce per turn (cpt), but also on total commerce produced # 6000 commerce difference at 280turns)(comming up to the max 90cpt earlier than B (110th turn instead of 260th turn). A: Best late commerce,

-working farms up to 10 then extra pop on cottage then at 20 : only cottage (xp C): not too much influence of long terl commerce; catching up to B on 40 turns, loosing a bit to A at 70turn, attaining +90cpt only some one or two dozens of turns later than A. (very bad early commerce) very good late commerce

-working farms up to 5 then extra pop on cottage then at 20 : only cottage (xp D), loosing to B until pop 10 as at that time B is still 5-6, in the early turns (turn < 60) it gives way more commerce than A. then loose a little to A but makes much more than B.
*The 10 to 12 extra food per turn seems roughly sufficient to have a late growth (>12pop to 20pop) of 1 pop every 2-3-3 turns instead of 1 every 1-1-1-1-2 turns with a full farm working city, while providing enough commerce due to earlier work of cottage to have a decent short AND long term commerce production

experiment D seems the best strat : roughly equilibred : quite good early commerce (>A, C,) and very good late total commerce (>>B, quite equals to C, a bit less than A). BUT as early commerce is more important than late commerce because tech are cheaper, I'd rather have more early commerce and a few less late commerce. As lot of late commerce lost (B vs A,C,D) is does not still compares to a few more early commerce (B vs D),

-I expect the thing to be more in favor of cottage-working with commerce increasing civics and tech (but only influence the mid-late game so in most cases, the farm-start options will already be in full cottage-work or even already have full villages or towns work).

-I expect things to work in favor of farm-working for:
..biology era(late founded cities);
..whipping (as commerce city has few hammer tiles and you want some buildings ==> wipping ==> pop ==> farms ==> less cottage)
..free expression civic: it reduce the time to make late villages and towns so as early towns took longer to be made than late towns it seems more worthwhile to put more work in early growth/many late towns than in low/lower growth/some early towns/******ed late towns due to ******ed pop).

experiment conclusion :
experiment D (5farms working until 20pop + cottage worked for 6th to 20th pop then at 20 all cottage) is IMO the optimum strat for a cottage city.

Even if your capping limit is not 20 but less (5...8...13...etc), it seems that it is still the best bet for an optimum cottage city.

Spoiler Optimum cottage city with pop limit :

In case of capping limit different from "max workable tiles".
I would propose (without experiment done):
-work 4-5 farms then farms + cottages until your pop limit (n)
-when just before the n+1 pop growth (granary+food bar full), swapping to a full cottage Work, conserving the 5 farms for when rising the pop limit.
-return to working the 5 farm every tim you need a you can afford pop point. when foodbar almost full, transer again each citizen to a cottage square
-Only remove the 5 lasting farms* / ** (potential extra food at 4/5*2+2=10 or 12F) when pop is at 20 or max working tile use.

(*You would use farm working peon as specialist while stagnating your city)

(**transform the 5 farms into cottages only if you don't hope to be able the raise the pop limit in a very long time (>30-40turns). If you change some of the farms into cottages, you will delay the next city growth and the late ones are expensive).

What is the revelancy to the specialist based thread?
the following one:
if you loose the wonder race for pyramids,
-your specialist economy is almost dead. (maybe you can resurect it later discovering representation or stealing pyramids, but it will loose most of its cutting edge)
-some people seems to think that your possible cottage economy has taken a great deal of "lead in the wing"? (very bad translation from french saying "prendre du plomb dans l'aile", meaning being stopped before reaching the goal)
-it has not !
-As you were aiming for a big 2nd city for specialist strat and especially for forge's GE or pyramids, you have a huge pop for an early city (4-6).
-if you were aiming for a cottage economy, your second city would idealy have had to speed up pop to pop limit... so trying to get the pyramid did not really cost you many turns for a cottage eco, just a few ones.

So aiming for a specialist strat, then not having pyramids and swapping for a cottage eco seems IMO a bad start but not a crippling one as some people think. (it is still a bad one but...)

 

[FunkyMonkee]

Thanks futurehermit this is a great thread. Also great input from DarkFyre99, Calavente and many others.

One point about running a specialist economy I couldn't see in the discussions about its pros and cons on production and later on the ability to purchase buildings when running Universal Suffrage.

Actually with Universal Suffrage it makes the Pyramids even more appealing with and running a specialist economy. I usually start using Universal Suffrage in a spurt to purchase items such as Libraries and Universities for all cities to allow for the building of the Oxford University further adding to the research multipliers quickly. This starts to happen when I&#8217;ve most likely got Markets and/or Grocers and maybe Banks which start boosting the economy.

Regarding production effects of a specialist economy I think this would hit smaller cities. This impact is offset once you get significant economy running to rush buildings/troops. Note thou the negative effects on research while in Universal Suffrage due to switching from Representation.

I've played many games running a specialist economy where during Renaissance I&#8217;m running technology research at about 5 turns at 0% research and the effect of changing it to 100% has no effect even with adequate cottages. This is as I&#8217;ve added a barrel full of specialist to my capital.

My interpretation of your analysis is that build the Pyramids and running Representation while running a specialist economy are highly desirable. I wasn&#8217;t quite sure about also with the Great Library. Think I lost that in the discussion somewhere. Personally I would think it would be highly desirable as well but not necessary.

In this Detailed analysis: # of specialist cities needed per era a major part of it seems to be focused on the Pyramids and the power of Representation. I&#8217;ll apologise if I&#8217;m starting to go at a slight tangent and could requires it&#8217;s own tread.

My questions are as follows:

How does the Oracle stand up to the Pyramids with this analysis?

If you don&#8217;t get the Pyramids, can you still run a specialist economy successfully without Representation or should it be cottage based?

I wasn&#8217;t sure by your analysis and conclusions wether the Great Library has a significant impact as well?


It seems that these two Wonders are heavily contested with significant impact on your analysis. I.e. Oracle gives you Code of Laws quicker and its benefits with running a specialist economy sooner and easier v&#8217;s the long term effects and flexibility of the Pyramids running civics such as Representation and/or Universal Suffrage until the relevant technologies can be researched.

There could be a convergence point where the Oracle and Civil Service head start is over taken by the Pyramids based on running a specialist economy or whatever is best with the civics available.

To keep it simple the comparison is using the Oracle to research Code of Laws and using Great Prophet to research Civil Service. Yes there are direct ways with the Oracle; however I find this the most reliable method for various game types. This is also assuming that by doing one or the other Wonder you most likely sacrifice the other. . This is for comparative reasons and not a debate that you can &#8220;always&#8221; get both. This is also assuming that the game speed, type size allows for the Great Prophet to complete or virtually complete the technologies in question. The last assumption would be that you have the Industrious trait or a good chance of securing either Wonder to make this comparison even plausible.

If bee lining for Pyramids you&#8217;re most likely sacrificing the option to do the direct Civil Service Slingshot due to researching Masonry. I.e. Oracle &#61664; Code of Laws &#61664; Great Prophet for Civil Service direct while delaying Masonry. There is an alternative Civil Service slingshot without delaying Masonry, however requires delaying Monarchy. I.e. Oralce &#61664; Code of Laws &#61664; Research up to Monotheseim &#61664; First Great Propht for Theology &#61664; Second Great Prophet for Civil Service.

Things to note:.
The great people generation from the Pyramids would be great engineers which most likely be generated a bit later then say the first Great Prophet due to the expense of the Pyramids v Oracle. This could be used towards other wonders or technologies, especially military ones early on i.e. Metal Casting/Machinery.

Don&#8217;t assume that because you can generate great engineers you are not necessarily guaranteed particular wonders like the Great Library. The civil service boosts production and research which maybe be adequate to pinch say the Great Library. This is dependent on how quick Civil Service/Great Prophet generation is achieved.

Also note the expensive of the Pyramids v&#8217;s the Oracle. I find that bee lining to the Pyramids could be detrimental to your survival. I guess experience players could note your power graph during this building period and act quickly to harass you. Or less experienced/ absent minded ones will react to the completion of the Pyramids and start their Military campaign towards you. I guess this is where Police State could be used if you felt they were on they way. I generally find if they are left unchecked their aim is to try to lay low and out tech everyone until the right time. The same could also be said for the Oracle. The only differences is that it&#8217;s a lot cheaper and can provide the production and research boost from Civil Service soon after.

To get the best out of the flexibility of the Pyramids the Spiritual trait looks like the best choice. You are however still limited by how often you can change civics so any change must be made carefully. Nothing is worse then realising you just changed civics and are close to researching a technology that opens up another valuable civic.

Note:
*Please no discussion about what you can achieve verses the AI. Any discussion about what you can achieve v AI are irrelevant due to how pitiful it is. Keep it general and reliable advice.

Cheers,

Funky Monkee

Edit: Scrolling up I just noticed Calavente thread about specialist economy and cottages v farms. This has helped with the question about if you don't get the Pyramids.

 

[Tennyson]

Re: Missionary spamming.

I find that the super science city is AWESOME for creating missionaries. It has one of the lowest hammer/population ratios of any city (due to the scientists not working tiles) but missionaries are cheap. More importantly, it has every monastery I can make.