Do you build factories?

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Hoover gives no shield benefit unless a Factory has also been built.

It looks like:
Without Hoover up to 20 shields are pollution free; with Hoover around 44 shields or so are pollution free.

Recycling Center allows up to around 65 shields pollution free (with or without Hoover).

I don't see Environmentalism (the Tech alone) having any affect on pollution generation levels.

Also, the great thing about Hoover is that it works for every city, where, normally, only those cities that are near a river can build their own Hydro Plant.

 

[Ace]

I have built numerous island and pole cities over the years and they yield more shields with an offshore platform first. I.e., a one hex island city can have up to 20 ocean hexes. So, putting in an OP in a city like this can yield up to 20 shields, depending on the size, while a factory will add at most, two shields if the island is a forest hex. However, if the OP yields more than 10 or 11 shields, you will get shield pollution everytime. But when you put in a factory, the shield pollution disappears. Note: A MT was already in place due to city size, so population pollution was not a factor.

 

[RegentMan]

Although pollution really isn't a concern for a city on a one tile island.

 

[Peaster]

Hoover gives no shield benefit unless a Factory has also been built.

It looks like:
Without Hoover up to 20 shields are pollution free; with Hoover around 44 shields or so are pollution free.

This is consistent with my game. I didn't expect any extra shields, but had a hunch Hoover would help with my OP pollution, and it did.

I don't see Environmentalism (the Tech alone) having any affect on pollution generation levels.

You and Ace and Ali agree about this, so I guess I am wrong. But I had a very distinct drop in pollution between 1170AD and 1172AD. Nothing much happened in that period - except getting the Env tech, launching a spaceship, and making the 255th city. Well, that's a lot, actually. But still, the Env tech seemed like the best explanation. Maybe I'll post some saves after the game, maybe in another thread, since I'm getting a little off-topic.

 

[Ace]

Although pollution really isn't a concern for a city on a one tile island.

Actually, it is. True, you cannot get skulls on water, but, pollution is cumulative, and once you get 9 or more pollution triangles, getting a skull on any city land with a single pollution triangle is possible. In fact, I have seen skulls appear in a city radius which has no pollution.

Correction: Peaster is correct about Environmentalism. I reviewed a thread by Starlifter from '01 in the forum, and in the formula computing population pollution, enviro adds a minus one to the tech multiplier. I don't have a link to the thread, but its called "pollution explanation".

forums.civfanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-765.html

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

I was only focusing on production pollution (factories, Hoover Dam). I didn't catch that Peaster was talking about population pollution as well. Environmentalism does affect population pollution.

 

[neutrino]

Given a chance, I almost always build factories. However, I have noticed that the timing has to be good ...

1. The city in question should be large enough (size 8 at minimum, perhaps?), thus ensuring that its unmodified production points are handful. (Since the production bonus due to Factory is multiplied from unmodified net production points, a city with puny net production does not benefit.)

2. Pollution can be a headache. The player's tech research tree should be on its way to Mass Production (to build Mass Transit). Roads, but especially railroads should be build around the city that plans on building a factory; makes easier to shuttle engineers around to clean up pollution.

 

[6K Man]

I'll build factories where there are enough base shields to make them worthwhile, which is usually 10+. This assumes that the game has enough time remaining to make them worthwhile. Sometimes it's easier just to crank out caravans, deliver them, and rushbuy everything.

Pollution concerns seldom enter into it. By the stage of the game where pollution becomes a widespread problem, I have plenty of redundant engineers with which to clean it up.

 

[Banach]

There are a few different situations I'm thinking about here.

1. I'm playing Early Landing. In this situation, I just don't build them. When they're available I'm not far from Automobile. Within a few turns of automobile my hyper-trading is bringing in enough for me to get one tech per turn from freight, AND enough gold to rush buy every city's production, from scratch, every turn (including wonders), AND accumulate several thousand gold a turn on top of that. In this situation, production is almost completely irrrelevant - I have many cities with production about 10, some even less. All they need is about 3-4 to support a transport and a couple engineers, and a few on top of that in case they need to rush a military unit to deal with an emergent barbarian threat (although these are almost always handled with diplomats).

2. I'm playing a lazy mid- to late- game conquest, where I build the statue of Liberty and switch to Fundy early. In this situation I often build Hoover, then factories in every city, then let the cities slowly crank out everything. This is a non-competitive type of play, however. I find it fun occasionally, when I want some mindless entertainment, but it by a long shot is sub-optimal.

3. I'm playing OCC. In this situation, I very often build a factory because production is definitely necessary in OCC, to a point. It all depends on available terrain. Note that I'm not a skilled OCC player, so I don't know what's optimal.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

If I am playing for score, I build factories most everywhere but only a select few before Hoover. After that I need them for production, because with a lot of cities trade is simply not enough to buy everything you need per turn.

 

[Banach]

If I am playing for score, I build factories most everywhere but only a select few before Hoover. After that I need them for production, because with a lot of cities trade is simply not enough to buy everything you need per turn.

I hesitate to say this because I'm the junior here and you're a much more experienced player, but I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. More cities means more trade, and I think a smoothly running Power Democracy, after Automobile, can easily deliver enough freights every turn to rush everything, including freights and the development of new cities at a pace that is more than comfortable enough for high score games. I haven't done an estimate recently on expansion capabilities of a Power Democracy, but I seem to recall one of the experts, Andu, saying that he estimates a Power democracy could double it's number of cities and maintain at least a 2:1 engineer to city ratio and in the span of 10-15 turns. I'd love to see some discussion here from more players, but here's my take -

I'll do a little back of the envelope calculation here. Let's say you start with 14 size 8 cities and one size 23 SSC a few turns after automobile (this is normal for me on a big map in a landing game). You have two engineers for every city. Every turn you rush about 6-8 freights and 7-9 other things (engineers, improvements, WOWs). From this situation I typically have enough income to rush everything every turn and make a few thousand on top of that, so there's extra for other cities....I think that you could comfortably make three engineers every turn, with continual WLTP day growth, of course. These three engineers could go found another city which would begin immediate celebration and growth. Rush buying in this city is easily funded by freights from the other cities until it gets large enogh to bring in super cash by itself at a larger size and superhighways and airport in place, which my cities get VERY early. As sooon as a city has superhighways and airports and is at least size 8 or so freights become profitable, especially if demanded. The city needs a couple routes early anyway to celebrate at 30% Luxuries, typically. Furthermore, as a city grows more and more, it will eventually get to the point where it will build ONLY engineers and freight, after it has all needed improvements. I'll just throw out a rough number - I estimate that 20% of your cities can rush an engineer on any given turn. A new city requires about five engineers - three to run in and make it big enough for immediate celebrations, and two to be re-homed to it as it grows to maintain that critical 2:1 engineer to city ratio for terrain development. So I think that you could probably manage a city growth rate of 20% (Engineer production rate) * 0.2 ( five engineers per new city) = 4% or so, and that's counting rush buying everything every turn. That means a doubling time (of # of cities) of about 18 turns. So if you start with 15 cities, I'd guess you could probably get 30 cities 18 turns later, 60 cities 36 turns later, 120 cities 54 turns later, and 240 cities 72 turns later, bumping up against the maximum limit. I think we need Starlifter to chime in here - in my mind he's THE guy for Power Democracy expansion.

To summarize, with fifteen cities initially and a decent trade network I think that a 4% city growth rate, based on a 20% engineer production rate, can comfortably be sustained with continual rush-buying of everything in every city, obviating the need for factories. I'm getting interested enough in this to try this next GOTM - As soon as I get automobile I will see how much I can push the expansion envelope with a Power Democracy while doing my typical rush buy everything in every city every turn. I'm just beginning to master the Power Democracy, but am still a novice, so I'm open to discussion here - I wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong. Can some of the other expansion experts chime in with their opinion on hyper-expansion, hyper trade, and rush-buying? I know that Starlifter develops Engineer-factory cities with production of >40, but I have a little different style (probably worse). I like my entire empire to be trade based after the freight start rolling.

I should add that I'm a little of a perfectionist and dislike pollution, so I prefer not to deal with factories and pollution - I'd rather have my cities get temples, colisseums, marketplaces, banks, Stock exchanges, Supermarkets, Superhighways, Airports, Aqueducts, and Sewer Systems (not in that order, of course). When they get big enough they get a mass transit. Other than that, they should just be pumping out engineers, freights, maybe a transport, and the occasional diplomat for zoom-to chaining or barbs or bribing. Every once in a while maybe a wonder.

Opinions?

 

[Ali Ardavan]

Banach, I was talking about situations when you have well over 100 cities. In a competitive game you need to expand early if you want to maximize your score. Otherwise you will end up either with a modern war against decent size rival empires which are quite costly or have to live with a lot of AI cities. The latter, on most maps, means fewer cities (and hence smaller score) for you.

I suppose if you stick with a small number of cities till automobile/superhighways and radio/airport, and then try to expand you could pay for things as you go. I have never tried this. My suspicion is that typically this is too late for a maximal expansion.

The other important difference between an early landing game and a high score game, is future techs. At 5 points each you want as many of them as possible (max 255) in a high score game, where as in any other strategy they are worthless. This means that you want your science maximized even when trade gives you plenty of science. In fact, since trade can never tip you over a scientific discovery, trade beyond filling up your beaker basket is suboptimal in a high score game. Maximizing science not only means minimizing taxes and luxuries but also libraries, universities, marketplaces, banks, ... in all your cities. (You need the marketplace, the bank, ... to keep the population content with minimal spending on happiness.)

Pollution is a a major concern for score, and I try to avoid it as much as possible. Which is why I make very few factories before Hoover. Afterwards, factories give you a 100% (not just 50%) production boost with little extra pollution.

 

[Ace]

Don't forget about specialists. A few scientists will really boost your beaker output, especially in a city with a library, uni, and you have the Setti wonder.

 

[Banach]

Banach, I was talking about situations when you have well over 100 cities. In a competitive game you need to expand early if you want to maximize your score.

Point well taken. I rarely play for high score, so don't know a whole lot about building massive empires. I'll chime back in when I'm more experienced.

I suppose if you stick with a small number of cities till automobile/superhighways and radio/airport, and then try to expand you could pay for things as you go. I have never tried this. My suspicion is that typically this is too late for a maximal expansion.

You may very well be right. In the next GOTM I'm going to see exactly how fast of a hyper-expansion I can manage, taking off post-automobile, starting with only 10-15 cities (depending on map size). It's all about how fast you get to automobile. For instance, in this GOTM, starting with automobile in 1290, I think that I probably could hyper-expand to the entire map, waging warfare along the way as well as obtaining all of the future technologies (per your comment below). I could be wrong, however.

The other important difference between an early landing game and a high score game, is future techs. At 5 points each you want as many of them as possible (max 255) in a high score game, where as in any other strategy they are worthless. This means that you want your science maximized even when trade gives you plenty of science. In fact, since trade can never tip you over a scientific discovery, trade beyond filling up your beaker basket is suboptimal in a high score game. Maximizing science not only means minimizing taxes and luxuries but also libraries, universities, marketplaces, banks, ... in all your cities. (You need the marketplace, the bank, ... to keep the population content with minimal spending on happiness.)

Trade beyond filling up the beaker basket is always sub-optimal. However, when you're rush buying a freight in one turn and delivering it immediately for 600-2,000 gold bonus, it's still a phenomenol return, and well worth doing when you can put the money to good use (I suppose if you find yourself in a situation where you actually can't spend it then you might as well not bother).

 

[Peaster]

@Banach (mainly): I guess most players who build factories play mainly for fun [without specific measurable goals] or maybe for high score. No problem. But those who play for EL, or EC, or GOTM score do not need factories.

In my opinion, they don't need Power Democracy either. The best recipe for GOTM gold is probably heavy ICS growth to approx 300AD [with maybe 150 cities], followed by Demo-growth in the high-score style until you reach diminishing returns or utter boredom in perhaps 600AD - followed by a quick conquest. If you enjoy Democracy, that phase can certainly boost your GOTM score, but almost nobody plays this way (eg ICS then Demo). A strong ICS player can get a relatively high GOTM score, perhaps gold, without Demo.

I don't play EL often, so I could be wrong about that part of my claim(s). Do the EL players disagree ?

I'll be interested in your hyper-expansion experiment. My guess is that you WILL be able to grow faster in Demo than in Monarchy/whatever. Maybe 7 or 8% per turn on average, instead of 5%. But if you start your Demo-growth phase with only 15-20 cities, I fear you will always lag behind an ICS player who had 150 cities, even before they got to Demo. And if you start it with 150 cities, your hyper-growth may not be very noticeable, since you must stop at 255 cities.

 

[Banach]

@Banach (mainly): I guess most players who build factories play mainly for fun [without specific measurable goals] or maybe for high score. No problem. But those who play for EL, or EC, or GOTM score do not need factories.

I concur.

In my opinion, they don't need Power Democracy either. The best recipe for GOTM gold is probably heavy ICS growth to approx 300AD [with maybe 150 cities], followed by Demo-growth in the high-score style until you reach diminishing returns or utter boredom in perhaps 600AD - followed by a quick conquest. If you enjoy Democracy, that phase can certainly boost your GOTM score, but almost nobody plays this way (eg ICS then Demo). A strong ICS player can get a relatively high GOTM score, perhaps gold, without Demo.

I agree as well - ICS has shown itself, time and time again, to be, in general, a superior strategy.

I don't play EL often, so I could be wrong about that part of my claim(s). Do the EL players disagree ?

The Power Democracy is essential to the way I play EL, in the latter portion of the game. It is what allowed me, in the 20 turns following automobile, to discover 22 techs (despite the purple civ being absent) while simultaneously growing my civ, buying wonders of the world as I saw fit, and accumulating enough gold (over 20,000) to build the fastest ship and still launch on the turn of discovering superconductor. I'm not the best EL player, however. Magic beat me in this GOTM by enormous expansion (190 cities).

I'll be interested in your hyper-expansion experiment. My guess is that you WILL be able to grow faster in Demo than in Monarchy/whatever. Maybe 7 or 8% per turn on average, instead of 5%. But if you start your Demo-growth phase with only 15-20 cities, I fear you will always lag behind an ICS player who had 150 cities, even before they got to Demo. And if you start it with 150 cities, your hyper-growth may not be very noticeable, since you must stop at 255 cities.

As a perfectionest, it is less about a competition with ICS-type strategies, and more about perfecting the strategy that allows one to grow one's empire non-stop, at a torrid rate, acquire atleast one tech a turn, while rush-buying anything and everything, and waging high-tech war, if needed, slaughtering the AI with surgical strikes by Veteran stealth fighters. It's the style of play that appeals to me, not the pursuit of GOTM gold. I'll definitely post my results once I delve into next GOTM with this strategy. I have a long way to go in perfecting my game. Particularly, as Grigor pointed out, in getting to automobile.

 

[iambenben]

i like lots of production in all my cities

 

[neutrino]

i like lots of production in all my cities

Makes managing wars easier with loads of production under your fingertips. I think the most time-consuming part is to prioritize which cities should invest in factories. (A city with lesser unmodified production shields = lower priority. A city with more unmodified production shields = higher priority. In any case, a city that 'wishes' to invest in a factory should have decent population and other infrastructures in place to get the most out of its soon-to-be factory.)