Analysis of Scientist city

[KrikkitTwo]

Well for a good comparison you ignore all of the civics+tech boosts (which appear mid game (which the scientist analysis does)

Now the Cottage analysis for this would be fairly similar in the sense that the population growth rate is the same (about 2 extra food at all times, in this case exactly 2 extra food)

ACTUALLY that is a major error:3 food/turn to pop 2 and then 1 food/turn to pop 3 is NOT an average of 2 food/turn

Imagine going 60 miles at 30 miles an hour for the first 30 miles of the trip and then 10 mi/hr for the second 30 miles. The trip will take you 4 hours, an average of 15 miles/hr not 20 (you can't average speeds by distance only by time)

so going from pop 1 to 2 takes ~7 turns, 2 to 3 takes ~24 turns
so a total of 31 turns to get 46 food ie ~1.5 food /turn (so you either need to change the rate of growth or change the population allocation so that the food/turn is 3,4,2,4,2,4,2,4,2, etc. rather than 3,1,3,1,3,1,3,1, etc.)

 

[Phyacis]

You cant compare specialists to cottages. Cottages provide a finite benefit, whereas specialists main benefits are all intangible, such as

1. flexibility of switching from science to production and back again at will. A specialist based city can have a lot more multiplier buildings much faster than a cottaged one can in the critical early game

2. GP's - these can often be game changing, depending on both luck and skill

3. specialist cities can recover from pillaging much much faster than cottaged ones can

If you're intimate with the game mechanics then specialists are much more powerful than cottages, but if you arent then cottages win when comparing just the numbers. Ditto, cottages are more suited to sp lower level games where opponents are weaker than you and land isnt pillaged often, specialists are more suited to mp and high level sp games. I'd go so far as to say that cottages may have been added primarily to make the learning curve more noob friendly by giving an 'obvious' improvement to build everywhere

 

[DementedAvenger]

You cant compare specialists to cottages. Cottages provide a finite benefit, whereas specialists main benefits are all intangible, such as

1. flexibility of switching from science to production and back again at will. A specialist based city can have a lot more multiplier buildings much faster than a cottaged one can in the critical early game

2. GP's - these can often be game changing, depending on both luck and skill

3. specialist cities can recover from pillaging much much faster than cottaged ones can

If you're intimate with the game mechanics then specialists are much more powerful than cottages, but if you arent then cottages win when comparing just the numbers. Ditto, cottages are more suited to sp lower level games where opponents are weaker than you and land isnt pillaged often, specialists are more suited to mp and high level sp games. I'd go so far as to say that cottages may have been added primarily to make the learning curve more noob friendly by giving an 'obvious' improvement to build everywhere

Do you have a save from a high-level SP game where you focus more on scientists than cottages? I'd like to see that.

 

[Zombie69]

Yeah, i don't think you can win on emperor or above by mostly ignoring cottages. By mostly ignoring specialists, you can still win. I'd say cottages become even more crucial the higher up you go in difficulty level, since it becomes harder to keep up with the AI in tech.

OCC games don't count because everybody knows they're specialist oriented, and neither do games with permanent alliances, because the AI does the research for you.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Yeah, i don't think you can win on emperor or above by mostly ignoring cottages.

I don't think it's hard to win at Emperor with no cottages, if you build lots of coastal cities.

 

[MrCynical]

I've beaten emperor level without building a single cottage. This was admittedly wasn't by choice because the terrain was so foul there were only two tiles in my empire it was possible to build a cottage on, both of which had resources. I was entirely reliant on coasts and specialists, but I still managed to pull ahead on science by the mid industrial age. I was playing a Financial civ though, which helped.

 

[Wreck]

Sure you can compare cottages to specialists. They both are a form of pop. Both generate production. This production can be compared. The fact is, these things, when compared, reveal cottages to be far superior to specialists, except for the value of GPP.

And to DaviddesJ, who (last page) said "that's like saying a cottage dominates a farm in every way except for the food!", not so. The situations would be parallel if farms generated some commerce, but not as much as cottages; and if in addition, farm-generated food did not actually lead to city growth, except in one or two cities at a time. Then, yes, I would say that cottages are superior (except for the food).

Phyacis, you list what you think are intangibles and say that specialists are superior.

Well, first off, the value of GPPs are not intangible. How they work are known, and it is quite possible to account for them as part of the value of using specialists. (I've done so before.) Using them in one city - good idea. Very good idea before you've gotten very many GPs. Using them generally - not good. But only, of course, if you are trying to maximize production.

Regarding flexibility, it's quite possible for cottage cities to irrigate, too, to grow pop fast, and to use mines to build stuff with instead of using cottage tiles. The actually useful flexibility you'll get from specialists really is not large.

Pillageability? Well, I could argue that cottages are superior since they slow the enemy down more. But I think that's silly. Perhaps this is a minor benefit to specialists, but if so, it's minor.

Bottom line is, it doesn't take that long to rebuild villages. If you are getting majorly pillaged more than once in a game, I have a hard time believing that you are winning it. Not SP at high levels, any way.

 

[Pete2006]

I think arguing whether cottages or specialists is the "best" or most efficient way to play is pointless. It's a valid strategy. Whenever I play a civ that isn't financial, I'll run representation with lots of specialists and I can stay in or lead the tech race.

 

[Wreck]

Trust me Pete, some of us do see a point. If you don't, well, don't worry -- be happy. Just play as you wish, and have fun!

 

[Phyacis]

Interesting differences of opinion. Personally I couldnt beat deity using cottages, and thats the main basis for my conclusion that they're intangibly if not numerically weaker than specialists. I'm open to the possibility that I just suck at using cottages, as I rarely find a use for them. Probably havent built even one in my last 20-30 games, at least 1/3-1/2 of which have been won. Note this isnt to say I never have any cottages, but its much more convenient to let the AI build and develop them for you. Human built cities are much more suited to military or gpp centers, imo

If you lose tech parity on deity you're screwed without tricks like the GS philosophy rush which require a specialist strategy. You cant maintain parity using cottages, even if you're lucky enough to start isolated and not get pillaged ten times in the early game, which is very rare. I spent considerable time in another thread demonstrating that tech parity could be maintained using specialists on a deity/7/pangea. 100bc I was 3rd in tech, 1400ad I was #1 in tech and all but 3 opponents were dead and a win guaranteed. As someone noted above that was a one city challeng game with PA's enabled due to the strategy it was illustrating, but the exact same strategy works (easier) on a non-occ deity game without PA's, which is where it developed from

 

[DementedAvenger]

Ah OK, that makes more sense thanks. I thought you were saying you didn't use cottages at all and forgot to account for captured cities. One of the biggest AI flaws seems to be land development, and the fact that they rely heavily on cottages does lead one to believe that if you're going to capture cities that are cottage-saturated already, it makes sense to focus on other things in your own cities.

 

[Kenji]

i think...unless u always run a winner-civ. Cottages Spam arent as good as Farm-Specialist.

Cottages take 70 turns to 100% utilized.
Farm takes 5 turns to build.
once Cottages (Town) are pillaged, u takes 70+ turns to reuse them. but Farm 5 turns all the time.

then...Philosopical not only getting bonus from Representation, they also get bonus from Biology (+1 farm, half of a specialist requirement u know ) and Pacfism (+100% GP rate) and Caste System (remove cap)

having ~30 Great Person is very easy with some good Farms pls add them in