[BTS] Building Wealth vs. Building Research
- Thread starter SquidInk
- Start date
Swordnboard
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2018
- Messages
- 223
In most situations, wealth is the way to go. Building research is good if you can pay for 100% slider without building wealth. And wonder failgold is often even stronger than building wealth, since it benefits from multipliers from resources, organized religion, industrious trait, etc, whereas wealth is a straight 1 gold per hammer.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 25,112
Yep, the gentleman above have nailed it. You can look at this logically Squid, by playing around with it in game. What happens to research when you build wealth and run 100% slider vs. just building research but not being able to afford the slider. Assuming you have libraries, academy, growing cottages, trade routes, etc., you should see a significant difference between your research one way vs. the other. Late game , if say going Space, one often converts more toward a hammer economy, with the ability to fairly easily build enough wealth to support 100% slider even with a large empire, then once that is achieved, build research in the rest.
But keep in mind earlier on, that you need to think about your goals before building wealth. Sometimes at certain points it may be necessary to build some wealth. However, there are other ways to get gold. So ask yourself if the hammers are put to better use in like going conquering. Bigger your empire, the more you can research.
But keep in mind earlier on, that you need to think about your goals before building wealth. Sometimes at certain points it may be necessary to build some wealth. However, there are other ways to get gold. So ask yourself if the hammers are put to better use in like going conquering. Bigger your empire, the more you can research.
Last edited:
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 14,036
Wonder failgold is much stronger than wealth, yup.
(if resis are available, and / or IND).
Slavery, overflow hammers & chopping are very important when considering "economy builds".
When we look at how many hammers 2 chops i.e. into a marble wonder create, at least 120 (with maths), lots of gold once they are completed.
With whipping & overflow, builds can be done without hammer tiles used, and that city can still contribute (fail)gold
Wealth & research can be very good to store hammers.
We can even use the failgold example, if waiting for wonder techs or maybe resis connected (marble or stone further away, and workers not ready yet?),
forests can already be chopped and those hammers kept by building wealth / research.
When everything is ready, all hammers created show for wonder building.
Original question, i only use research "builds" if i have enuf gold for both 100% slider and cities on research,
and want to reach a very useful tech quicker.
Examples could be Civil Service, Bur. usually pays back fast (so we can say cities on research created those beakers + what x turns of Bur sooner give).
Or when running a golden age, and it's close with reaching Civic unlocking tech(s) while they are still Anarchy free.
Overall building research can be used for urgency situations, but only if gold allows 100% slider (explained by others already).
Wealth can be seen as creating gold that's needed now, not in x turns like failgold, or if there's nothing else, and as hammers storing placeholder.
(if resis are available, and / or IND).
Slavery, overflow hammers & chopping are very important when considering "economy builds".
When we look at how many hammers 2 chops i.e. into a marble wonder create, at least 120 (with maths), lots of gold once they are completed.
With whipping & overflow, builds can be done without hammer tiles used, and that city can still contribute (fail)gold
Wealth & research can be very good to store hammers.
We can even use the failgold example, if waiting for wonder techs or maybe resis connected (marble or stone further away, and workers not ready yet?),
forests can already be chopped and those hammers kept by building wealth / research.
When everything is ready, all hammers created show for wonder building.
Original question, i only use research "builds" if i have enuf gold for both 100% slider and cities on research,
and want to reach a very useful tech quicker.
Examples could be Civil Service, Bur. usually pays back fast (so we can say cities on research created those beakers + what x turns of Bur sooner give).
Or when running a golden age, and it's close with reaching Civic unlocking tech(s) while they are still Anarchy free.
Overall building research can be used for urgency situations, but only if gold allows 100% slider (explained by others already
).Wealth can be seen as creating gold that's needed now, not in x turns like failgold, or if there's nothing else, and as hammers storing placeholder.
dean.pegal
Chieftain
Most of prefer building wealth rather than some because we all think money can buy anything and we can buy anything we like.
Also pends what level you play. On some levels the Ai will be much slower to wonders. So you have the choice of waiting for the Ai to build a wonder or building it yourself and putting hammers into serveral cities to get back the gold. Many on higher levels put hammers into Stonehenge to get fail gold early on to help with science.
Remember you can also get fail gold on national wonders.
Wealth is also more superior than many city builds. Once you have a granary/light house and library not all other builds are needed. Forge are useul if you plan to play the longer game. Especially for cuirs whipping.
Remember you can also get fail gold on national wonders.
Wealth is also more superior than many city builds. Once you have a granary/light house and library not all other builds are needed. Forge are useul if you plan to play the longer game. Especially for cuirs whipping.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
I'd say no to both, except if your income is in the negatives and you need to build gold to prevent strikes. If you have nothing to build, build anything that will return the investment. If nothing to build, I usually make Horse Archers/Knights for some reason 
Fish Man
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,545
I'd say no to both, except if your income is in the negatives and you need to build gold to prevent strikes. If you have nothing to build, build anything that will return the investment. If nothing to build, I usually make Horse Archers/Knights for some reason
This is terrible advice.
Building units for the sake of building units is a waste of hammers and a complete drain on your economy. In fact most buildings, etc. markets and intelligence agencies, aren’t worth investing in at all. In most space games in most cities once I get granary forge and factory it’s straight to wealth and research.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
If you didn't even read my post, why bother replying? I wrote: If you have nothing to build, build anything that will return the investment.
This game, at least on higher difficulty levels, is about turn compression and utilizing windows of opportunity. Building wealth and science are mechanicsms that are plain terrible for turn compression and serve only as a bypass for extending other investments that created your windows of opportunity.
A cavalry unit costs 120 hammers, a Marketplace costs 150 hammers. Are these better investments than building 150 beakers? The real answer is: it depends on a large number of factors.
20 cavalry costs 2400 hammers, excatly how much a late renaissance tech costs in beakers. What if that 20 cavalry captures a vassal? You just converted 2400 hammers into a dozen or more "free" techs until the end of the space race that are far more valuable than the investment.
As I said, build anything that will return the investment. As fast as possible. If you calculate that the currently planned investment will not pay itself off in a reasonable amount of time, build something else.
Hammer economy, on the other hand, is a very well established and written about concept, hardly to be dumbed down to "forge+factory=go!" It has a "before" and "after", it has specific city roles and gameplay with the slider, and still adheres to the turn compression/windows of opportunity rules just like every other good strategy.
Last edited:
The reality is many players will whip these builds and put very little hammers from production into them. . Putting hammers into markets is often very poor. Especially if you plan to run slider at 100% science. Another reason to use wealth as it helps push your science rate higher and allows you to reach military techs faster.
Building units because you have no better build is not great. Waste of hammers unless it forms a part of a military strategy. Even then you need a decent stack pending on difficulty level. If you don't plan to use them they are costing you gold per turn.
I find on games where I have gone out full military I often need wealth as I am often running a negative economy. Esecially when you have 10-20 cities by 100ad.
Reality is most buildings apart from granary, forge and a few libraries are pointless. Up to 1000ad you really don't need many. Maybe wonders if they match your strategy.
Building units because you have no better build is not great. Waste of hammers unless it forms a part of a military strategy. Even then you need a decent stack pending on difficulty level. If you don't plan to use them they are costing you gold per turn.
I find on games where I have gone out full military I often need wealth as I am often running a negative economy. Esecially when you have 10-20 cities by 100ad.
Reality is most buildings apart from granary, forge and a few libraries are pointless. Up to 1000ad you really don't need many. Maybe wonders if they match your strategy.
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 14,036
Building wealth has several purposes, not just bypass.
Unexperienced players build not enuf wealth (or failgold), and go for buildings and units often..
If you say nope or "terrible" for wealth building (science is usually weaker, has been described why),
you are wrong no matter how we turn this, sowy.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
Let me quote myself from 8 years ago : (I still stand by reasoning that in most scenarios there are better alternatives to both building wealth and science, and not just to spam units and buildings.)
Creating buildings that give
(and thus promoting building wealth) have the following traits:
- need very early and very cheap technologies (Writing, Meditation)
- generate culture
- the total science multipliers after Scientific Method are 75% until superconductors
- culture buildings never survive city capture
- it's most certainly possible to have cities with +105% and an Oxford with +205% till Scientific Method.
It's not unheard of to have as much as +45% multipliers in early cities with 2 religions with the benefit of also generating 6
Thus, the logical choice in the early eras is to push the science slider up and to build wealth.
In comparison, the MGB has the following traits:
- requier two moderately expensive and one relatively cheap technology
- the total multipliers are 100% already after banking
- can survive city capture
- are buildings that require a lot of
to build
- does not open their superbuilding (Wall Street) with Banking
- more often than not, the Grocer and Marketplace require trade with nations in different climate zones and/or continents to gain the full benefit of investment.
Astronomy opens up many new trades, cities are already able to produce more expensive buildings (workshops with caste and guilds), thus realistically enabling a solid expansion of MGBs.
In my opinion (myriad exceptions put aside):
- build science from Alphabet to Currency
- build wealth from Currency to Scientific Method
- build tech buildings from Meditation to Education
- build wealth buildings from Guilds to Astronomy
: (I still stand by reasoning that in most scenarios there are better alternatives to both building wealth and science, and not just to spam units and buildings.)Creating buildings that give
(and thus promoting building wealth) have the following traits:- need very early and very cheap technologies (Writing, Meditation)
- generate culture
- the total science multipliers after Scientific Method are 75% until superconductors
- culture buildings never survive city capture
- it's most certainly possible to have cities with +105%
and an Oxford with +205% till Scientific Method.It's not unheard of to have as much as +45%
multipliers in early cities with 2 religions with the benefit of also generating 6Thus, the logical choice in the early eras is to push the science slider up and to build wealth.
In comparison, the MGB has the following traits:
- requier two moderately expensive and one relatively cheap technology
- the total multipliers are 100% already after banking
- can survive city capture
- are buildings that require a lot of
to build- does not open their superbuilding (Wall Street) with Banking
- more often than not, the Grocer and Marketplace require trade with nations in different climate zones and/or continents to gain the full benefit of
investment.Astronomy opens up many new trades, cities are already able to produce more expensive buildings (workshops with caste and guilds), thus realistically enabling a solid expansion of MGBs.
In my opinion (myriad exceptions put aside):
- build science from Alphabet to Currency
- build wealth from Currency to Scientific Method
- build tech buildings from Meditation to Education
- build wealth buildings from Guilds to Astronomy
Last edited:
Swordnboard
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2018
- Messages
- 223
Another way of looking at it, Bibor, is that a technology is so much more than just its beaker value. Acquiring the benefits of, say, communism or assembly line, a few turns earlier can result in thousands more beakers towards getting the next tech earlier, which helps get the next one earlier, etcetera. And that's not even considering trade value.
Anyways, 20 cavalry is sometimes better than the wealth/research, sometimes not, but be sure you understand the full implications of the trade off. And Gumbolt is right that renaissance armies are often created through whip & draft rather than hammers, so perhaps you can enjoy the best of both worlds. I'd also recommend you take a close look at WastinTime's "deity bc space" and Anysense's "achieving an early deity space victory" threads as both are sensational games played recently which heavily lean on wealth and research building with minimal infrastructure.
Anyways, 20 cavalry is sometimes better than the wealth/research, sometimes not, but be sure you understand the full implications of the trade off. And Gumbolt is right that renaissance armies are often created through whip & draft rather than hammers, so perhaps you can enjoy the best of both worlds. I'd also recommend you take a close look at WastinTime's "deity bc space" and Anysense's "achieving an early deity space victory" threads as both are sensational games played recently which heavily lean on wealth and research building with minimal infrastructure.
Quoting from 8 years back does not make it right. Sometimes you have to unlearn what you have learned to move your game forward.
If I am going for cuirs or rifles I will rarely build Oxford uni or wall street. Why spend 700-1000 hammers on builds that are in most games simply not required. Having to build 6 unis to unlock OU is a huge investment. I would prefer a bulbing strategy. That or hammer economies later in the game.
If you get an academy early on your capital should have at least 75% science. On most games 2-3 of my cities are producing 80-90% of my science. Mostly from the capital with a bureau/cotage approach. On most immortal games or higher it's unlikely you will have many religions unless you capture or the Ai spreads it to you.. Monst in 1-2 cities can sometimes be useful to spread religion to help golden ages.
Your approach also assumes you need these buildings for science. With mids and specialists you can quickly ramp up 300-400 beakers a turn. Mix that with bulbing and you can tech edu, lib, philosophy and maybe get 1-2 Merchants for trade routes. Which renders buildings like markets etc less useful as your slider will be 100% science for long periods anyway.
If I am going for cuirs or rifles I will rarely build Oxford uni or wall street. Why spend 700-1000 hammers on builds that are in most games simply not required. Having to build 6 unis to unlock OU is a huge investment. I would prefer a bulbing strategy. That or hammer economies later in the game.
If you get an academy early on your capital should have at least 75% science. On most games 2-3 of my cities are producing 80-90% of my science. Mostly from the capital with a bureau/cotage approach. On most immortal games or higher it's unlikely you will have many religions unless you capture or the Ai spreads it to you.. Monst in 1-2 cities can sometimes be useful to spread religion to help golden ages.
Your approach also assumes you need these buildings for science. With mids and specialists you can quickly ramp up 300-400 beakers a turn. Mix that with bulbing and you can tech edu, lib, philosophy and maybe get 1-2 Merchants for trade routes. Which renders buildings like markets etc less useful as your slider will be 100% science for long periods anyway.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
The original question was "is there a consensus". My answer was "no, and there are other options as well". I have no way of knowing how well or how SquidInk wants to play or what specific game/plan/strategy he's in.
So much this!
Fish Man
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,545
Sorry for being so harsh - was having an off day. But as others have stated building wealth and science are the best mechanisms for expanding windows of opportunity, barring stuff like wonderbread and failgold. They're also the best mechanism for sustaining your economy, whether in space or conquest games. The metagame that you mentioned was considered the norm maybe 5-10 years ago, but now it's almost indisputably out.
I'm not the best player by any means so don't take me as the absolute authority for this but if you're not willing to take my word for it then look at some of the most recent fast wins I've done.
Wealth is usually better, but definitely research has its uses (to get a tech early for example when you have enough gold to run at 100%). Both (especially wealth) are pretty good vs many buildings. I'd say using wealth more frequently vs 'random' buildings has improved my game substantially, allowing your cities production to coordinate towards common goal (Tech).
