CE vs SE Head-to-Head Experiment Part II

[mice]

What I mean is: Would you generate much less GP, when you run just one or two GP-Farms instead of empire wide specialist use?

Yeah, if you have 2 scientists in every city, just for example, across a big empire, surely you end up wasting a lot of GPP.

There must be an optimum but you would need to be half crazy to calculate it game by game. Any rule of thumb here?

 

[Jet]

In a cottage economy, if you take the point of view that specialists are worse than cottages and good mainly for great people points, then in the long term it's more efficient to develop one city as a GPP producer and get great people just from there. There's a detailed analysis of this in a thread somewhere, although the context of the analysis is an artificial scenario, so it's not mathematically proven as a general result.

That's moot in the early game where all you have is libraries. If you want the first few scientists early, assign 2 scientists in a few different cities. They'll leapfrog each other. Of course you may also get wonders, temples, Caste System, which makes the game richer.

The same is true in general whenever you have multiple cities generating comparable amounts of GPP. Eventually they'll leapfrog each other, and X cities each producing approximately Y GPP will pop great people faster than one city producing approximately Y GPP.

 

[lilnev]

... but it seems that a CE is as well able to lightbulb as heavy as a FE does.

I would say that that's not true at all early, and closer but still not really true later.

Early: It's not really a GP farm before the NE. That means Lit, plus some build time, plus probably some build time for the GL first (unless you either can't get the GL or you use a GE). Before that time, you can get your first couple of GSs off of libraries. To do that, you've got to look like a SE/FE, or at least like a hybrid with a couple of cities in SE/FE mode.

Later: Once the GL/NE are up and running, a CE can come closer in great person production. The GP farm will be almost as good, but the SE/FE probably has empire-wide advantages: some combination of Philosophical, Pacifism, Parthenon, Caste System. If the CE has a Philo leader as well, and adopts the same civics as the SE, their GP farms will be equal, but the SE will still have its second, third, fourth cities etc. running at 2x or more GPP production, which can contribute even in the face of a 3x GP farm.

Personally, I've become convinced that it's worth running scientists off libraries for the first 2-3 GSs even if I plan to run a CE with a single GP farm later (which I most commonly do). The return on investment for those first few is just too good to pass up.

peace,
lilnev

 

[futurehermit]

running specialists in every city (with caste system) produces more gps than a dedicated gp farm.

 

[iamnleth]

What is the best way to control maintenance for a specialist economy? I tried one recently, and, sadly, I went into strike.

 

[BCLG100]

Well in theory your running at 0% the whole time so you just continue as if your trying to run a normal economy. courthouses etc. The benefit over a cottage economy is that you can get these up and running quicker with the added production.

you can also of course higher some merchant specialists if your in caste system.

 

[futurehermit]

What is the best way to control maintenance for a specialist economy? I tried one recently, and, sadly, I went into strike.

Don't overexpand, just like a CE. Prioritize CoL (courthouses, prereq for phil lightbulb, prereq for CS, caste system). Trade for currency asap. Trade your advanced tech for cash. Get money from conquering cities. Raze ones that you can't afford to keep giving you more money. And as acidsatyr told me: plan ahead, you can always get money from somewhere.

 

[BCLG100]

This game was usefull for gold because i was forced into pillaging mature cottages which did give me quite a bit of gold also.

 

[futurehermit]

Many people will say to keep mature cottages and run a hybrid econ. If I'm running a hybrid already or planning to transition to CE I'll keep them. If not, I'll pillage them and farm over them.

 

[MKElderGod]

CE hybrid > CE is better, better multiplayer and single player (no tech tradn).

 

[30+]

Everyone will eventually get a HE due to taking AI capitals and aquiring cottages. Map size has great dependance on which can potentially be better. Smaller maps imo favor SE/FE due to greater tech lead and production from the whip. Larger maps possible for CE due to univ suff/rush buy. All your post keep saying MP no tech trading. Most people dont play more MP, or no tech trading. Once again, I do prefer a HE myself but that doesnt make it better. People like Acidsatry can win on Immortal 9/10 times, something I haven't even attempted (and he uses SE/FE). I am still on Emperor (with some wins).

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=190502&highlight=poll

 

[MKElderGod]

I need to see hardcore proof that SE/FE can out tech early with out TECH TRADN, CHEATING, WAR. Doesnt one GS pop one TECH? when i run a CE or HE at 100% im teching techs probably 2-8 turns. Isnt that better than waiting for GP?

 

[cabert]

I need to see hardcore proof that SE/FE can out tech early with out TECH TRADN, CHEATING, WAR. Doesnt one GS pop one TECH? when i run a CE or HE at 100% im teching techs probably 2-8 turns. Isnt that better than waiting for GP?

tech trading is part of the game
If you don't play with tech trading on,
1) you're not really playing civ IMHO
2) you need pyramids to make a SE competitive

 

[BCLG100]

your also running specialists which are doing the equivalent job as cottages- it isnt just one GS bulbing.

 

[MKElderGod]

Okay i take back what i said, SE/FE is the best way to go in the start. At 680 AD i found my self 8 techs ahead of the 2nd best country in science with no old techs behind. With only 3 cities mght I add. I apologize for my ignorance. Who ever said they ccan get to liberalism at 100 ad PLEASE TEACH ME.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

100 AD I've never achieved, or even heard of. Someone in this thread said they did 200 AD before, forgot who, better that I forgot who too, because I don't believe in that story, or at least I need a screenshot to be convinced. However, anytime after the fall of the Roman empire is not too difficult at all, as long as you stay focused. I think it's overrated though, because paper and education aren't too useful to a small empire, and what tech are you able to get with libearlism anyway, since you've skipped so many techs? It usually ends up being gunpowder or nationalism for the drafting and hapiness.

What I do find interesting is that the way scientists pop techs is clearly intended as a feature added by programmers as a sort of 'secret' to win immortal and deity. Either way, I think the distinction between specialist and cottage economy is kind of artificial. You go for whatever tiles you got.

 

[30+]

Liberalism in 150 AD has been achieved before, by me. I was the one who made the reference. You need to have extraordinary luck in starting position in order to reach a 150 AD time. With 3 gold mines within your first 3 cities BFC you can do it. Even in my walkthrough here :

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=208993

I reached Liberalism in 375 AD.....and that was w/out mining the 2 gold resources close to Delhi. If i had mined both those gold early I would have taken approximately 6-8 turns of my total research off my bottom line time, therefore placing me at approximately 175-250 AD. It's not hard to see how an additional gold mine could decrease the bottom line even lower.

You pick Nationalism as your free tech (thats almost a whopping 3000 beakers) and immediately after you research gunpowder you begin researching constitution for representation. Paper/Education/Philo/Drama/Lit etc... are very useful because they allow you to trade for techs you have missed such as metalcasting/machinery/feudalism(if you plan on taking on vassals)/ etc..., and of course, you can trade techs for the all mighty $$ to keep your research and empire growing and expanding. Not to mention you can bribe other AI to war with each other (something I do every game).

I don't think there is anything artificial in the distinction between the 2 economies. If I don't have a leader with a philosophical trait I will never run SE/FE economy.....that's because my SE/FE revolves alot around lightbulbing techs, and if I didn't have a philosophical leader it would take entirely to long to produce the GS needed to meet my time frame requirements.

 

[parachute4u]

Launched in 1850 using pure SE. Only techs I did not research myself were part of capitulation treaties.

Hybrid economy is probably best. It really hurt my eyes, not to cottage some cities. -- Tech pace was ok in the end though:

Spoiler :

 

[eren1207]

I tried both of them using romans. the map has 2 continents and I share the other one with Genghis and Sitting Bull. On the SE, I won the race to liberalism at the earlier time than the CE and effectively wipe out my two neighbors but as I prefer to innvade the other continent with marines/transpo/cannon, I found it is faster do so with CE.
Now I realize that if I want to end my game quickly, I must play SE but if I want to enjoy the warfare.. I must play CE.

 

[Zanttu]

If you play the romans, want to win quickly and enjoy warfare, just wipe out everybody with praets . For that you don't need so solid economy at all