Corporate Maintenance Explained

[DaviddesJ]

I feel bad for you however, because you play emperor which is 1 more lvl than I usually play - and I heard someone say that inflation is dependant on difficulty, so I know that unless you end your game early, you'll be having the same troubles I will.

I feel worse for people who view difficulties in the game as "troubles", rather than enjoyable challenges.

 

[DrJambo]

Look, forget the difficulties and or troubles issue for us. We're humans and we'll learn and adapt our playstyle to suit. The problem is not us, although some of us might find corps unappealing because of the slightly wonky way inflation works with corps maintenance.

However.....

The AI isn't doing what it has to do when corps are introduced, and that is place them sensibly and with restraint, especially if the AI doesn't own the HQ! If corps are designed as they're supposed to be then the AI isn't good enough. If the AI is designed as it's supposed to be then corps are right. As to which, I'm not fully qualified to say, however, I might be inclined to opine that it's a bit of both.

The AI will either hermit up under Mercantilism or SP and not get involved. OR it will spread them like wildfire, most commonly among their own cities first and then among each and every one of their neighbours, if possible. That to me is the issue - there is no middle ground! Whether you blame it on the current way corps work or on how the AI deals with them, is debatable. The fact of whether there is an issue or not, in my opinion, isn't.

 

[homan1983]

Look, forget the difficulties and or troubles issue for us. We're humans and we'll learn and adapt our playstyle to suit. The problem is not us, although some of us might find corps unappealing because of the slightly wonky way inflation works with corps maintenance.

Yes, the point isn't that I can't adapt. Surely the next game I'll simply account for all these problems.

But adaption should be a short term solution - especially so because corporations have so much potential that it would be a travesty if they were delegated to being simply a weapon to use on AI.

I want corporations to be a viable alternative to SP/CS not because I can't win, if that were the case I would simply switch my method [which I do from game to game] but in fact the opposite: civilization is more about the journey than the destination, from 1 settler to a huge empire in the lategame - and as such I want to enjoy all the different aspects.

 

[Big J Money]

1) Inflation changed the situation - how is it right that something costs triple later than it does now, without the option of removing your own corporation?

Actually, I thought about this, too. It seems like you should be able to remove the corp later. However, after reading the game manual (read below) I realized that this is their intention. Corps were made in such a way that they can be abused and cripple you later. Yes, it _is_ right that it can cripple you later. However, maybe enough complaints and they'll change it.

2) One of the target civs went SP - so you're telling me I'm a sitting duck if I have corporations because if someone feels like it they can destroy my economy by going SP ?

Yes, this is a possible penalty for spreading a corp indiscriminately.

3) I captured someone who I had spread to and suddenly I lost both a source of income and gained a huge source of spending: You what you're saying is that if we do use corporations (which is an important part of the game and half the point of BTS) then we can't ever conquer people?

YES. This is an emergent aspect of gameplay that is very desirable, and it even mimics real world situations uncannily well! This isn't Vanilla Civ anymore. Just like in the real world, once civilization have become this advanced and the economies so huge, the entire field changes and you must change tactics as well! Wars cannot even be fought indiscriminately. Spy on your enemy and make sure you acatually desire their land before you take it. New gameplay, Cheers!!

4) The AI started spreading the corps to themselves - by your reasoning the AI was programmed to commit suicide because apparently everyone is wrong and the reality is that corporations are just a weapon to use on someone

We can't argue this one, yet. There is no way to know without AI debug info if the AI is actually committing suicide or making a weighed decision. I will agree that it seems apparent they are doing something buggy.

In any case insulting people by saying they're idiots because they use corporations domestically is petty.

I agree. When I get home from work, however, I will post a quote from the manual that came with the game. It says something to the effect of, "You must use corporations judiciously or there could be problems."

All good points, I'm glad they're being talked about on the forums.

=$=

 

[mrt144]

Look, forget the difficulties and or troubles issue for us. We're humans and we'll learn and adapt our playstyle to suit. The problem is not us, although some of us might find corps unappealing because of the slightly wonky way inflation works with corps maintenance.

However.....

The AI isn't doing what it has to do when corps are introduced, and that is place them sensibly and with restraint, especially if the AI doesn't own the HQ! If corps are designed as they're supposed to be then the AI isn't good enough. If the AI is designed as it's supposed to be then corps are right. As to which, I'm not fully qualified to say, however, I might be inclined to opine that it's a bit of both.

The AI will either hermit up under Mercantilism or SP and not get involved. OR it will spread them like wildfire, most commonly among their own cities first and then among each and every one of their neighbours, if possible. That to me is the issue - there is no middle ground! Whether you blame it on the current way corps work or on how the AI deals with them, is debatable. The fact of whether there is an issue or not, in my opinion, isn't.

I'd say that it's both. The system of cost causes one problem, which is compounded with the AI being foolish with them, and there is causation in the costs system causing the AI to be foolish with them to some degree.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well from what it seems like corps can definitely be useful (even on Deity Environmentalist with SOME Inflation)
and I think that "Some" inflation is the key part.

What I would see as the Max reasonable "Non Inflation affected Price" for a Corporation (assuming Courthouse is applicable, and the population multiplier is applicable)

8 m per corp
3 m per resource (map adjusted since the benefit is also adjusted)

(under a Courthouse, Deity level, Environmentalism, 19 pop city=15/8 multiplier)
8 m->15 gold cost (the max you can get for a corporation..ie in Wall Street)
3 m->5.625 gold per resource (to get the equivalent of those resources would cost you 6 gold=rushing 2 hammers v. using a Factory on 1 'raw' hammer, Using the slider costs 6 gold to get 1 raw gold+2 raw culture)

If the values are less than that, then a Domestic Corporation is Always breakeven (except
1. in unusually large cities (20++)
2. they give resources you don't want(Culture)
3. You lack Wall Street

To accomodate those, and to make Foreign corporations a good thing to have (sometimes ie with enough resources, and with the right multipliers in place)

say
5 per corp
and
2 per resource (map adjusted since the benefit is also adjusted)

would lead to a situation where domestic corps are Always good in properly developed areas (unless displacing another, or with truly useless output... ie when you don't want culture... research and te)
5= max cost of 9.375 (10 Gold is the max yield)
2= 3.75 cost per resource (close to making the cultural one's worthwhile... because they give ~3 gold worth of 'non' culture resources)

So I'd probably go with something in between those two values
5-8 per corp
and
2-3 per resource (map adjusted since the benefit is also adjusted)

If the cost is to be independent of Inflation
If it is meant to be tied to Inflation, then they should be ~1/3 of that (given Inflation reaches into that range)
so
2-3 for the Corp
0.5-1 per resource (map adjusted since the benefit is also adjusted)


That way, if the UN switches to Environmentalism, Domestic Corporations can be neutral while Foreign Corporations are Weapons. However, if the UN isn't Civic Forcing, then
1. Free Market to make Foreign corps useful, and Domestic ones more profitable
2. Mercantilism to get Foreign corps out while making Domestic ones slightly less useful
or
3. State Property, because you are getting the main benefits of Corps (hammers/Oil/Aluminum) through Workshops/Conquest rather than Cottages->Gold->Corp maint->Corp benefits

The decision would be less forced in lower difficulty levels.

 

[largedarryl]

One thing that should be added is to make the passing of environmentalism very hard, IMHO. Just look at todays world, and if we wanted to force an environmentalism ideal around, no one would want it.

@krikkitone, I like the way you defined the civics and how the "should" work with corporations. I think that was probably the idea that Firaxis had as well.

 

[Ralgar]

Should it be added or is it already implemented? In my last game the Greeks, Vikings, China and me had corporations and a vote for environmentalism came up. It didn't get passed. Some backward civs who struggled with health voted in favour of it, but if I remember correctly all the corporation-civs voted with "no".

 

[Nikis-Knight]

Yes, I do think the AI votes smarter in general in BtS.

To accomodate those, and to make Foreign corporations a good thing to have (sometimes ie with enough resources, and with the right multipliers in place)

say
5 per corp
and
2 per resource (map adjusted since the benefit is also adjusted)

would lead to a situation where domestic corps are Always good in properly developed areas (unless displacing another, or with truly useless output... ie when you don't want culture... research and te)
5= max cost of 9.375 (10 Gold is the max yield)
2= 3.75 cost per resource (close to making the cultural one's worthwhile... because they give ~3 gold worth of 'non' culture resources)

this is why, if I were redesigning corporations, Hq income would be less, so that Foreign corps would give a benefit to both parties. We have espionage as a "hurt me a little, hurt you more" mechanic. Corporations would be interesting as a "help you a little, help me more" mechanic.

 

[mrt144]

Should it be added or is it already implemented? In my last game the Greeks, Vikings, China and me had corporations and a vote for environmentalism came up. It didn't get passed. Some backward civs who struggled with health voted in favour of it, but if I remember correctly all the corporation-civs voted with "no".

so the risk of running state property and ahving the UN override you is diminished if enough of the other civs have corps and wont vote in environmentalism?

 

[jkp1187]

Originally Posted by homan1983
3) I captured someone who I had spread to and suddenly I lost both a source of income and gained a huge source of spending: You what you're saying is that if we do use corporations (which is an important part of the game and half the point of BTS) then we can't ever conquer people?

YES. This is an emergent aspect of gameplay that is very desirable, and it even mimics real world situations uncannily well! This isn't Vanilla Civ anymore. Just like in the real world, once civilization have become this advanced and the economies so huge, the entire field changes and you must change tactics as well! Wars cannot even be fought indiscriminately. Spy on your enemy and make sure you acatually desire their land before you take it. New gameplay, Cheers!!

Although I am still concerned about the way inflation affects corporations, the point discussed here is something I think is generally appropriate -- the game has always modeled foreign trade as being superior to domestic trade. In general, this represents the fact that foreign products have (relative) scarcity and exotic taste considerations that increase the price. Coffee from Puerto Rico? Whatever--that's nice. Organically-grown fair trade coffee grown by hard-working poor people from Bolivia? Oooh! A bargain at twice the price!

 

[marioflag]

Don't know if on another speeds than Marathon, Corporations founding city give 5 gold, but i found that on Marathon setting the problem is not only the huge inflation but also that corporation founding center give just too much gold. In other words i think that advantages for whoever founds a corporation are too high while as other people said costs for cities hosting it is too much.
In my last game my capital has Wall Street,Bank,Grocer,Market my civics are Free Market,Bureaucracy and i have founded Sid's Sushi and Mining Co. around 60 turns before my last savegame; my capital already produces 700 gold per turn, (i have spread my 2 corporations to 20 cities) which allows me to run research at 100% and earning around 135gold per turn.I can say that even spreading my corporation to my cities gives me more money than what i spend (turn 920).
I think personally that Corporations are just too much powerful, in Civ4 there was no ultimate weapon but i think these Corporation can really destroy the balance of a game.
IMO 2 steps should be taken , it'snot just nerfing mainteinance costs.

-Corporation founding city should get 4 gold per city which hosts this corporation
-nerfing corporation mainteinance costs


This would make life a bit harder for whoever found a corporation and make life easier for civs hosting it.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

I haven't ignored the thread, and I certainly haven't backed out ... I'm moving this weekend so I'm mostly AFK.

No, just no: using rushbuying on a wonder costs twice as much as anything else in the game, and the fact that you have to use a great wonder to prove your point shows exactly why your idea is so flawed at its core.

I only used a Wonder because that's was what Aelf was building in his screenshot.

I don't understand why you think corps should be some mindless spamming of branches in foreign cities, we are playing a strategy game - there are games where mindless spamming would work and if they interest people they should go there - not come here and destroy the last hope we have of a nice historical based TBS.

It's not mindless spamming ... that leads to the AI civ adopting Merc or SP.

Anyway you keep arguing for arguments sake but I bet you'll feel pretty stupid when you realize that this wasn't their intent when they change the mechanics to east/remove inflation from the calculation.

Nope, because I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing, and I'm only moderately arguing in favour of this system.

I have yet to say this system is perfect. I have not once mentioned it should not be changed. All I am saying is that with the right gameplay, Corporations can be managed.

I play at Prince-Monarch, though and seldom see the 2000s. Next week, I'll go for some time victories to push the limits.

You know people told me I was crazy when I said that the Portugal UU can carry settlers/workers, people told me that I'm crazy when I said the Dutch Dike can be built on any coast cities because having them only on coast cities with river would make no sense.

Frankly I'm pretty happy actually because as time goes on people are beginning to realize that there is actually something terribly flawed with the current model (hooray for common sense) where the same corporation cost 33 80 turns ago but costs 99 now even though it provides the same benefit.

You've lambasted a couple posts for being "uppity" ...

... but isn't that what you're doing in there .!?

A problem with the AI doesn't mean corps are broken. It means there is a problem with the AI.

Firaxis themselves said that the AI can use all the new features in BTS. Hence the AI is using them as they were intended.

This means its very likely that the actual problem is with the corps rather than the AI.

They've said a lot of things about how well the AI acts, and we've all seen how false those claims have sometimes been (like camping an Archer on a hill outside a capital city to stagnate it for the taking).

Even though I give the impression that the corporation is always crap to use, the reality is that for more than 60% of the time I have corporations, they are just brilliant! But that doesn't mean its perfect - suddenly they just break down.

I was surprised to read this in one of your posts.

A very sensible conclusion. I agree. The way some people want corporations to be will just make them too powerful. I think the issue is more with inflation that corps themselves.

Unfortunately you didn't show how its beneficial, you showed that its equivalent to an SP or slightly worst than SP in a SINGLE city, whereas SP+CS would have not only been equal/better in that single city, but would have been much better for the country as a whole.

Personally, I'm grateful Aelf didn't post 15 screenshots explaining why each Corporate Office was founded and why he deemed it beneficial to use the given corporation.

I believe it is a safe assumption that if the corporations were benefiting the one city he posted that he was probably using similarly sound logic and calculations for the rest of his empire.

Without us looking at every single city and breaking it down, we really don't know what that 600 GPT was doing for the rest of his empire and must therefore go with the presumption it was worth it.

YES. This is an emergent aspect of gameplay that is very desirable, and it even mimics real world situations uncannily well! This isn't Vanilla Civ anymore. Just like in the real world, once civilization have become this advanced and the economies so huge, the entire field changes and you must change tactics as well! Wars cannot even be fought indiscriminately. Spy on your enemy and make sure you acatually desire their land before you take it. New gameplay, Cheers!!

I think personally that Corporations are just too much powerful, in Civ4 there was no ultimate weapon but i think these Corporation can really destroy the balance of a game.

It's posts like this that embolden my resolve that Corporations are not as broke as many are making them out to be.

When one player says they're overpowered and another says they're broke, then the answer is probably somewhere in the middle.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

Originally Posted by aelf
A very sensible conclusion. I agree. The way some people want corporations to be will just make them too powerful. I think the issue is more with inflation that corps themselves.

The only change people want at this point is to limit the interaction of corporations maintence and inflation. That is the main contention in all these threads.

There is also a broader arguement about whether corporations function too well as weapons and about how much return you should get compared to SP, these are mostly just to establish if this is intentional or not. The only change I think anyone here wants right now is some upper limit on inflation, or some stabalization of the corps cost benefit ratio. Unless we know that either what it is right now is intended, or what point on the inflation curve corporations are intended to be, we can only speculate on the broader balance issues.

According to Aelf's posts, 1934 inflation (err, in game, not irl) gives domestic corps a reasonable trade off in some situations.

 

[mrt144]

heres a little thought exercise i just did, with setup costs (GP and founding branch fees taken out.)

dy= company location is domestic and owned by you
fy= company location is foreign and owned by you
dn= company location is domestic and not owned by you


dy = +2 benefits (hq income, resource conversion) -1 costs (maintenance)
fy = +1 Benefit (hq income)
dn = + 1 Benefit, -1 Cost
HI = HQ income
RC = Resouce Consumption
M = Maintenance
Ci = Civic

so that f(DY) = HI+RC - M*Ci = 0
so that FY = HI = 1
so that DN = RC - M*Ci =

now if the maintenance were weighted so that they are 3 times as they are (which they seem like are, at least it is not 1:1 you can see how DY is playing out as they are (being slightly beneficial in some ways but not others), FY is playing out as well as it is and and DN hurting foreign civs the way it is.

now lets assume the real maintenance for corps should be 2 times the amount not 3.

Under free market
DY = 2:2*.75
FY = 1
DN = 1:2*.75

Under Merc
DY = 2:2
FY = 1
DN = 0:0

Under Environmentlaism

DY = 2:2*1.25
FY = 1
DN = 1:2*1.25

this way the benefits of real civic change would be about minimizing DN while increasing DY and FY. the costs of setting up domestic corps is still there in cold hard cash and GPs. enemy ones in your territory are worse but still provide benefits, vice versa.

Obviously the best way to prevent corp spreading spam is up the costs of setting up offices of the corporations like GPP points. 200 for the first, 300 for the second, 400 for the 3rd, 500 4th, so on and so forth, so that you will pay a hefty price to benefit, but the benefit wont diminish with time.

there's a spreadsheet in the zip to demonstrate what i mean.

 

[homan1983]

Actually, I thought about this, too. It seems like you should be able to remove the corp later.

No, its just ridiculous that corps get worst as time goes on.

Yes, this is a possible penalty for spreading a corp indiscriminately.

No, unless you have proof that I, or other people are spreading corps mindlessly in which case please present it.

YES. This is an emergent aspect of gameplay that is very desirable, and it even mimics real world situations uncannily well! This isn't Vanilla Civ anymore. Just like in the real world, once civilization have become this advanced and the economies so huge, the entire field changes and you must change tactics as well! Wars cannot even be fought indiscriminately. Spy on your enemy and make sure you acatually desire their land before you take it. New gameplay, Cheers!!

No, in fact the argument used against me goes along the lines of: "this isn't like the real world, corporations work differently in-game" I find it ironic that now your saying the exact opposite

We can't argue this one, yet. There is no way to know without AI debug info if the AI is actually committing suicide or making a weighed decision. I will agree that it seems apparent they are doing something buggy.

No we can argue it, just because you say the AI is bugged it doesn't make it so. Truth is that corporations are bugged and the AI doesn't take inflation into account when deciding whether a corporation is net-profitable.

I agree. When I get home from work, however, I will post a quote from the manual that came with the game. It says something to the effect of, "You must use corporations judiciously or there could be problems."

All good points, I'm glad they're being talked about on the forums.

Yes its why I love civfanatics, generally people are much nicer here that other forums - if you wanna know what arguing for the sake of argumen feels like, you'll really know it when visiting other forums - civ players in general are just much more mature.


Also regarding the manual - you assume because I say inflation shouldn't have such a game-breaking effect on corporations that I think corps should be spammed at home the same way many people argue that it was designed to be mindlessly spammed to foreign civs. For the real truth I suggest reading this and the 2 other related threads in full.

 

[Uncle_Joe]

I'm sure this has been said in here before, but the thing that jumps out the most is the scaling of both Corporate Maintenance and Inflation as the Difficulty Level increases.

For example, compared to Noble, Emperor level has 30% more Corp Maintenance and 10% higher Inflation. IMO, it doesnt necessary make the game 'harder', it just makes Corporations less desirable.

Personally, I think just yank the Corporate Maintenance Handicap and let it be.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

I'm sure this has been said in here before, but the thing that jumps out the most is the scaling of both Corporate Maintenance and Inflation as the Difficulty Level increases.

For example, compared to Noble, Emperor level has 30% more Corp Maintenance and 10% higher Inflation. IMO, it doesnt necessary make the game 'harder', it just makes Corporations less desirable.

Personally, I think just yank the Corporate Maintenance Handicap and let it be

One kind of iironic thing is that there was an effort to make levels of difficulty effect strategy less--for instance, initial health and happiness caps are much more similar now than in warlords.

 

[homan1983]

For example, compared to Noble, Emperor level has 30% more Corp Maintenance and 10% higher Inflation. IMO, it doesnt necessary make the game 'harder', it just makes Corporations less desirable.

Personally, I think just yank the Corporate Maintenance Handicap and let it be.

Hi

Can you tell me what you mean when you say Emperor has 30% more Corp Maintenance [since you have a seperate inflation]?
If what you're saying is the case then its REALLY disappointing and sort of explains why some people find corporations perfect and others have problems.

I would say that its strange corporations get weaker as dificulties go up but State Property doesn't, mainly because they're in direct competition.

 

[Uncle_Joe]

In the Handicap files there is a line for Corporate Maintenance. Its set at 100 (100%) at Noble. As you go up the Difficulty, this number increases (hitting 130% at Emperor and 150% at Deity).

I'm guessing that this is a large part of the problem as it affects the cost effectiveness of the corporations. I dont see how it makes the game 'harder' so I dont know why its there. I just see it making corps nearly useless at high levels, but leaving them quite useful at the lower difficulties.