Detailed analysis: # of specialist cities needed per era

[UncleJJ]

Gold in the game is different from Science in a strategic sense. This is because a player with an agressive-specialist economy can win the game by conquest / domination even if it slightly behind in technology by having an overwhelming superiority in force. So it can afford to have lower science rate than its opponents but it needs to meet its upkeep costs every turn or the attempt at domination will fail.

So you must meet your overall city maintenance costs, civic costs and army costs every turn. And these costs grow rapidly as you get carried away by capturing cities and extending your empire adding more population and extending the distance from your capital. Your developed core cities can only afford to carry so many newly captured ones before the costs become unbearable.

Razing big cities will reduce the final score so that is not a desired solution in a domination game although small and inefficient cities can be burnt without losing much.

Here is the equation for Gold that corresponds to the Science equation I gave in post #17 of this thread.

Gold = (C * (100% - R - K) + G) * BG

Where,
C = Commerce in that city (in capital with bureaucracy *1.5)
R = The global science rate
K = The global Kulture rate
G = Gold from Shrines plus Specialist base gold from food specialists, settled specialists, free specialists.
BG = The gold building multiplier in that city (market, grocer and bank)

And the Science equation is modified to use BS to distinguish science buildings from others

Science = (C * R + S) * BS

Where,
C = Commerce in that city (in capital with bureaucracy *1.5)
R = The global science rate
S = Specialist base beakers from food specialists, settled specialists, free specialists as modified by representation.
BS = The science building multiplier in that city (library, monastries, academy, university, observatoty, laboratory)

These two general equations show the important relationships between commerce, specialists and the buildings that boost their performance. I believe any strategy that involves a large number of cities needs to pay careful attention to underlying truths expressed in these equations and needs to apply them even if the player does so unconsciously

I look forward to a numerical argument on the virtues of the "new" strategy

 

[futurehermit]

I see I've got a lot to answer to this morning! Bear with me...

By the late game, if you're supporting eight specialists, you could be working sixteen cottages... at a minimum of seven commerce a each.

The thing is though, someone running a specialist econ can support a much larger empire because their science slider is at 0% thus they use all their gold for maintenance. The cottage empire builder has science at 100% and thus does not have gold for maintenance and has a smaller empire. So, although you could be running 16 cottages per city as compared to 8 specialists, the specialist player could in theory have twice the number of cities thus making the comparison 16 cottages vs 16 specialists. 16 fully matured cottages are only slightly better than 16 fully matured specialists and the specialists with representation are superior for centuries and centuries prior to this!

I think the analysis is flawed because you do not factor in the % magnification of your commerce.

current game I'm playing pangea, prince, as qin shi. currently its 1650 in game
this is at 70% science +25 gpt
my capitol has library, univ, academy, observatory, oxeford
***producing 211 beakers per turn***
I do run 2 scientists there, but only to deal with the food overflow
2 other cities have the same setup -oxford and are producing
136 and 141 beakers respectively

my civilization's total output currently is 879 beakers per turn from 15 cities

15 cities of specialists... even with representation you would need 10 scientists PER CITY assuming you were running caste system instead
with libraries and universities adding in there it would be closer to 6 scientists per city. but still can you find 6 4+ food tiles around every single city??
***not to mention the happiness and health diminishing returns with high populations***
you are also ignoring governmental bonuses to fully upgraded towns of
+1 production and +2 commerce and another +2 from techs..
if I had to get rid of the towns I would be down atleast 5+ hammers per city.

if you're a financial leader, it's true that it's harder to justify a specialist economy. this is because a financial leader's cottages will surpass specialists faster. 1 specialist with representation gives 6 beakers. to produce 6c, the financial leader's two cottages only have to grow to size 2! and on size 3, they become superior. thus, if you're a financial leader a cottage econ is more appealing, definitely. however, the drawback of the cottage econ is that it is much lower food thus it is more inflexible and cannot maximize whipping as effectively!

furthermore, as i have already stated, the specialist player would not require as many specialists per city as you claim because the specialist player can afford to support more cities than the cottage player since their science slider is at 0.

and, yes i can easily find that much surplus food for a city because i farm every available tile. if it doesn't have at least as much food as you claim, it either becomes a production city or else i don't build it (or i raze it if it is captured).

finally, certainly very late in the game a maximized cottage econ with the proper civics is very powerful. however, by that point in the game my games are usually decided and the specialist econ is far superior for centuries and centuries before this. i would far rather have my advantage during the early, critical stages of the game than late game when i have the game in hand.

I don't think the problem has been addressed at all. Simply saying the science slider is set to 0% means that there is an assumption that whatever commerce is floating around (since no particular attention has been paid to gaining any commerce) meets the running costs of the newly expanded empire. That might be true for a time but you can't keep going on that way for long. Eventually the costs will exceed the commerce and if you run the caste system you can then switch to running some merchants to get more gold... but that reduces the amount of beakers. I am interested in when this happens and what can then be done to extend the run of conquests.

I would like to see anyone advocating the conquest and specialist economy to provide some actual numbers rather than giving us some euphoric statements and hand waving the economic problems away. This thread is called a "detailed analysis" afterall . The only analsys of a real game I've seen so far has been my own... so back up your claims with numbers please.

I will try and get some detailed numbers next time i play. All i can say at this point is that i get my maintenance money from having the science slider at 0 and conquering cities. Because the science slider IS at 0, I can afford to keep FAR more cities than when I play a cottage game. And since I can get 2 scientists up and running in a newly captured city very quickly, my research rate is also clipping along at a fast enough pace that I can continue warmongering as my troops never become outdated (in fact, mine are usually superior). Again, in a cottage game, I require periods of peace to get the techs I need to continue warring. In a specialist game, I just keep the war machine rolling. War weariness setting in? Switch to police state until I finish my immediate goals and then sign peace for a bit.

These two general equations show the important relationships between commerce, specialists and the buildings that boost their performance. I believe any strategy that involves a large number of cities needs to pay careful attention to underlying truths expressed in these equations and needs to apply them even if the player does so unconsciously

I look forward to a numerical argument on the virtues of the "new" strategy

In your equations, you've *completely* forgotten gold received from conquering cities. This is a *substantial* source of revenue, FAR superior to the amount generated by cottages. So, as long as you are consistently taking cities, you are consistently generating far more revenue than you could with a cottage economy. And, as i keep mentioning, with a specialist econ and the science slider at 0, you can afford to keep the cities and keep warmongering far longer than a cottage econ player can.

It all ties together so perfectly: 1) Specialist econ produces a superior amount of science early-to-mid game so you get an early tech lead; 2) You use your early tech lead to also support a superior and large army which you use to capture and keep more cities; 3) The money from conquest and a 0% science slider allows you to keep far more cities; 4) These far more cities also produce a superior amount of science in a very short time since you only need a couple farms and a library to be up and running; 5) This superior amount of science allows you to expand your tech lead further; 6) This increased tech lead allows you to unlock even better military techs to support an even more superior and large army which you use to capture and keep still more cities; etc. etc. etc.

 

[malekithe]

At different stages of the game, the specialist economy emphasizes particular factors in your equations. In the beginning, for instance R and C are being emphasized, as costs are low. As costs rise, R is lowered but S is increased to compensate. As R approaches 0, the value of S starts to dominate the science equation, and the C value dominates the gold equation. For a specialist economy, R will be 0 for the vast majority of the game.

Gradually, though, expansion will start to outstrip C, and you will have to produce more gold. There are many ways to do this. You can simply conquer and pillage your neighbors, acquiring the gold through force. You could start to run some merchants, reducing S slightly, but also increasing G. Or you could work to increase the value of C. All of these are valid options. In a non-specialist economy, the most common approach is to increase C. That is also a valid option in a specialist economy. Cottages are not completely off-limits. If you have to pay the bills, by all means work a commerce tile.

Over the course of the game, as more merchants can come online, courthouses are put in place, and a shrine or two is contructed, the specialist economy can start increasing the value of K. Increasing K has the somewhat indirect effect of increasing the values of G and S as well. That is something that is not displayed in your equations. When I increase the general happiness level in my empire, it make it easier to increase G, S, and even C.

Toward the end of the game, a specialist economy's equations will actually end up looking more like this:

Gold = G * BG
Science = S * BS

The whole point of a specialist economy is to maximize G and S at the expense of C. C will still dominate the gold equation up until you start to increase the value of K, at which point is starts to lose relevence. So, it's not that a specialist economy ignores the value of C, it simply is not as relevent to the general tech rate. It plays a large role in tech in the early game, a large role in empire maintenance in the mid game, but is simply around to increase culture by the late game.

Another nice thing about a specialist economy that your equations demonstrate is how easy it is to maximize the benefit of BG and BS. These two factors are calculated on a per-city basis. However, R is set empire-wide. So, in an empire relying on R * C for it's research, every decrease in R reduces the effectiveness of BS. Similarly, every increase in R reduces the effectiveness of BG. However, since S and G are per-city factors, they can be tailored to maximize the effectiveness of BS or BG in the specific city.

 

[DarkFyre99]

I don't think the problem has been addressed at all. Simply saying the science slider is set to 0% means that there is an assumption that whatever commerce is floating around (since no particular attention has been paid to gaining any commerce) meets the running costs of the newly expanded empire.

Beakers are beakers, whatever their source. The same multipliers that affect beakers produced through commerce and the slider also affect beakers produced by scientists.

If have nine scientists and two great scientists, who are producing a total of 72 beakers per turn, in your best science city, having three monasteries, a library, a university, an academy, and Oxford University there will produce 237 beakers per turn.

That might be true for a time but you can't keep going on that way for long. Eventually the costs will exceed the commerce and if you run the caste system you can then switch to running some merchants to get more gold... but that reduces the amount of beakers. I am interested in when this happens and what can then be done to extend the run of conquests.

It happens about the same time you bump your science slider down a notch: when your economy goes into the red. It can go into the red because of conquest, or it can go into the red because you need more happiness. The good news is that bumping the culture slider up a notch usually costs you at most 10 gold for your whole empire, rather than a whopping 10% of your total economy (often from research).

As you said, in order to make more gold, you simply stop supporting a scientist and start supporting a merchant. The advantage of the specialist strategy over a cottage economy is that you control exactly which city the extra gold comes from.

This means you have to produce less gold multiplying buildings if you want to maximize your gold output. In a cottage economy, you pretty much have to build banks, markets, and grocers in every science city if you want to maximize the gold coming from the slider. In a specialist economy, you only have to build these buildings where the gold's being produced.

When choosing which city to produce merchants in, usually you start with your holy cities first... unless they're production centers. They already have the infrastructure in place to maximize your gold output. Then you move on to cities that have quite a few commerce resources, since they're likely to have some of the infrastructure in place already. Finally, you start building in your science city... one city at a time.

When you're supporting all merchants, instead of all scientists, you're at the equivalent of around science slider set to 50%.

Another thing to keep in mind, as you conquer your enemies, you'll also be pillaging all those lovely cottages they've been nurturing. You'll be building farms anyways, so your mounted troops will be happily pillaging as you besiege their cities.

I would like to see anyone advocating the conquest and specialist economy to provide some actual numbers rather than giving us some euphoric statements and hand waving the economic problems away. This thread is called a "detailed analysis" afterall . The only analsys of a real game I've seen so far has been my own... so back up your claims with numbers please.

Okay, by the numbers:

The hypothetical primary late medieval science city is usually around population 20. Of these, four are working hammer tiles (often resource tiles), ten are working farm tiles (usually on the river) or food resources, and six are actually specialists. It has two great scientists settled there by now, and thanks to the Great Library and Mercantilism, it has three extra scientists.

Raw output from tiles:
Food: 43
Hammers: 12
Commerce: 10

Commerce from trade: 3

Specialists: 9 scientists, two Super Scientists

Slider settings:
Science: 0% - 0 beakers
Culture: 20% - 6 happiness, 2 culture
Gold: 80% - 11 gold

Civics:
Representation, Vassalage, Caste System, Mercantilism, Theocracy

Buildings:
Academy
Aqueduct
Courthouse
Granary
Library
University
Three Monasteries
Theatre
Coliseum
Great Library
Oxford University

(Note the complete lack of wealth multiplying buildings. Theatres and Coliseums produce happiness, and the Aqueduct health. Grocer will eventually be built for the health it provides, but not the market. It's cheaper to bump up the slider.)

Health output: 22 (5 core +3 river +6 granary, +2 forest, +2 aqueduct + 4 other resources)
Happiness output: 22 (5 core + 6 slider + 1 buildings + 2 civics +7 resources +1 state religion)
Culture Output: 31 (+2 slider, +29 buildings)
Great Person Points: 30 (+3 buildings, +27 specialists)

Hammer Output: 12
Beaker Output: 237 (+72 specialists + 230% from buildings)
Gold Output: 11

(Keep in mind that I'm going from memory here, and I'm pretty sure the core numbers are from Noble... adjust for higher difficulty levels.)


EDIT: Swapped Pacifism civic for Theocracy. We're at war with the world, after all.

 

[DarkFyre99]

The thing is though, someone running a specialist econ can support a much larger empire because their science slider is at 0% thus they use all their gold for maintenance. The cottage empire builder has science at 100% and thus does not have gold for maintenance and has a smaller empire. So, although you could be running 16 cottages per city as compared to 8 specialists, the specialist player could in theory have twice the number of cities thus making the comparison 16 cottages vs 16 specialists. 16 fully matured cottages are only slightly better than 16 fully matured specialists and the specialists with representation are superior for centuries and centuries prior to this!

As I've said before, the advantage of the specialist strategy is early conquest. I've tried the specialist strategy on a continent where there were no neigbors to conquer... it doesn't work quite as well. I usually ended up razing barbarian cities, and they didn't build very many cottages.

In addition, the cottage empire builder rarely has the slider at 100%... I consider the optimal setting to be at 70%. If I can afford to bump it up to 80%... it's time to conquer another neighbor.

It's all a matter of what infrastructure you build for health and happiness, and how you specialize your cities. The cottage strategy uses markets for happiness (larger gold yield), while the specialist strategy uses coliseums and theatres (equal hammer cost, larger happiness yield). The cottage strategy has three types of non-production cities: gold, science, and commerce. The specialist strategy has two: Gold and science. The hammers you save building extra infrastructure in a commerce city, you use to build barracks and units.

Also, keep in mind we're talking about the late-game here. If you haven't won the game by the late-game (which is the whole point of the specialist strategy), and aren't likely to soon, then you're at a disadvantaged compared to an empire supported by cottages. In the late game, you run head first into that population cap. It stops being about how many tiles you can work, and becomes about how many citizens you can support.

The advantage of the cottage is that they produce more commerce per population point. Each grassland cottage requires one population point, so it produces 7 commerce. Each specialist requires two population points late game: the specialist and the farmer supporting him. Under representation, you're producing three commerce per population point... less than half. You don't need a size 20 city to support ten cottages... you only need a size ten city. A late game cottaged city not only produces more commerce, it produces a lot more hammers. Your ten scientists are only producing beakers. Those ten cottages are also producing ten hammers as well as a similar amount of beakers.

The bottom line is that it's a trade off. You're risking everything on an early win, vs a slower investment for a later win. If you've got all the ingredients there to pull off the specialist strategy, then you should. Go for the early win. But if you reach the late-game, and you haven't won yet, and you're facing off against opponents of equal size... you're at a disadvantage. They can outproduce you and out research you. They can also cash in on any saved forests, which you need for the extra health.

If the ingrediants aren't there, there's nothing sub-optimal about the cottage strategy. It simply takes a little longer.

 

[UncleJJ]

The thing is though, someone running a specialist econ can support a much larger empire because their science slider is at 0% thus they use all their gold for maintenance. The cottage empire builder has science at 100% and thus does not have gold for maintenance and has a smaller empire. So, although you could be running 16 cottages per city as compared to 8 specialists, the specialist player could in theory have twice the number of cities thus making the comparison 16 cottages vs 16 specialists. 16 fully matured cottages are only slightly better than 16 fully matured specialists and the specialists with representation are superior for centuries and centuries prior to this!

You seem to be ignoring the early happiness limitations. Each cottage only takes 1 pop, whereas a specialist often needs 2 pop to give 6 beakers with Representation. This is why gaining GPPs and settled Scientists are so important early on before Calendar and Hereditary Rule allow larger populations. They make up for the losses a specialist economy has in the beginning.

if you're a financial leader, it's true that it's harder to justify a specialist economy. this is because a financial leader's cottages will surpass specialists faster. 1 specialist with representation gives 6 beakers. to produce 6c, the financial leader's two cottages only have to grow to size 2! and on size 3, they become superior. thus, if you're a financial leader a cottage econ is more appealing, definitely. however, the drawback of the cottage econ is that it is much lower food thus it is more inflexible and cannot maximize whipping as effectively!

A Financial player starting on the usual river will have cottages giving 3 commerce immediately and not after 10 turns. Two riverside cottages immediately equal a floodplain farm and scientist (with Representation) and after 10 turns beat it

furthermore, as i have already stated, the specialist player would not require as many specialists per city as you claim because the specialist player can afford to support more cities than the cottage player since their science slider is at 0.

and, yes i can easily find that much surplus food for a city because i farm every available tile. if it doesn't have at least as much food as you claim, it either becomes a production city or else i don't build it (or i raze it if it is captured).

Unproven and I'm not convinced yet.

I will try and get some detailed numbers next time i play. All i can say at this point is that i get my maintenance money from having the science slider at 0 and conquering cities. Because the science slider IS at 0, I can afford to keep FAR more cities than when I play a cottage game. And since I can get 2 scientists up and running in a newly captured city very quickly, my research rate is also clipping along at a fast enough pace that I can continue warmongering as my troops never become outdated (in fact, mine are usually superior). Again, in a cottage game, I require periods of peace to get the techs I need to continue warring. In a specialist game, I just keep the war machine rolling. War weariness setting in? Switch to police state until I finish my immediate goals and then sign peace for a bit.

I am surprised that you haven't got any old save games from the games you have mentioned already. I usually save my game evey 10 turns or so. That would certainly help if we wish to make a detailed analysis.

In your equations, you've *completely* forgotten gold received from conquering cities. This is a *substantial* source of revenue, FAR superior to the amount generated by cottages. So, as long as you are consistently taking cities, you are consistently generating far more revenue than you could with a cottage economy. And, as i keep mentioning, with a specialist econ and the science slider at 0, you can afford to keep the cities and keep warmongering far longer than a cottage econ player can.

I haven't forgotten anything of the sort and never intended that equations for each of your individual cities should include gold from their capture. That is better considered separately at the Empire level along with extortions and other one off effects.

I seriously doubt that you can continue to capture cities every turn in the early to mid game although I have done that myself in the late game when overruning a weaker opponent... but then my costs would be 700 gold per turn and cities only give about 120 if I recall correctly. Fortunately I had a well developed economy that could easily finance the costs by then. Please give us some idea of number of cities and costs and income you have in mind when running this strategy. Money from conquest can certainly help sustain a conquering run but you can still take that too far and over extend. We need to establish the best point to stop conquering and consolidate the gains before another burst of conquest. That is what interests me, I get the basic theory but want to know how and when to apply it.

Also as another poster has said it is likely that you running your economy at 0% Science is perhaps equivalent to a more cottage and town driven economy running at 50%. There is nothing magic about having a 0% rate you will still be using whatever commerce you have and more will still be useful and allow you to continue for longer.

It all ties together so perfectly: 1) Specialist econ produces a superior amount of science early-to-mid game so you get an early tech lead; 2) You use your early tech lead to also support a superior and large army which you use to capture and keep more cities; 3) The money from conquest and a 0% science slider allows you to keep far more cities; 4) These far more cities also produce a superior amount of science in a very short time since you only need a couple farms and a library to be up and running; 5) This superior amount of science allows you to expand your tech lead further; 6) This increased tech lead allows you to unlock even better military techs to support an even more superior and large army which you use to capture and keep still more cities; etc. etc. etc.

I fail to see that having (say) 40 cities that are weak and paying a huge amount of gold in upkeep and only producing say 15 beakers each in useful output is automatically better than a smaller and better controlled empire with (say) 30 more productive cities ... perhaps running a research rate of 50% as well as lots of specialists. The answer to that sort of question is all in the numbers. Who is to say that it is not better to allow the AI to research a few techs for you to extort with your powerful army is not better than killing them off immediately and having to research the tech yourself ?

 

[UncleJJ]

At different stages of the game, the specialist economy emphasizes particular factors in your equations. In the beginning, for instance R and C are being emphasized, as costs are low. As costs rise, R is lowered but S is increased to compensate. As R approaches 0, the value of S starts to dominate the science equation, and the C value dominates the gold equation. For a specialist economy, R will be 0 for the vast majority of the game.

Gradually, though, expansion will start to outstrip C, and you will have to produce more gold. There are many ways to do this. You can simply conquer and pillage your neighbors, acquiring the gold through force. You could start to run some merchants, reducing S slightly, but also increasing G. Or you could work to increase the value of C. All of these are valid options. In a non-specialist economy, the most common approach is to increase C. That is also a valid option in a specialist economy. Cottages are not completely off-limits. If you have to pay the bills, by all means work a commerce tile.

Over the course of the game, as more merchants can come online, courthouses are put in place, and a shrine or two is contructed, the specialist economy can start increasing the value of K. Increasing K has the somewhat indirect effect of increasing the values of G and S as well. That is something that is not displayed in your equations. When I increase the general happiness level in my empire, it make it easier to increase G, S, and even C.

Toward the end of the game, a specialist economy's equations will actually end up looking more like this:

Gold = G * BG
Science = S * BS

The whole point of a specialist economy is to maximize G and S at the expense of C. C will still dominate the gold equation up until you start to increase the value of K, at which point is starts to lose relevence. So, it's not that a specialist economy ignores the value of C, it simply is not as relevent to the general tech rate. It plays a large role in tech in the early game, a large role in empire maintenance in the mid game, but is simply around to increase culture by the late game.

Another nice thing about a specialist economy that your equations demonstrate is how easy it is to maximize the benefit of BG and BS. These two factors are calculated on a per-city basis. However, R is set empire-wide. So, in an empire relying on R * C for it's research, every decrease in R reduces the effectiveness of BS. Similarly, every increase in R reduces the effectiveness of BG. However, since S and G are per-city factors, they can be tailored to maximize the effectiveness of BS or BG in the specific city.

Thanks for replying in such a clear and accurate way I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say in the first 2 pargraphs and could not have put it better myself.

In para 3, of course the equations simply model what gold and science output you get from managing your cities in the way that you choose it does not make any what-if predictions about the indirect effects of increasing the happiness through culture. It seems too much to expect that to me.

It seems unlikely to me that there is any particular benefit from allowing the commerce to fall so low at the end of the game that it becomes insignificant. All cities have some basic commerce. With R = 0% one commerce is equal to one or 2 gold at any stage of the game and is always useful. I understand the approximation you are making but it doesn't seem useful.

When you talk about increasing the cultural slider I am much more doubtful. I fully appreciate that it would allow increased happiness and have often used it to some extent myself on a temporary basis up to 50% to just get that extra turn or two to finish a war off. But as a long term strategy to run a few larger cities in peacetime seems an expensive use of even residual commerce. I can see you might use it to boost your total pop to win a diplomatic victory or avoid a defeat perhaps In a Domination game population size is not really a good thing (once the victory condition is met and that is easy) as it increases the cost of city maintenace and civics. Also there are many ways to manage the happiness of individual cities by various buildings, spreading religions and civics (with careful planning). So for me it seems to be an emergency measure only and I prefer to keep the gold from commerce across the whole empire rather than artificially boost a few super cities. But that will depend on the specific circumstances and the numbers should be clear one way or another.

And again I agree completely with your last para.

 

[Betafor]

noob question- does increasing the culture slider increase happiness w/o theatres? if so, i may try this.

I've also noticed that this strat is probably best on monarch and up. Why? because it's strength is LOTS of cities, and you need LOTS of cities for the specialists to make a difference. You can pull this off sorta ok on prince down, but on monarch and up, you don't need to build settlers because the AI builds a lot more cities faster for you. units -> cities ->more science from specialists and production because all cities affordable -> more units -> more cities->(ect)->domination/conquest.

 

[Nares]

Who is to say that it is not better to allow the AI to research a few techs for you to extort with your powerful army is not better than killing them off immediately and having to research the tech yourself ?

Guess I'll have to say it. Generally, the research turns saved by extorting a tech for peace are costed multiple times over when you return to finish the target you extorted. The only reason you should extort for peace is if you are unable to hold those cities, and are unwilling to raze them.

As was discussed earlier, one of the positive sources of income for the aggressive specialist economy is pillage income, in particular income pillaged from capturing cities. I certainly agree that this money can be substantial, in particular during the very same phases of the game at which a specialist economy running Representation is at the relative height of its superiority.

What I think fails to be appreciated is that you can, and should, capture the (semi-)mature Cottages of your opponents rather than pillage them. This provides the very tools necessary to maintain superiority as a fully Cottage-based economy comes into its own. While Cottages are the most valuable tile improvement available for pillaging, they are almost always better off saved, especially so in the case of Villages and Towns.

By supplementing your specialists with captured high commerce tiles during the late Medieval era, you both maintain the flexible high food state that you want for the early-mid game for Slavery while still producing the more valuable high commerce tiles that really only come into their own during the Renaissance and Industrial eras. Note that this is also roughly the point where a Cottage-based economy grows to become on par with a specialist economy opperating under Representation. I would roughly peg that point to around the late Medieval for specialist vs. Financially backed Cottages, or the early Renaissance (Printing Press) for specialist vs. non-Financial Cottages.

With regards to maintaining a larger empire, I actually have found that both economies are about as ill suited to running a larger empire. The only real means of running a large empire are strongly tied to technology, not economics. Civics, Courthouses, +%Gold modifiers, +trade routes, +free specialists all play a major role in maintaining a large empire. Cottage based economies benefit from Printing Press, in particular, whereas production based economies rely on later technologies (namely State Property). But beyond that, the costs of operating a large empire are largely so crippling as to be unmanageable prior to Renaissance era and later technologies.

The distinct difference I found is that the specialist economy under Representation can operate with fewer cities overall. It does not require so large an investment in commerce because it is not using commerce as a primary means of both research and income. This frees up remaining cities to focus on other pursuits.

For example, the specialist economy really only requires a single science city and a single commerce city, with all other early cities devoted to production. This allows for a distinct future Great Library site as well as potential future GP farm, and a distinct commerce site, most likely your capital, to take advantage of Bureaucracy.

Versus the Cottage based economy, which basically requires Cottages sprinkled throughout every city. The pure Cottage city has little ability to produce infrastructure, as it is neither high production nor high food, and it must devote its citizens to working Cottages. To this end, only a few ideal sites are capable of maximizing Cottages, dictated more so by mid-grade food and hammer surpluses. However, such a ideal site is counterproductive, as where it could be a solid early-mid game production site, it is forced to work Cottages in order to have those Cottages sufficiently matured.

There's definatly a case to be made for the rise and fall of a specialist economy. However, it is certainly a powerful means of maximizing the early-mid game, and can be sufficiently augmented by capturing some (semi-)mature Cottage rich cities during the mid-game in order to maintain survivability (ie succesfully trainsition to a fully Cottage based economy) during the late game, when a Cottage economy finally comes into its own.

 

[NaZdReG]

I have to weigh in again on this. at some level the specialist econ is also a bit restraining. one of the bigger uses for excess commerce is the ability to quickly upgrade entire armies to the next tech level. in the game I described earlier I was able to drop my science to 0% for 2 turns and mass several thousand gold to upgrade my grens and cats to riflemen and cannons. also then later all of my calvary to gunships.

I assume you could mass enough commerce the other way, without completely destroying science output, but if you are not building both the science and commerce output buildings in your large cities it hurts that flexibility.

I usually drop a grocer and market in EVERY city.. not for the commerce magnification (I run at 70% or better science) but for the health and happyness.

they just have the nice backup of being able to produce a decent amount of $$ when you need it.

got any hard #'s on switching your science output out like that?

NaZ

 

[Nares]

I have to weigh in again on this. at some level the specialist econ is also a bit restraining. one of the bigger uses for excess commerce is the ability to quickly upgrade entire armies to the next tech level. in the game I described earlier I was able to drop my science to 0% for 2 turns and mass several thousand gold to upgrade my grens and cats to riflemen and cannons. also then later all of my calvary to gunships.

I assume you could mass enough commerce the other way, without completely destroying science output, but if you are not building both the science and commerce output buildings in your large cities it hurts that flexibility.

It depends on the extent to which you're utilizing your commerce to supplement your research, but I'll agree that a specialist economy will never be able to produce gold like that. Still, I don't see a Cottage based economy being able to do that until having a significant number of Villages and Towns, plus having Printing Press researched. Namely, it could not effectively do that for a Axemen/Swordsmen->Macemen upgrade, but it can do that for Macemen/Catapaults->Grenadiers/Cannons upgrades.

 

[malekithe]

When you talk about increasing the cultural slider I am much more doubtful. I fully appreciate that it would allow increased happiness and have often used it to some extent myself on a temporary basis up to 50% to just get that extra turn or two to finish a war off. But as a long term strategy to run a few larger cities in peacetime seems an expensive use of even residual commerce. I can see you might use it to boost your total pop to win a diplomatic victory or avoid a defeat perhaps In a Domination game population size is not really a good thing (once the victory condition is met and that is easy) as it increases the cost of city maintenace and civics. Also there are many ways to manage the happiness of individual cities by various buildings, spreading religions and civics (with careful planning). So for me it seems to be an emergency measure only and I prefer to keep the gold from commerce across the whole empire rather than artificially boost a few super cities. But that will depend on the specific circumstances and the numbers should be clear one way or another.

Alright, it looks like the use of the culture slider is where our understandings of this "strategy" differ. In most games I use the culture slider just like you do, to combat war weariness or handle other emergencies. When your economy is driven by C, that's the only option you have; running with the K permanently set to a high value would absolutely cripple a commerce-driven economy. However, since a specialist economy is not driven by commerce, they can afford to use the culture slider. They would use it in a similar to manner to how a cottage economy uses the science slider. When they can afford it, they take it up a notch.

The effects of the culture slider could use a little explanation, possibly. For every notch you move it, it increases the happiness level in all of your cities by 1. If the city has a theater, it also gets another bonus happiness. And, if the city has a colliseum, it get's half a bonus happiness. That's potentially 2.5 additional happiness per notch on the slider. For a lot of the game, that translates directly into 2.5 additional population per city. In most cases, that's one extra specialist per notch on the slider. There is, of course, a cost for that extra specialist. For comparison purposes with a cottage economy, you can roughly say that every cottage being worked would equate to 1 additional population needed in the specialist economy. This additional upkeep is the primary drawback to running specialists, but it can be mostly managed through diligent courthouse building and proper civic choices (nationhood and state property spring to mind).

Another thing that has, heretofore, been overlooked is the increase in the great person birth rate. At any given time, a specialists economy has ~80% of it's cities operating as mini-GP farms. They operate about 60-80% the number of specialists of a true GP farm, but you're bound to make up a lot of ground just by virtue of the sheer number of GP points you'd be producing. With enough cities, I could see a situation where you're essentially getting a new Great Person every 8-10 turns or so well into the game. In the experiments I've run, the specialist economy typically gets about 3 times the number of great people as a lone great person farm. If 1/3 or so of those are great merchants, that's a serious source of income that's been overlooked. Not to mention, you'd be getting large numbers of beakers from great scientists every now and then. On average, then, I'd say that would be an extra 2000 gold/science every 8-10 turns. Definitely not a paltry sum.

 

[futurehermit]

I've convinced myself and feel that if critics aren't convinced at this point they won't be. In my mind the early game is more important and the specialist econ is superior early in the game. Through warmongering you should have the largest empire by the mid game and thanks to representation also a tech lead. With a tech lead and the largest empire you should not lose the game, no matter what skill level. A specialist econ provides this for you in a manner superior to the cottage econ. In my mind, that is case closed.

 

[pigswill]

Given the importance of representation in an early specialist strategy how do you ensure you have access to the pyramids early on?

 

[NaZdReG]

Another thing to consider on this matter.

how is it that you support specialists in every city before you get to civil service?? without that tech its impossible to chain farms into spaces away from rivers.. does that limit your early location choices when producing settlers in the ancient era??

obviously once you get to that point you can chain away. but since you go with pyramids to get representation.. how do you quickly sling there?? other than bonus food resources how do you go about setting up each city to use specialists??

if you can provide input on this futurehermit and perhaps a save showing your success at that time period, I would be willing to try your strategy at prince level just to see its results for myself

thanks

NaZ

 

[malekithe]

current game I'm playing pangea, prince, as qin shi. currently its 1650 in game
this is at 70% science +25 gpt
my capitol has library, univ, academy, observatory, oxeford
***producing 211 beakers per turn***
I do run 2 scientists there, but only to deal with the food overflow
2 other cities have the same setup -oxford and are producing
136 and 141 beakers respectively

my civilization's total output currently is 879 beakers per turn from 15 cities

Decided I'd try to come up with something to compare this to...

In GOTM 07, I went for a no-cottage cultural victory. I was mostly peaceful the entire game, only grabbing one opponent's city by force. I had a save from 1673AD lying around, so I thought I'd see how many beakers per turn I could get out of my specialist-based empire.

Keep a couple of things in mind when you look at these numbers. First, I just spent the last 500 years dumping every cent into culture. I ran nothing but artists in my most powerful cities and had the culture slider cranked up as far as it would go. Since about 1300, my science essentially stagnated as my only source was the trickle of beakers coming in from artists. Essentially, I could have had biology by around 1400 if I had wanted to. Also, I only have 5 libraries and 4 universities in my entire empire. Instead of expanding science production, I was focused on building temples and cathedrals.

Despite all of that, my meager 10 cities (1 of which I just got out of a culture flip) are putting out 714 beakers per turn. That's almost enough for an industrial age tech every 10 turns (on epic speed, no less). All but two cities are producing over 50 beakers per turn. I also happen to be able to run at 100% science thanks to multiple shrines, the spiral minaret, plenty of foreign trade, diligent courthouse building, and an entire city devoted to merchants (I'm running 8 merchants total across my empire, 6 focused in a single city with a shrine that is paying 1/3 of my total maintenance).

My capital is producing 155 beakers per turn and it lacks a university, observatory, or oxford (I haven't built oxford yet, as I was too focused on increasing culture, not science). If I had actually been focusing on science output, Mecca could be producing a staggering 288 beakers per turn. It also happens to be producing 136 GPP per turn, but that's not entirely relevent.

Here's a breakdown per city:

Mecca: 16 pop, 9 scientists, 155 beakers
Anasazi: 17 pop, 7 scientists, 96 beakers
Kufah: 15 pop, 8 scientists, 91 beakers
Damascus: 18 pop, 7 scientists, 90 beakers
Ainu: 13 pop, 7 scientists, 79 beakers
Najran: 13 pop, 6 scientists, 67 beakers
Baghdad: 19 pop, 6 merchants, 52 beakers
Hastings: 14 pop, 4 scientists, 51 beakers
Medina: 10 pop, 1 merchant, 27 beakers (production city)
Tokyo: 6 pop, 1 merchant, 6 beakers (newly acquired)

Oh, and if I wanted a little money for upgrades, I could take the science slider down to 0%, producing around 200 gold per turn, but still producing a respectable 504 beakers per turn. If I wanted more gold still, I'd just run a few more merchants.

Also, if you check the save, you'll note I've been first in military power for most of the last 100 turns, I've only recently slipped into second, since Huayna's been aggressively gearing up for war against someone else. (My GNP is a little amusing at -2... more than a bit misleading )

I can only imagine what things will look like in 12-13 turns when I discover biology...

EDIT: One last thought, my science in the early game was also good enough to get to liberalism in 830AD. By the time of the save below, only one other opponent has even reached education.

 

[NaZdReG]

well thanks for putting that up there to compare!! my biggest question though.. what were the specialists before you converted them to science?? I think the only real good way to compare this would be to get 2 games running under similar circumstances.. and have one really good player run a cottage based econ and the other a specialist econ focused on scientist use.

I do have a 170ish save that i'm uploading to compare to yours though. I think for a cultural victory the specialists are probably the way to go.. but take a look at science output, land control due to army size.. and tech level.

I'm no expert but I have to take a bit of pride in this game.. I usually get domination in the mid 1900's this game was over 100 years earlier than usual. I did and still use specialists as food permits (or early game when I needed a GS) but this is a cottage based econ

NaZ

 

[futurehermit]

Could someone tell me what the maximum c/turn is that a fully matured cottage generates (assuming not on a river and not financial) and the number of turns required to grow it from a cottage? What would be really helpful is if someone could say: Cottage-1 c; x turns later it becomes a hamlet-2c; x turns later it becomes a whatever-3c; etc.

Thanks!

 

[Nares]

Well, you could check it easily enough in-game, futurehermit, but I'll list it here as well.

For normal game speed.

Cottage (1c) -> Hamlet (2c) : 10 turns
Hamlet (2c) -> Village (3c) : 20 turns
Village (3c) -> Town (4c) : 40 turns

Printing Press adds a flat +1c per Village and Town, converting them to 4c and 5c respectively. Running the civic Free Speech also adds +2c to Towns (only, IIRC).

+1c for riverside, and +1c for Financial would max a Town at 9c. Then again, riverside tiles are great for watermills, and Financial is getting a reaming in the expansion (I think it's the single most removed leader trait).

 

[NaZdReG]

Nares you got it right. you also get to add 1 hammer with the universal sufferage civic... definately something to factor into the equation.

NaZ