Education too powerful?

[Yaotzin]

onedreamer, just a hint, replying "LOL" to a well explained/justified assertion does not make you look good. Not that it needed much justification, that x commerce is superior to x gold is obvious.

As for the topic, whether city states or apprenticeship or cottages are too powerful or not, it seems almost inarguable that having them all in one tech is too much.

 

[xienwolf]

Historically speaking:

Military Apprenticeship = Squire

IMO.

 

[Arilian]

Don't really need to tell you anything. It is your opinion that a -20% culture penalty is irrilevant. You are surely entitled to think so, in the same way as I have the opposite opinion, that's all.

While your logic is generally OK, you have not explained why you have an opposing opinion.


What is not an opinion, but a fact that I never experienced a cultural clip FROM my empire (in Deity) even when i play City States about 95% of the time. Computers seemd never use the culture slider. The only reason i to use other civic is to go Cultural Victory.

I never felt that -20% is a disadvantage.

 

[Tarquelne]

Military Apprenticeship = Squire

I think that's a good example - it's pretty close.

 

[onedreamer]

While your logic is generally OK, you have not explained why you have an opposing opinion.

The only reason i to use other civic is to go Cultural Victory.

I never felt that -20% is a disadvantage.

Saying that -20% culture isn't a penalty also doesn't explain much. Like you yourself stated, it is a penalty when you aim at cultural victory. I suspect most players on this forum never end a game. They will go on a rampaging conquest game because it's so easy in FFH2, and quit before the end because it simply gets too boring with the overpowering units you can get through FFH's promotion system. Now, for a change and a challenge I do sometime impose myself to win with other victory conditions, all of which (except Altar of Luonnotar) are quite harder or longer or more elaborate, one of them happens to be the Cultural Victory, which would be quite a bit longer than it already is with a -20% culture from the early game. The bottom line is that a penalty that does hinder one of the victory conditions is not irrilevant. Need I say more ? Ok: I also happen to like the civic Military State, and its cultural penalty, summed up with the one from City States, does become a bit more than a nuisance, unless of course you head for the easy rampaging conquest way. In this case though, a lot of other aspects on this game don't really matter, including some that are being discussed as overpowered in this thread.

 

[onedreamer]

onedreamer, just a hint, replying "LOL" to a well explained/justified assertion does not make you look good. Not that it needed much justification, that x commerce is superior to x gold is obvious.

As for the topic, whether city states or apprenticeship or cottages are too powerful or not, it seems almost inarguable that having them all in one tech is too much.

I answer LOL when an assertion doesn't look justified at all. First off, the argument is that having cottages and city states in the same tech is not too much IF these 2 features are not the best features all together. My argument is exactly that City States is more useful later in the game than early.
This being said, saying that 3 commerce is better than 3 raw gold is simply ridiculous, because one of the main goals of this game is to keep the % slider as high as possible toward science. Since you have to pay maintenance costs, you need gold per turn though, but a 100% slider to science, which as I said is one of the main goals of this game, will net you a grand total of zero gold. And the same is true for % gold buildings like money changer. Hence, having the most raw gold as possible is a must to keep your science rate high. Also, this game has a lot of variables, really many, and simple yet absolute statements like 3 commerce are better than 3 gold, as well as vice versa, aren't really any serious. There are always a lot of ifs. This game is not sheer mathematics as many like to simplify, if it was, the AI wouldn't be easily beaten.

 

[Pyr0mancer]

This being said, saying that 3 commerce is better than 3 raw gold is simply ridiculous, because one of the main goals of this game is to keep the % slider as high as possible toward science. Since you have to pay maintenance costs, you need gold per turn though, but a 100% slider to science, which as I said is one of the main goals of this game, will net you a grand total of zero gold. And the same is true for % gold buildings like money changer. Hence, having the most raw gold as possible is a must to keep your science rate high. Also, this game has a lot of variables, really many, and simple yet absolute statements like 3 commerce are better than 3 gold, as well as vice versa, aren't really any serious. There are always a lot of ifs. This game is not sheer mathematics as many like to simplify, if it was, the AI wouldn't be easily beaten.

Generally true, but you're ignoring the case where you're at 100% science already and still have a surplus from shrines, tribute, or other sources. In which case, 3 commerce is better. Basically though it does come down to the fact that there's no way to make absolute statements about things like that. The game technically IS nothing but mathematics, just not simple mathematics and with the addition of pseudo-random number generators

 

[Demus]

This being said, saying that 3 commerce is better than 3 raw gold is simply ridiculous, because one of the main goals of this game is to keep the % slider as high as possible toward science. Since you have to pay maintenance costs, you need gold per turn though, but a 100% slider to science, which as I said is one of the main goals of this game, will net you a grand total of zero gold. And the same is true for % gold buildings like money changer. Hence, having the most raw gold as possible is a must to keep your science rate high. Also, this game has a lot of variables, really many, and simple yet absolute statements like 3 commerce are better than 3 gold, as well as vice versa, aren't really any serious. There are always a lot of ifs. This game is not sheer mathematics as many like to simplify, if it was, the AI wouldn't be easily beaten.

the goal isn't to keep the % slider as high as possible. Saying getting as much breakers/turn as possible is a lot closer to the truth, even though you're still ignoring military might doing so (look at the clan, less breakers, but still tough through warrens).
Tell me, what's better: getting 10 commerce per turn, with 100% science, or 100 commerce per turn, running at 10%? The truth is it'll end up being exactly the same amount of breakers: 10 (ignoring % bonusses for this statement). The reason why he (aswell as myself and a lot of other players) prefer commerce over gold is the versatility: you can turn commerce into gold, aswell as into science or culture. Gold is only that: gold. To sum up: 3 gold is 3 gold. 3 commerce can be 3 gold, 3 science, 3 culture, or any combination

an exeption for this rule is with godking or the bazaar. Running godking, a market in your capitol will generally be preferable over an elder council (assuming you haven't got an academy set up). Same goes for the bazaar of mammon, but by then you should have both markets and cottages

 

[Zechnophobe]

Like you yourself stated, it is a penalty when you aim at cultural victory.

Can't disagree with that! However, the other 99% of the time, when you aren't going for the culture victory...

Now, for a change and a challenge I do sometime impose myself to win with other victory conditions

So, we should then ignore the rest of what you have to say, as it only pertains to a scenario in which you purposefully make the game harder? That's like saying that Archer line units are the best, if you don't let yourself use melee or recon.

... which would be quite a bit longer than it already is with a -20% culture from the early game.

Actually, early game culture gains are almost negligible towards the cultural victory, since they don't turn into larger gains later on.

The bottom line is that a penalty that does hinder one of the victory conditions is not irrilevant.

However it is fairly irrelevant to those that it doesn't hinder, right?

Ok: I also happen to like the civic Military State, and its cultural penalty, summed up with the one from City States, does become a bit more than a nuisance, unless of course you head for the easy rampaging conquest way. In this case though, a lot of other aspects on this game don't really matter, including some that are being discussed as overpowered in this thread.

This is pretty hand waving. First you seem to say that City States' culture penalty is bigger, because it adds with Military State... bringing in a completely new variable in, and combining it. Then you say if Someone is playing Military State, then the culture penalty is bigger, unless you are going for a conquest victory. In Military State, I find it hard to believe you'd adopt the civic for ANY other victory type.

I answer LOL when an assertion doesn't look justified at all. First off, the argument is that having cottages and city states in the same tech is not too much IF these 2 features are not the best features all together.

How exactly does that relate to the argument of Commerce greater than Gold? Seems you are snowballing the issues together here. There is insidious subtext to your LOL that the reasonable world may soon start to dread...

My argument is exactly that City States is more useful later in the game than early.

It definately gets more useful as the game progresses. However it's pretty decent right when you get it at Education. At that point it is a much more difficult argument over which is IMMEDIATELY more useful, God King or City States, but CS definately pulls ahead in the next time or so you build or capture a city. Like I said, the real turning point seems to be around 6 cities controlled, less if they aren't close together.

This being said, saying that 3 commerce is better than 3 raw gold is simply ridiculous, because one of the main goals of this game is to keep the % slider as high as possible toward science.

This, as has been pointed out, is completely false. In fact, I made the assertion in my previous rebuttal that this may be your biggest mistake. The % of science is irrelevant, only the actual amount of beakers you get out of it. Very often expansion will cause your slider to go down, but your beakers to go up. Those who use scholarship can attest that often you have to slide down with it, but still end up making a good deal more beakers from it.

Since you have to pay maintenance costs, you need gold per turn though, but a 100% slider to science, which as I said is one of the main goals of this game, will net you a grand total of zero gold. And the same is true for % gold buildings like money changer. Hence, having the most raw gold as possible is a must to keep your science rate high.

Just making sure that I point that that this is also false, because it is based on your previous assumption that slider % is greater than actual beaker production.

Also, this game has a lot of variables, really many, and simple yet absolute statements like 3 commerce are better than 3 gold, as well as vice versa, aren't really any serious. There are always a lot of ifs. This game is not sheer mathematics as many like to simplify, if it was, the AI wouldn't be easily beaten.

The real difference here, is that you seem to blush at trying to figure out how all these variables well and truly work together, whereas others are here doing significant work and thought to make sense of it.

Consider:

3 Commerce can turn into 3 Gold.
3 Gold cannot turn into 3 Commerce.

This is fundamental. ANY situation in which you produce commerce, you have the option of turning it into an equal amount of gold. At least, you do so over the average of all such situations.

 

[Zechnophobe]

What? No way. Calabim benefit from outrageous food production... Aristocracy means you make less food. Therefore, it's the worst thing for Calabim.

In case this wasn't pointed out, the main reason this is a decent strategy, is because aristocracy lets you build a *lot* of farms without completely gimping your economy. With Flauros, you get 3 GNP from a square that doesn't have a river, which is pretty decent.

Basically, don't think of this as a normal build pattern where you have a few farms, and lots of cottages. Think instead of a city with almost all farms.

The counter argument though, that I put up, is that, anecdotally, I don't seem to need more than a few cities with high population. Generally only after a fair bit of the game has passed, so I can clear land, and make one or two all farm cities, without them being a degraded version of the early cottage centric commerce capitals of my empire.

That's a pretty big discussion though, so I don't expect any real resolution to it.

 

[Mailbox]

Consider:

3 Commerce can turn into 3 Gold.
3 Gold cannot turn into 3 Commerce.

This is fundamental. ANY situation in which you produce commerce, you have the option of turning it into an equal amount of gold. At least, you do so over the average of all such situations.

Except those three gold are independent of terrain status and the plots the city is working. The only price you pay for the market is the hammers to produce it, and then you get the + 3 gold for the rest of the game.

 

[westamastaflash]

Generally true, but you're ignoring the case where you're at 100% science already and still have a surplus from shrines, tribute, or other sources. In which case, 3 commerce is better. Basically though it does come down to the fact that there's no way to make absolute statements about things like that. The game technically IS nothing but mathematics, just not simple mathematics and with the addition of pseudo-random number generators

I wonder if Fall From Heaven is Solvable?

 

[daladinn]

this conversation has devolved into some semi interesting theory.

let me come at this from a different angle

typically speaking commerce is going to be greater then either gold or beakers due to its flexibility. this does however break down at certain points.

1st - when your running at maximum allowed for a given type. example being at 100% research. the only way at this point to increase your beaker production would be to build buildings and such that give raw beakers or by opening more trade routes

2nd - the opposite when you start depriving aspects of your economy (aka running 0% research). this is most commonly done when your looking at an economic military.

On an overall economic scheme you have to look at sooo many different things and need to really understand how the economy is calculated.

1st - you have to look at commerce. this comes from 2 sources visible on the city screen. the plot values (enhanced by cottages and such) and the trade routes. the sum of these result into your total commerce which is then adjustable via the slider.

2nd - you have the raw values in gold, beakers , and culture that are added via buildings , specialists , and great people.

3rd - you have your percentile modifiers that are added together from buildings and civics and such.

taking all this into consideration you need to understand your goals. are you trying to win the game via a tech war? trying to outproduce your enemy? or what?

sadly the value of culture has been greatly diminished in the most recent versions and patches of FFH. there have been times through out this games history where culture was king in trying to get through certain wars

all that being said i would like to add a fee points....

1st - the only reason to take aristocracy is for the horsemen that come with it. in every case your better off mixing cottages in with farms instead of using the hybrid format that aristocracy brings. this has changed over the versions as the agriculture civic has been altered and modified. my personal opinion is to add an addition coin to the bonus that it gives to farms.

2nd - the trait that gives +2 culture to every city got a very significant nerf with the changes to the defensive bonus granted to cities. this ability is now really only useful in a cities initial stages as the growth benefits have been cut in half. i would recommend allowing cities to get a greater defensive bonus based on culture with this trait.

 

[Sureshot]

i noticed some people said its good to have a high tech slider %, and also that commerce is always better than gold because of flexibility (this would also suggest that commerce is better than science)

there are situations where this is not true, the biggest situation being after youve gotten mathematics and can make gambling houses. then the lower the tech slider % the better, and because of that, raw science is nice because it allows research even with 0% science slider, making the very versatility of commerce bad (since its versatility is tied to a variable that is better lower)

id say its hard to compare commerce vs. gold or commerce vs. science in the same way its hard to compare gold vs. production, its really setting and situation dependent

 

[DuckAndCower]

Am I completely wrong in thinking that the Tech Slider % means absolutely nothing? What you should really be looking at is the number of produced... it doesn't matter that you have the slider at 100% if it doesn't have much to modify in the first place.

Building a bunch of markets might prevent the slider from bumping down to 90%, but, if you can keep your slider at 100% anyway, having a market is actually bad for science production.

 

[daladinn]

Building a bunch of markets might prevent the slider from bumping down to 90%, but, if you can keep your slider at 100% anyway, having a market is actually bad for science production.

100% correct

 

[Arilian]

100% correct

Not really. You can buy Science building from the surlpus gold, therefore increasing the science.

100% science have one disadvantage btw:
You will have 0 happy faces from culture/commerce.

 

[hbar]

Re: Apprenticeship

Was the apprenticeship system ever applied to military training historically? So far as the civic goes it seems like a misnomer to me - or just misplaced. The game effect is more like that of a military college, or something like the Spartan "Agoge" training.

I'd expect some sort of commerce or production bonus from "Apprenticeship" helping the civ's craftsmen institutionalize training.

Anyway... perhaps a general production bonus - to reflect the non-military aspects of "Apprenticeship"? I like the idea of a larger military production penalty. IMO -10% is insignificant given the reward - I'd rather run it for military purposes than Military State.

I just googled "history of military apprenticeship" and while I didn't get any singularly good sources, but it looks like military apprenticeship has had a long history, particularly in England and France. Even today, the American ROTC is a form of military apprenticeship.

I think the real question is, why are cottages available at Education? I think they should be available to everyone from the beginning, but Education should give cottages/hamlets/etc. +1 commerce (meaning cottages would have no initial benefit, but would make money after they grew). After all, you don't have to have a school to have a village, but smarter workers will make better goods. That would also give early workers something to do, nerf Edu. just a bit, and make it less (hmm, required = flamebait, so...) attractive in the early game.

 

[Zechnophobe]

Except those three gold are independent of terrain status and the plots the city is working. The only price you pay for the market is the hammers to produce it, and then you get the + 3 gold for the rest of the game.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. If the Market produced +3 Commerce instead of +3 Gold, it would be better.

 

[Mailbox]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. If the Market produced +3 Commerce instead of +3 Gold, it would be better.

No, it wouldn't. The entire point of the market is to offer gold independent of the research slider. You're all discussing the "tech slider being independent of science produced" but if you're running at 60% and a market lets you go to 70% then you're going to make more science. While shrines and merchants let you gain gold independent of the slider, markets are easy to get and don't require a touch of luck. Running the slider at 100% is always optimal and having gold in surplus is never a bad thing. A market doesn't provide commerce because then it would not provide gold at high science sliders, and thus it would not be able to help keep the slider high.