Feedback: Corporations

[atirtanadi]

So thanks for the positive feedback on my idea of public companies v. private ones. Just to respond to Lindsay40k - the benefit of having foreign private corporations in your civ is the higher productivity/food bonus' than you could receive if you nationalized a public company. The downside is that having a foreign corporation produces income which goes into the home civ's treasury - and you may not want to do that if they are your enemy. The private companies would also produce greater unhappiness and unhealthiness vs. the public ones.

Although - maybe you shouldn't be able to nationalize foreign corporations existing in your civ, just be able to nationalize your civ's own corporations. You can switch to bureaucracy to kick out all foreign corporations. Also, if you would nationalize your civ's corporation, any presence it had in other civ's would automatically disappear.

Basically private corporations give you less control, more unhappiness/unhealthiness, but much more productivity/food - and since they can spread to other civs, potentially more income. I don't think they should be "better" than public corps in HR though: because with public corps, you could do something like found all your corporations in the city you have with a stock exchange or aggressively spreading a corporation bonus' to all your cities. If you lack lots of happiness or healthiness resources, private corporations might also be more trouble than they are worth, because they might hurt your cities growth. Those are just a few of the gameplay choices that come to mind...

thanks!

 

[Xyth]

Status report on the Corporation Overhaul


I've made some minor tweaks to my proposed corporations. Flax moves from Bombay Dyeing to General Mills (which drops Potatoes) and is replaced by Furs, meaning Bombay Dyeing will compete with Hudson Bay. East India Company drops Tobacco (probably for the best given it's health penalty) and gains Gems, meaning it will compete with De Beers. The overall effect of this is that you can no longer have more than 2 commerce corporations in any city, and most cities can never have more than any type. There are only 2 combinations of 5 corporations possible (out of hundreds) and 6 or more in a single city is impossible.

Not all corporate HQs will give gold per city. Some will give research per city or culture per city instead (as listed in my earlier post, but with the food corporations also giving one of these commerces). The actual corporation branches will only give food, production, or commerce to the city they're in, based on number of resources available. I won't change HQs from world wonders to national wonders, but I might add 'Franchise HQs'; national wonders that grant a similar but smaller benefit (and possibly only available under certain civics).

I am most probably going to remove corporate maintenance. It's convoluted, unrealistic, and the AI doesn't manage it very well. I was hoping to adapt and tweak it into a subsidy/taxation system but the calculation is locked away in the DLL and I can't alter it to the level I hoped. Better it goes altogether. Instead I want all corporations to cause unhappiness (poor labour conditions) and unhealthiness (environmental disregard). These would be mitigated by the Social Welfare and Environmentalism civics, respectively.

The other civics that would definitely relate to corporations are Bureaucracy (which I might rename Protectionism), Free Market, and Industrialism. With the probable removal of maintenance I haven't yet determined what effects they will have. Protectionism will relate to public corporations and Free Market will relate to private corporations.

I don't know whether I'll make use of the 'No Corporations' or 'No Foreign Corporations' civic options yet. The latter makes thematic sense remaining at Protectionism (Bureaucracy) but it will depend how the other mechanics work out. There's no clear candidate for 'No Corporations' and I'm not sure there needs to be with the advent of public corporations.

I think I'll retain the founding of corporations by great people. It's a good mechanic and reasonably balanced so long as the corporation system itself is reasonably balanced. Whether a corporation starts out public or private will depend on the Economic civic you're running at the time of founding.

I'm imagining that public companies will act much like corporations do currently; you build executives and spread them manually with a cost in both production (building the executive) and wealth (spread cost). With private companies you give up control (can't build executives) and allow corporations to spread as they wish, but at no cost to you. That will be the key, and probably only, inherent difference between them. Any other differences would be done via civics (Protectionism and Free Market).

The biggest technical challenge at this point is how to implement the switch between public and private. It could be done with civics; via the existing ones or even by a new category. The former creates significant AI issues, the latter avoids many of them but feels excessive and disconnected. Both cases would need to be binary: all of a civ's corporations are privatized or nationalized with the same 'switch', and there would be no effect on foreign based corporations.

However, what I would really like to do is allow corporations to be privatized or nationalized via individual switches in the corporation advisor screen. With a system like this I might even be able to add franchising and 'takeovers'. This will take a lot of research, hard work, testing, and swearing, but I think it might be possible. If I do decide to attempt this, the privatization aspect of the scheme will need to wait till 1.19.

Let me know what you think of all this so far.

Still, its not inconceivable that you could receive a demand letter from one of these corporations. If that happened, you would have to rewrite your mod or hire a lawyer, which you may not want to do. To be safe it would probably be best just to use generic logos and to mix up the names (i.e. MacDougalds instead of McDonalds).

Not inconceivable, just unlikely. There are several other mods out there using real world corporation names and logos and they've yet to be challenged. I'm going with a mix of actual, derived, and invented logos for now and I'll quietly change that if I see one of the higher profile mods get sued

 

[Simon_Jester]

Hm, Xyth, a question.

What civic combination would you use to model the Soviet Union?

 

[Xyth]

Hm, Xyth, a question.

What civic combination would you use to model the Soviet Union?

Depends on who was in charge, but under Stalin I'd say Despotism, Authoritarianism, Industrialism, Redistribution or Protectionism, Standing Army, Rationalism. I'm no expert on the USSR though, or communism.

 

[lindsay40k]

Just to respond to Lindsay40k - the benefit of having foreign private corporations in your civ is the higher productivity/food bonus' than you could receive if you nationalized a public company. The downside is that having a foreign corporation produces income which goes into the home civ's treasury - and you may not want to do that if they are your enemy. The private companies would also produce greater unhappiness and unhealthiness vs. the public ones... Basically private corporations give you less control, more unhappiness/unhealthiness, but much more productivity/food - and since they can spread to other civs, potentially more income. I don't think they should be "better" than public corps in HR though

I like it, it has appeal to both left and right. Keep them both 'good in certain circumstances that are not unlikely'.

Although - maybe you shouldn't be able to nationalize foreign corporations existing in your civ, just be able to nationalize your civ's own corporations. You can switch to bureaucracy to kick out all foreign corporations.

I think both have merit.

A Free Marketeer will be happy to have investment from Transnational Corporations.

A Protectionist will want to kick out foreign corporations and nurture domestic business. (Perhaps Bureaucracy could hasten the spread of domestic corps?)

A Communist will want to take the assets of TNCs into public ownership. Which will, of course, incur a hefty relations penalty with the Civ where the corp is based... perhaps if that Civ is running Free Market, also give them a 'Would you like to consider this violation of private property an act of war against your people?' prompt.

Hmm. In the present day, there's controversy about less developed countries being forced by the IMF and World Bank to privatise utilities such as water and energy and those assets being snapped up by Western TNC's. I wonder if the public/private corp and tribute systems might support a vague approximation of this?

I'm no expert on the USSR though, or communism.

As it happens, I'm pretty well read on the history of communism, and would be happy to fill in any gaps that may help mod development. In fact, I'll digress a little here with another case study.

In the Russia of 1917, there was very little domestic-owned industry; most of the production was foreign-owned. Orthodox Marxists held that socialist demands have to wait until after business activity creates a nouveau riche who do a Cromwell/Washington and take power from the feudal lords and create a Parliamentary government. Lenin and Trotsky's position was that there wasn't a big enough domestic bourgeoisie to do this, and the foreign capitalists actually liked the authoritarian Tsar keeping the workers under the thumb; they advocated a Marxist vanguard party leading the revolution to overthrow the aristocracy and then the state industrialising the economy in a 'Permanent Revolution'. Hence the split between Bolsheviks who wanted to go ahead with a revolution there and then, and more dogmatic Marxists who wanted to encourage the capitalists to get on board with John Locke's brand of Liberalism.

Not opening up a debate on the October Revolution, just setting out the ideologies involved and illustrating how the nationalisation of foreign corporate assets was a big factor in a very significant historical event that IMO warrants representation in HR.

Also, if you would nationalize your civ's corporation, any presence it had in other civ's would automatically disappear.

Fair enough, a good commie doesn't want to exploit foreign workers

I've made some minor tweaks to my proposed corporations. (snip)

And very good they are.

Not all corporate HQs will give gold per city. Some will give research per city or culture per city instead (as listed in my earlier post, but with the food corporations also giving one of these commerces).

Again, excellent. I look forward to getting a tech firm set up next door to Oxford University!

I won't change HQs from world wonders to national wonders, but I might add 'Franchise HQs'; national wonders that grant a similar but smaller benefit (and possibly only available under certain civics).

Interesting.

Perhaps for public sector corps, they could be Ministries? Or to be less UK-centric, Departments?

The other civics that would definitely relate to corporations are Bureaucracy (which I might rename Protectionism), Free Market, and Industrialism. With the probable removal of maintenance I haven't yet determined what effects they will have. Protectionism will relate to public corporations and Free Market will relate to private corporations.

One thing that comes to mind... I like the idea of Free Market making general corporate spread more rapid. It elegantly represents lobbying in a fashion as simple and user-friendly as the way city health simplified pollution and sanitation. Now, Mercantilism brought with it a fairly minor benefit that was in most situations completely outweighed by the 'no foreign trade routes' penalty. But historically, Protectionism doesn't really relate to public corporations, it relates to domestic private corporations. So perhaps it should give their spread a major boost, whilst stopping or heavily choking foreign corporate spread?

Industrialism making all corporate branches public sector would be interesting. It could represent both full-on socialist government, and also a war economy in which shareholders are told that their profits are a secondary concern to national security.

I think I'll retain the founding of corporations by great people. It's a good mechanic and reasonably balanced so long as the corporation system itself is reasonably balanced. Whether a corporation starts out public or private will depend on the Economic civic you're running at the time of founding.

Agreed, I like the mechanic. Whether it be Kiichiro Toyoda founding Toyota, or Tony Benn founding the Meriden Workers Co-Operative!

I'm imagining that public companies will act much like corporations do currently; you build executives

Or perhaps, Civil Servants?

The biggest technical challenge at this point is how to implement the switch between public and private. It could be done with civics; via the existing ones or even by a new category.

I can't help but feel this is pulling things back to having a Communism/Marxism tech and a State Property civic...

However, what I would really like to do is allow corporations to be privatized or nationalized via individual switches in the corporation advisor screen.

This would certainly add depth and get away from an extreme black-and-white system, which is good. Especially if, say, a corporation is giving you benefit but is closing branches, and you want to keep its facilities running.

If I do decide to attempt this, the privatization aspect of the scheme will need to wait till 1.19.

I think it would probably be a good thing to playtest the balance of the new corporations first, and then roll out the more extreme changes to the system later. So this wouldn't be a problem IMO.

There are several other mods out there using real world corporation names and logos and they've yet to be challenged.

Heck, if Nintendo don't care about Advance Wars By Web, I reckon the modding community must be pretty low on the radar of corporate lawyers

 

[Nightstar]

Let me know what you think of all this so far.

So far I really like what I see. I'm looking forward to playing around with it in 1.18.

 

[Azoth]

First impressions of the proposed corporate mechanics:

• I like your selection of corporations. I think you should use their real logos wherever possible. I'm not fond of the generic logos in BtS; much like generic names, I feel they break player immersion. (And I certainly wouldn't worry about finding sternly worded letters in the mail.)
• I feel the food corporations are a bit bland. Food corporations are only as strong as their yield-to-resource ratios; so long as you keep these below 0.5 per resource (on Standard maps), I think you can afford a second flavour bonus. Apart from beakers, gold, and culture, what can you code: bonus espionage? city defense? trade routes?
• I'm not quite sold on the commerce corporations. You have to sacrifice a lot of commerce to found and spread corporations. (Great Scientists can often deliver 2000 instantly and Great Merchants can easily top 2000 in trade missions.) Granted, you also have to spend hammers to train Executives; but it's often useful to spend hammers now for more hammers later, say when building spaceship parts. And, yet, it's rarely worthwhile to spend commerce now for more commerce later. I guess what I'm saying is: apart from culture corporations for Culture Victories, I'm not sure commerce corporations will break even soon enough to be useful. There's a fine line between "always a good idea" and "barely worthwhile."
• I am strongly in favour of eliminating corporate maintenance. It IS clunky. I think the per city bonus from corporate headquarters probably needs to be toned down to match. Otherwise, all Corporations will always run at a profit, which might not be ideal. (I do like the idea that the per city bonus will not always be gold.)
• I'm intrigued by the health and happiness penalties for corporations, and the public/private dichotomy. It will add a lot of depth to the system. I will say that I much prefer the name 'Bureaucracy' to 'Protectionism.' Bureaucracy implies regulation limiting corporate growth; Protectionism implies regulation limiting foreign trade. Since you are focused on the former, I would keep the name as is.
• Finally, I approve of Franchise Headquarters as National Wonders. It should allow empires that weren't the first to discover a certain technology, or weren't lucky enough to produce a certain Great Person, to share in the benefits of corporations.

 

[Howard Mahler]

Might it be simpler, at least initially, to just have some of your many corporations be private and some be public, set in advance by you.

Once you see how this all works, you can get more complicated in future versions.
(Random, or by civic, or by player choice, etc.)

Just a thought.

 

[Xyth]

I like your selection of corporations. I think you should use their real logos wherever possible. I'm not fond of the generic logos in BtS; much like generic names, I feel they break player immersion. (And I certainly wouldn't worry about finding sternly worded letters in the mail.)

Real Logo: Bombay Dyeing, McDonalds, Toyota
Derived Logo: General Mills, Hudson Bay, Nestlé
Invented Logo: Aramco, Barilla, BASF, Rio Tinto
Firaxis Logo: De Beers, Taiyo, Vinci

That's how it ended up. 'Derived Logo' means I haven't used their best known logo but have instead created a new logo using other aspects of a corporation's branding. I may adapt or create new logos in the future for the last three corporations in that list, but the Firaxis logos work well enough for now.

I feel the food corporations are a bit bland. Food corporations are only as strong as their yield-to-resource ratios; so long as you keep these below 0.5 per resource (on Standard maps), I think you can afford a second flavour bonus.

Food corporations are getting additional commerces after all. They way I've decided to do it is that corporations only provide food, production, or commerce in the cities they're in. The Wealth, Research, or Culture bonus is headquarters only. Also (at least in 1.18) all corporations will grant the same yield per resource in cities, none are better or worse than the others. The Headquarters bonus per city does vary though, and this variance is based on how common the corporation's resources are.

So, to give an example, Barilla has the rarest resources of all the food corporations, while Taiyo has the most common (even without Fish). They'll both give the same food per resource, but Barilla's HQ will provide a more to it's city than Taiyo's HQ will. I feel this creates an interesting dynamic, not only when choosing corporations to found, but also when deciding which foreign corporations to encourage in your borders and which to encourage in theirs.

Having identical corporate branch yields also makes it MUCH easier to scale the system sensibly with map size.

Apart from beakers, gold, and culture, what can you code: bonus espionage? city defense? trade routes?

The mechanics support espionage, and I'm thinking of using that for some non-corporate organizations in the future. Corporations can also provide a resource a la Standard Ethanol, and can apparently provide a free unit, though I've not tested that to see how it works. Anything else needs to be custom coded and thus runs into potential AI difficulties.

I'm not quite sold on the commerce corporations. You have to sacrifice a lot of commerce to found and spread corporations. (Great Scientists can often deliver 2000 instantly and Great Merchants can easily top 2000 in trade missions.) Granted, you also have to spend hammers to train Executives; but it's often useful to spend hammers now for more hammers later, say when building spaceship parts. And, yet, it's rarely worthwhile to spend commerce now for more commerce later. I guess what I'm saying is: apart from culture corporations for Culture Victories, I'm not sure commerce corporations will break even soon enough to be useful. There's a fine line between "always a good idea" and "barely worthwhile."

The commerce corporations will give more wealth and culture to their headquarters than most of the other corporation types will (Barilla and Nestlé being the exceptions due to their resources being rarer, though this may change once I adjust the numbers for the improvement changes we're making).

I am strongly in favour of eliminating corporate maintenance. It IS clunky. I think the per city bonus from corporate headquarters probably needs to be toned down to match. Otherwise, all Corporations will always run at a profit, which might not be ideal. (I do like the idea that the per city bonus will not always be gold.)

As mentioned, rather than reducing HQ income, I'm having the corporate branches provide only yield and not specific commerces.

I'm intrigued by the health and happiness penalties for corporations, and the public/private dichotomy. It will add a lot of depth to the system.

Note that health and happiness penalties are coming in 1.18 but the public/private mechanics won't be. They're going to take a ton of work to implement.

I will say that I much prefer the name 'Bureaucracy' to 'Protectionism.' Bureaucracy implies regulation limiting corporate growth; Protectionism implies regulation limiting foreign trade. Since you are focused on the former, I would keep the name as is.

That's a useful way to look at it.

Finally, I approve of Franchise Headquarters as National Wonders. It should allow empires that weren't the first to discover a certain technology, or weren't lucky enough to produce a certain Great Person, to share in the benefits of corporations.

I'm not sure they'll be needed with 14 corporations in play, but we'll see. They wouldn't be too hard to add but I'd prefer to try the system without them in 1.18 first.

 

[Xyth]

Might it be simpler, at least initially, to just have some of your many corporations be private and some be public, set in advance by you.

Once you see how this all works, you can get more complicated in future versions.
(Random, or by civic, or by player choice, etc.)

Just a thought.

Once the public/private mechanics are in, whether a corporation begins public or private will depend on the economic civic you're running. That's easy to implement, the challenging aspect is coding the means to change that state later.

 

[Xyth]

Since corporate maintenance is being removed, the Free Market civic needs a new, corporation-related bonus. There are two candidates:

1. 50% faster production of Corporate Executives
2. Corporation spread costs are refunded

If the public/private mechanic is implemented (after 1.18) then this civic may be redesigned further, but in the meantime, which of the above options seems most useful?

 

[Keinpferd]

Which of the above options seems most useful?

50 percent faster production would reduce the time to build an Executive from about three turns to maybe one turn on Normal speed in your most productive cities, as far as I remember from my game.

How about letting Free Market grant a (Python created) free Executive once in a while as the reward of encouraging self-initiative and free enterprise?

 

[Azoth]

Food corporations are getting additional commerces after all. They way I've decided to do it is that corporations only provide food, production, or commerce in the cities they're in. The Wealth, Research, or Culture bonus is headquarters only. Also (at least in 1.18) all corporations will grant the same yield per resource in cities, none are better or worse than the others. The Headquarters bonus per city does vary though, and this variance is based on how common the corporation's resources are.

So, to give an example, Barilla has the rarest resources of all the food corporations, while Taiyo has the most common (even without Fish). They'll both give the same food per resource, but Barilla's HQ will provide a more to it's city than Taiyo's HQ will. I feel this creates an interesting dynamic, not only when choosing corporations to found, but also when deciding which foreign corporations to encourage in your borders and which to encourage in theirs.

Hmm. I'm not sure I like this model. Attaching the Wealth, Research, and Culture bonus to the Headquarters instead of the corporation merely concentrates the bonus in a single city. This greatly simplifies corporate strategy: Wealth corporations should be paired with the Stock Exchange, Research corporations should be paired with the Academy, and Culture corporations should not be founded at all, unless pursuing a Culture Victory. Culture is the real outlier here. In most cases, corporate culture is only useful for extending the borders of outlying cities; a little extra culture in a mature city is useless. However, every scrap of corporate culture is useful for a Cultural Victory; and if a corporation spreads far enough, a single Headquarters might produce more culture than all the theatres and taverns and monasteries of earlier ages. This leaves Culture corporations in an odd place: as either a ticket to success, or not worth thinking about, depending on the game.

I still prefer attaching the Wealth, Research, and Culture bonus directly to corporations and replacing the per city Headquarters bonus with various unique and percentage modifiers. For example, assuming Barilla and Taiyo are slated to be food/culture corporations, I might suggest the following:

Barilla
Mediterranean Food, based in Italy
• Requires: Sociology, Great Artist
• Consumes: Wheat, Rice, Olives, Spice, Wine
• Provides: 0.30 and 0.40 per resource
• Competitors: General Mills, McDonalds, Nestlé, Taiyo

Headquarters
• +50% trade route yield, +1 (Great Artist)
• +5% with Wheat
• +5% with Rice
• +20% with Olives
• +10% with Spices
• +30% with Wine


Taiyo
Seafood, based in Japan
• Requires: Labour Unions, Great Merchant
• Consumes: Shellfish, Crab, Whale, Rice, Salt
• Provides: 0.40 and 0.20 per resource
• Competitors: Barilla, General Mills, McDonalds, Hudson Bay

Headquarters
• +2, +1 (Great Merchant)
• +10% with Shellfish
• +10% with Crab
• +10% with Whale
• +5% with Rice
• +10% with Salt​

This way, players receive the Wealth, Research, and Culture bonus in each city instead of at the headquarters; and Not all of it can be magnified by a Stock Exchange or some such. At the same time, players are encouraged to collect at least one copy of each resource to power their Headquarter multipliers. The unique Headquarter bonuses and mismatched yields add flavour, but these can be standardized for balance. The only thing missing is an incentive to spread the corporation to foreign cities; only a per city bonus can offer that.

Since corporate maintenance is being removed, the Free Market civic needs a new, corporation-related bonus. There are two candidates:

1. 50% faster production of Corporate Executives
2. Corporation spread costs are refunded

If the public/private mechanic is implemented (after 1.18) then this civic may be redesigned further, but in the meantime, which of the above options seems most useful?

"Corporation spread costs are refunded" seems more useful - but it might be too strong in the case of corporate takeovers. (Corporation spread costs are higher in cities with competing corporations.) In fact, I might suggest it as a leader trait. Consider:

Financial
• +1 per city
• double production speed of Market, Bank
• corporation spread costs are refunded
Removed: 1% compound interest earned on

Enterprising
• allows 1 merchant in every city
• +1 trade route per city
• roadway construction costs are refunded
Removed: free promotion (Sentry) for Recon, Naval​

Either way, I would stick with "50% faster production of Executives" for Free Market. Alternatively, you could add a building requirement to Executives, say a Bank. Free Market would then read "can build Executives without Banks," much like Organized Religion with Missionaries.

(That's probably more ideas than you were expecting. )

 

[Simon_Jester]

For some reason, I find "Free Market is to the economy as Organized Religion is to religion" a very appealing idea.

 

[Xyth]

Hmm. I'm not sure I like this model. Attaching the Wealth, Research, and Culture bonus to the Headquarters instead of the corporation merely concentrates the bonus in a single city. This greatly simplifies corporate strategy: Wealth corporations should be paired with the Stock Exchange, Research corporations should be paired with the Academy,

It's the same in BTS, only with the addition of different commerces, so its not simplification at all. Placing your headquarters is not meant to be the strategic part of the system, spreading corporations is.

and Culture corporations should not be founded at all, unless pursuing a Culture Victory. Culture is the real outlier here. In most cases, corporate culture is only useful for extending the borders of outlying cities; a little extra culture in a mature city is useless. However, every scrap of corporate culture is useful for a Cultural Victory; and if a corporation spreads far enough, a single Headquarters might produce more culture than all the theatres and taverns and monasteries of earlier ages. This leaves Culture corporations in an odd place: as either a ticket to success, or not worth thinking about, depending on the game.

There are only 4 Culture corporations (Barilla, Vinci, Bombay Dyeing, De Beers) out of 14, so I don't consider this much of an issue. A player will try and found/spread the ones that suits their strategy best. If a player is pushing for a cultural victory then their opponents can try and slow down the spread of that player's commerce corporation by spreading a competing corporation in its place.

This way, players receive the Wealth, Research, and Culture bonus in each city instead of at the headquarters; and Not all of it can be magnified by a Stock Exchange or some such.

Well, the individual cities can get wealth/research/culture bonuses - via the commerce corporations. Indirect yes, but flexible and you can have two of them in a city as well as a food and production corporation.

My main reason for excluding wealth/research/culture from the city bonus is that it is considerably harder to balance the 'per bonus' mechanic than it is the 'per city' mechanic, especially when it comes to mapsize scaling. I'm not adverse to adding wealth/research/culture to cities later but lets get everything else balanced first. I do not want to remove the 'per city' mechanic though, see below.

At the same time, players are encouraged to collect at least one copy of each resource to power their Headquarter multipliers. The unique Headquarter bonuses and mismatched yields add flavour, but these can be standardized for balance.

Resources can only grant food, production or commerce modifiers to a building; they cannot be made to grant wealth, research, culture or espionage. The incentive to have at least one of each resource already exists via regular buildings.

The only thing missing is an incentive to spread the corporation to foreign cities; only a per city bonus can offer that.

Without incentive to spread corporations to foreign cities, corporate strategy is reduced to "found corporations you like, spread them to your cities, done." There's little competition, little multinationalism, and this completely defeats the point of the system in my opinion. The 'commerce per city' mechanic is easily fine tuneable and scales perfectly with mapsize, I see no reason not to use it. As mentioned earlier, headquarter placement isn't meant to be all that strategic and even with your proposed changes it still doesn't vary much from 'put it in the city with the highest modifiers'.

Competition needs to be an essential part of the system - you want to spread your corporations but you also have to think about blocking your opponents corporations as well. Sometimes that might mean letting one rival's corporation spread in order to curb the influence of another's.

"Corporation spread costs are refunded" seems more useful - but it might be too strong in the case of corporate takeovers. (Corporation spread costs are higher in cities with competing corporations.) In fact, I might suggest it as a leader trait. Consider:

Financial
• +1 per city
• double production speed of Market, Bank
• corporation spread costs are refunded
Removed: 1% compound interest earned on

I wouldn't be sad to see Financial's interest bonus disappear. I know some people love it but it has been a pain to balance. Corporate spread costs being refunded is an appropriately powerful replacement but I worry that it's no use for much of the game and then too strong when it does kick in - at a time when many other traits no longer provide as many benefits (unlocked civics, etc).

Enterprising
• allows 1 merchant in every city
• +1 trade route per city
• roadway construction costs are refunded
Removed: free promotion (Sentry) for Recon, Naval

Not sure on this one.

Either way, I would stick with "50% faster production of Executives" for Free Market.

That's what I'm using at the moment. Free Market has also gained unlimited merchant specialists (formerly at Professionalism) so it's better that the bonus is a smaller one (more so since it's effectively invisible to the AI).

Alternatively, you could add a building requirement to Executives, say a Bank. Free Market would then read "can build Executives without Banks," much like Organized Religion with Missionaries.

Hmm. What if the building requirement was the actual corporate headquarters?

 

[Azoth]

Well, the individual cities can get wealth/research/culture bonuses - via the commerce corporations. Indirect yes, but flexible and you can have two of them in a city as well as a food and production corporation.

Having thought about it some more, I agree this system will work fine. I have to keep reminding myself that with 14 corporations available, most players will be using three or four per city instead of just one or two, like in BtS.

There are only 4 Culture corporations (Barilla, Vinci, Bombay Dyeing, De Beers) out of 14, so I don't consider this much of an issue. A player will try and found/spread the ones that suits their strategy best. If a player is pushing for a cultural victory then their opponents can try and slow down the spread of that player's commerce corporation by spreading a competing corporation in its place.

Ah, but I'm still not convinced that per city culture bonuses for corporate headquarters are good idea. They're only useful for Culture Victories, and I can't see players sacrificing a Great Person simply to deny a corporate headquarters to the AI. What if culture corporations were the exception to the rule? They could provide culture per resource, which would be useful for both Culture Victories and for cultural battles in border cities. In exchange, the corporate headquarters would provide only a flat +50%, equivalent to a Great Temple or Hit resource Wonder.

Without incentive to spread corporations to foreign cities, corporate strategy is reduced to "found corporations you like, spread them to your cities, done." There's little competition, little multinationalism, and this completely defeats the point of the system in my opinion. The 'commerce per city' mechanic is easily fine tuneable and scales perfectly with mapsize, I see no reason not to use it. As mentioned earlier, headquarter placement isn't meant to be all that strategic and even with your proposed changes it still doesn't vary much from 'put it in the city with the highest modifiers'.

Competition needs to be an essential part of the system - you want to spread your corporations but you also have to think about blocking your opponents corporations as well. Sometimes that might mean letting one rival's corporation spread in order to curb the influence of another's.

The problem with spreading corporations to foreign cities is that it creates more competition for corporate resources. If you spread Barilla to your neighbours, they will no longer trade you their excess Olives and Wine; in fact, they will compete for the excess Olives and Wine of other empires. This is a problem common to BtS, and the per city Headquarters bonuses cannot compensate for the lost resources. That's why I feel corporate strategy is reduced to "found corporations you like, spread them to your cities, done" anyway.

I wouldn't be sad to see Financial's interest bonus disappear. I know some people love it but it has been a pain to balance. Corporate spread costs being refunded is an appropriately powerful replacement but I worry that it's no use for much of the game and then too strong when it does kick in - at a time when many other traits no longer provide as many benefits (unlocked civics, etc).

Some traits are stronger in the early game and some traits are stronger in the late game. Expansive is best early, when city sizes are small and most of the world is unclaimed. Humane is best late, when Golden Ages are frequent and pollution levels are high. That said, all traits should provide some benefit throughout the game. Financial fits the bill: a small commerce boost early, a mid game production boost on buildings, and a strong corporate bonus in the late game. I would make the change. (In fact, I might even bump the bonus to +2 per city.)

Not sure on this one.

The reason I like "roadway costs are refunded" as a leader trait is because it fundamentally changes game play. Those lucky leaders can build roads wherever they wish: on every tile if they can spare the Workers! That's much more interesting than an incremental bonus such as +10%. Other "radical" leader traits include Spiritual (customize your civics every 5 turns!) and Protective (only the cities, not the countryside, are vulnerable to attack!)

But maybe Enterprising is wrong leader trait? How about this?

Enterprising
• Allows 1 Merchant in every city
• +1 trade route in every city
• Sentry promotion for Helicopter, Mounted, Naval units

Industrious
• +1 production per city
• Workers build improvements 50% faster
• Double production speed of Forge

Judicial
• All Government civics available
• -50% civic upkeep
• +1 happiness from Jail, Courthouse
Removed: +100% defense against espionage and spies

Organized
• +50% faster production of Worker, Workboat
• roadway costs are refunded
• Double production speed of Library​

The rationale for the reshuffled bonuses: Organized Workers can be trained quickly (+50% faster production) while Industrious workers are more efficient in the field (build improvements +50% faster). Organized leaders also invest in national infrastructure (roadway costs are refunded). Judicial leaders deliver more stable societies (-50% civic upkeep). All Scouts start with the Sentry promotion, to better compete with Warriors with +50% vs. Animals. Thus, Enterprising leaders provide Sentry promotions to more exotic units. "100% defense against espionage" is cut because its effects cannot be directly observed. (That's no fun.)

That's what I'm using at the moment. Free Market has also gained unlimited merchant specialists (formerly at Professionalism) so it's better that the bonus is a smaller one (more so since it's effectively invisible to the AI).

Really? I thought unlimited merchants worked well Professionalism; by the time Free Market arrives, many cities have built Markets and Grocers, and don't need the extra specialists. And I can't think of civic better suited to "+50% trade route yield" than Free Market. Democracy doesn't quite fit.

Hmm. What if the building requirement was the actual corporate headquarters?

I was just about to suggest that. In fact, we could take it one step further. What if Executives had building and technology requirements, but didn't require that the corporation be present in the city? Under most civics, they could be trained only at the corporate headquarters. But under Free Market they could be trained in any city, even one without the corporation, so long as the technology requirements were met. That way, players under Free Market could spread foreign corporations without having to conquer a foreign city or wait for the AI to send an Executive. And we wouldn't have to bother with clunky franchise National Wonders.

 

[Xyth]

Ah, but I'm still not convinced that per city culture bonuses for corporate headquarters are good idea. They're only useful for Culture Victories, and I can't see players sacrificing a Great Person simply to deny a corporate headquarters to the AI. What if culture corporations were the exception to the rule? They could provide culture per resource, which would be useful for both Culture Victories and for cultural battles in border cities. In exchange, the corporate headquarters would provide only a flat +50%, equivalent to a Great Temple or Hit resource Wonder.

Lets see how it goes and review it later if need be. I'd like to find a more general way of making culture a bit more desirable in interior cities.

The problem with spreading corporations to foreign cities is that it creates more competition for corporate resources. If you spread Barilla to your neighbours, they will no longer trade you their excess Olives and Wine; in fact, they will compete for the excess Olives and Wine of other empires. This is a problem common to BtS, and the per city Headquarters bonuses cannot compensate for the lost resources. That's why I feel corporate strategy is reduced to "found corporations you like, spread them to your cities, done" anyway.

Yeah that's definitely a flaw. Still, not all civilizations will have the relevant resources and its good strategy to spread your corporations to civs that benefit the least. Just like in BTS, you can have corporations designated for domestic spread and corporations designated for foreign spread. Some multinationalism is better than none at all.

Some traits are stronger in the early game and some traits are stronger in the late game. Expansive is best early, when city sizes are small and most of the world is unclaimed. Humane is best late, when Golden Ages are frequent and pollution levels are high. That said, all traits should provide some benefit throughout the game. Financial fits the bill: a small commerce boost early, a mid game production boost on buildings, and a strong corporate bonus in the late game. I would make the change. (In fact, I might even bump the bonus to +2 per city.)

I'll put it in.

The reason I like "roadway costs are refunded" as a leader trait is because it fundamentally changes game play. Those lucky leaders can build roads wherever they wish: on every tile if they can spare the Workers! That's much more interesting than an incremental bonus such as +10%. Other "radical" leader traits include Spiritual (customize your civics every 5 turns!) and Protective (only the cities, not the countryside, are vulnerable to attack!)

Yeah it has potential, I'm just not sure if it should be a trait or a wonder. Will keep it in mind for later.

I was just about to suggest that. In fact, we could take it one step further. What if Executives had building and technology requirements, but didn't require that the corporation be present in the city? Under most civics, they could be trained only at the corporate headquarters. But under Free Market they could be trained in any city, even one without the corporation, so long as the technology requirements were met. That way, players under Free Market could spread foreign corporations without having to conquer a foreign city or wait for the AI to send an Executive. And we wouldn't have to bother with clunky franchise National Wonders.

It's an intriguing idea, I'll definitely look into it for 1.19.

 

[Xyth]

I'm interested in everyone's thoughts on 'yield per resource' numbers for corporations, particularly how they scale with mapsize. I have something in place but I'm curious to see what your expectations are without me biasing it. Remember that cities can now have 3-4 corporations in them - in most cases up to 1 food corp, 1 production corp, and 2 commerce corps.

How many resources do you feel it should take to grant 1 yield on a Standard map? A Huge map? Or whichever size you play most?

 

[Nightstar]

I'm interested in everyone's thoughts on 'yield per resource' numbers for corporations, particularly how they scale with mapsize. I have something in place but I'm curious to see what your expectations are without me biasing it. Remember that cities can now have 3-4 corporations in them - in most cases up to 1 food corp, 1 production corp, and 2 commerce corps.

This may be a bit tangential, but do the health and happiness penalties scale with the number of resources consumed, or is it just a flat amount for the corporation being present?

If the latter, then with the removal of corporate maintenance costs, there is *no* disincentive to accumulating as many of your corp-used resources as you can manage.

How many resources do you feel it should take to grant 1 yield on a Standard map? A Huge map? Or whichever size you play most?

Ideally, this should depend on how common a particular corp's resources are. Unfortunately, I suspect that this will vary depending on which mapscript is used during world generation (please correct me if I'm misunderstanding how that works). Also, the new resource discovery mechanics provide further complication, and will also vary considerably depending on the prevalence of terrain types on any given map type.

Overall, I would recommend erring on the side of caution and setting most of the yields on the low side, perhaps 0.5 to 0.25 for a Standard size map. Maybe even lower than that. (I can't really comment on the larger map sizes, as my hardware limitations make using them a bad idea.)

 

[Azoth]

Overall, I would recommend erring on the side of caution and setting most of the yields on the low side, perhaps 0.5 to 0.25 for a Standard size map. Maybe even lower than that. (I can't really comment on the larger map sizes, as my hardware limitations make using them a bad idea.)

I agree with Nightstar. 0.25 to 0.5 per resource on Standard maps sounds about right. (Here's my math: Unless I go conquering on a grand scale, I usually have a 10 city empire on Standard maps. So do my rivals. Assuming each city has, on average, 1 copy of one of 5 corporate resources, I can expect to have 10 domestic resources in all. At best, I might manage to acquire 10 more resources through foreign trade. With 10-20 resources and a yield of 0.4 per resource, a food corporation would produce 4-8 food per city. Add the headquarters bonuses and it feels strong but not too strong.)

Note that Sid's Sushi provides 1 food per resource on Standard maps; and even on single landmass maps, taking corporate maintenance into account, it's quite powerful. So I can't see yields rising much above 0.5 per resource. As for other map sizes, I would scale the yield by the number of tiles on the map. If Tiny maps have, on average, one-fourth the tiles that Standard maps do, they should have four times the yield per resource.

This may be a bit tangential, but do the health and happiness penalties scale with the number of resources consumed, or is it just a flat amount for the corporation being present?

If the latter, then with the removal of corporate maintenance costs, there is *no* disincentive to accumulating as many of your corp-used resources as you can manage.

Good question. Xyth mentioned a flat 1 and 1 per corporation in another thread, but even if the penalties scaled, they would be nullified by the Social Welfare and Environmentalism civics. We may want to consider a resource cap for corporations, if possible. (Say, no more than 30 resources on Standard size.) Otherwise, you're right, corporate yields for large empires could get out of hand.