Getting Better at Emperor Level

[ABCDPuppies]

It's not 15 turns vs. 50% science "for the rest of the game"; no one's denying that in most cases you should get an academy eventually, most likely with your second GS. So really it's saving ~15 turns vs. 50% capital beakers for the period of time it would take you to get your next GS -- usually something like 20-50 turns.

My point is that sometimes this will be a good trade-off, depending on how you are able to leverage the time savings, and how much science your capital is producing. If bulbing math speeds up your rush significantly, allowing you to take out a dangerous neighbor before they start to spam troops, it can be a great move, particularly if you are not running the slider or scientists in your capital in the meantime. On the other hand it's probably a very bad move if you have a good science capital and wouldn't do anything special with Math in the meantime anyway.

Don't get me wrong, I build academies often, and bulb math only in very specialized situations. I'm just saying, I think it's demonstrably not correct to say that bulbing math is the "wrong thing to do, period."

 

[kochman]

Negative, because this means you spent a GS on getting a tech that is worth far less than a GS bulb can get you, so you have lost tons of beakers, for the remainder of the game. You are also not considering, while your 2nd GS can make an academy, my 2nd GS will be settling in the academy city, and so on...

Basically, bulbing math or anything that early, with a GS, is throwing away tons of beakers because you are not even coming close to maxing out the beakers that you could bulb out. This is math (no pun intended), not opinion.

I only bulb scientist well after the time where said can no longer discover a tech in one turn, settling all others in the academy city. Generally, I think Education is one of the first, important techs you can not fully bulb out.

 

[ABCDPuppies]

With all due respect, I think you're missing part of the point of bulbing. In many cases it's not so much to maximize the number of beakers you get from the bulb, as it is to get some short term advantage that can be leveraged into a larger advantage. While bulbing math does not, in itself, produce as many beakers as bulbing Edu, or settling a GS, I'm asking you to imagine a situation (which definitely can come up) where it makes a decisive difference to your military plans.

I don't mean to spout clichés, but I really do believe that to a large extent land is everything. If bulbing Math allows for a successful rush that nets you say 5 cities, those cities will produce way more in terms of beakers and hammers than an early academy, or settling a GS or bulbing Edu or Philo or something later. We're talking about potentially doubling the size of your empire, which is a benefit of a different order from increasing the beaker rate of one city. On the highest difficulties it can be the difference between having a competitive empire at all, and being stuck with only a couple cities due to rapid AI expansion.

You may think I'm overstating the difference that bulbing Math can make, but I assure you I'm not. 15 turns is huge (and often the difference is more than this particularly if you a bulbing math on the way to Oracling construction), because it can mean that you hit the AI before they have finished expanding and started to spam troops. Similarly, having math earlier also means that more of your chops will be boosted; and you having more troops, combined with your target having less, can easily make the difference in the outcome of a war. And that is a way more significant matter than a couple beakers here or there.

 

[kochman]

I get the benefit... short term rewards are generally not how I aim to win a long game (anymore).
At this point (1000BC), I hardly have enough cities to really make it worth while to get to math earlier so I can take out some AI... in fact, I can usually trade for it, because I will have alphabet by this point.
There is still tons of blank space on the map, and I am trying to rex into it.
I understand the merits of taking cities the AI has built... I used to due an axe rush on my closest neighbors about 3 out of 4 games...

I gave up on this early war technique when I tried to do it on Diety, and got my skull crushed... meaning losing stocks of Praets to stacks of assorted, but numerically superior units from Mansu Masu... that was embarassing!!!

Now I generally try to get to rifleman/cannon/infantry fastest and take out some peaceful wonder builder on my borders. Has been working pretty well...

That being said, if you do manage to pull of the early rush on higher levels, it goes to GREAT effect, because you will get more beakers in the long run by having way more cities. So, in a roundabout, specific sense, you are correct.

 

[ABCDPuppies]

That being said, if you do manage to pull of the early rush on higher levels, it goes to GREAT effect, because you will get more beakers in the long run by having way more cities. So, in a roundabout, specific sense, you are correct.

Thanks . To be clear, I never denied that bulbing math is highly situational and often inferior to other options. I just don't think it makes sense to completely rule out bulbing something that leads to such an important early military tech, and boosts production to boot.

 

[QuothTheRaven]

If you haven't already, I'd go carefully study some of DMOC's game reports, such as this currently active one. He's played a couple public games on Immortal and Deity that you can look over. His strong, clear writing style and frequent asides for educational purposes make it a great resource for comparing his strategies and decision making process to your own.

And aside from being educational they make for exciting and fascinating reads