Maximizing benefits of Organized trait requires fast expansion / warmongering

[Padmewan]

The "Organized" trait is much-maligned in this forum, but I'd like to give Sulla's explanation a chance, which is that it's a "hidden" benefit that accrues over time, invisibly.

From what I am gleaning from the game mechanics, the Organized trait has its biggest advantage in the ancient era and then again in the medieval era. This is because during the ancient era most civs are stymied at 3 cities until they can get their economy up and running, or otherwise cripple their research. With organized, you can up that by a city or two, which is crucial for the early land-grab (unless you are playing with raging barbarians and need to protect your cities more carefully, limiting your growth to your military build speed; then the trait is tampered down some).

The other moment when organized offers a distinct advantage is when the expensive civics come into being. It seems that the high-upkeep civics are geared towards warmongering -- the combination of Vassalage and Theocracy in the Middle Ages can be killer (esp. if you also have the Aggressive trait). Also, given that one of the problems with warmongering is that each city you capture adds red to your balance sheet, the organized trait is doubly helpful.

Later on, Police State can also help with a war effort, but by then the correctly-played Organized civ should have the game locked up thanks to early expansion through growth and conquest. The Environmental civic seems like something thrown in and pretty useless unless you are starting a game in the Modern era.

I've only played a couple of games with the Organized trait so let me know how your experiences compare to mine. It seems that Organized's most synergistic co-traits are Expansive (to further drive quick expansion with cheap granaries/lighthouses for food) or Spritual (to make switching in and out of civics almost consequence free). This would mean Caesar -- with the praetorians to help with military conquest; or Asouka, with fast workers to speed the forest-chopping and building roads over hills to get your settlers to their destinations faster.

 

[Gufnork]

When organized is best is when you get Code of Laws and can build courthouses quickly. At every single time in a game Financial would have given you much more than Organized.

 

[Draax]

When organized is best is when you get Code of Laws and can build courthouses quickly. At every single time in a game Financial would have given you much more than Organized.

How does financial help warmongering when you quickly have a half dozen new cities with no towns (because you razed them all in the fighting)?

Seems to me that organized is beautiful for conquest. I always end up hurting for a while after destroying another civ, until I can rebuild its infrastructure. And even then the towns take forever.

 

[SmartMuffin]

How does financial help warmongering when you quickly have a half dozen new cities with no towns (because you razed them all in the fighting)?

Because Organized doesn't affect city maintainence costs at all. The cottages/towns you still have in your existing cities are still helping you more than the Organized trait does.

Haven't we been over this?

 

[Padmewan]

I didn't intend this to be a discussion about whether financial is better than organized or whatever. My point was that if you do play using an organized leader, how to maximize that trait's advantages? And it seems to me that organized is particularly well-suited to wars of conquest (as opposed to harrassment, defense, or limited-objective wars).

Playing as if Organized is an inferior version of Financial misses the point, I think. I believe an Organized civ has to expand fast and furious in the beginning, then switch to total war, to maximize the benefits of the trait.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well basically Oganized gives 1/2 to All non unit maintenance
a) Civic upkeep 1/2 cost all the time
b) Courthouses (1/2 to regular City Maintenance) built faster

So Organized is really best for expansion After Code of Laws, because you can squash the costs of new cities quickly. Not to mention Financial Requires towns for best benefit, limiting production. Organized, on the other hand requires a large empire, which can be either hammer powerful or gold powerful as it choses, advantages the same either way.

 

[Speciou5]

I always saw organized as the water boom trait. With the exception of two organized civs, they all start with fishing. Also, all civs that begin with fishing are organized. The benefits of starting with fishing on a water map is pretty apparent. As well, courthouses are much more important in supporting far flung cities across islands which is something else organized helps out with.

 

[Zhahz]

I think Organized is underrated, particularly if you want to be an early aggressor. It can also be good if you like expensive civics and/or have a huge empire. I don't necessarily think it's a great all around trait as it's best used with particular strats but that's not a unique concept as most traits don't do a whole lot for you if you don't use them well.

 

[Ruffin]

I usually play the same way - kill my nearest neighbor, plant cities at all the choke points, and try to make up in size what I can't accomplish in skill. It works very well with the Americans, an organized civ. In my attempts as the Brits and Greeks I'm in a sinking hole of red ink by 500AD and the game is over. I've never been able to catch up technologically and lose the space race. So organized is very, very useful for an aggressive land grab. I can almost play Civ3 style with it.

 

[Gufnork]

As I said, the benefit from Organized comes with Courthouses. Getting them up and running in the cities you conquer is a nice benefit. In all other aspects the trait sucks. Even when controlling half the world the money it saves is miniscule. Anyone good at Praetorian rushing can confirm that.

You pillage towns around cities you will conquer? Why would you pillage your own towns? I can understand pillaging mines and pastures to reduce his production, but towns? Pillaging towns are for defensive or destructive wars, when all you want is to hurt your opponent then declare peace. Wars of conquest should not include pillaging of towns.

 

[Padmewan]

Gufnork, I have the same instincts as you, since I'm a builder by nature, BUT... If you can spare a unit or two (and you should if you are planning your war correctly) to go deep into enemy territory and pillage back there, you can help cripple the civ's counter-attack. True, that's money that won't be coming to you later, but it's money in the bank TODAY, and war is a good time to be borrowing against the future, and it's money NOT going into your enemy's counterattack (or upgrading defenders). Unless you have ludicrously overwhelming force, it will take some time for your main army to catch up with the pillagers (esp. since cities stay in resisitance for several turns) so by the time you get there, they have even started rebuilding.

 

[Ungar]

People still don't understand what organized is.

Every turn you spend gold on:

Science Research - Set as a % of your turn budget.
Unit Upkeep - Depends on how many units you have.
Building Upkeep - Depends on how many buildings you have in your cities.
Civic Maintenance - Depends on how many cities and your population levels.

If you like grabbing land early your Civic Maintenance goes up really fast. I founded a new city with a settler when I had around a dozen already and my turn budget took an immediate -15 gold per turn hit from added Civic Maintenance. To break even that new city would need to generate 15 gold down the road which won't happen until improvements and buildings are added to it.

If you're building out settlers or steamrolling opponents early by taking over cities your Civic Maintenance skyrockets. You start operating at a budget deficit each turn at 0% science.

Having an organized leader allows you to grab more land early on by building more settlers or just wiping out your closest neighbors.

I prefer taking over opponent cities and then using them to create a cultural barrier. If you don't sign any open trade agreements, none of the AI's settlers can cross your line of cities to find unoccupied space.

After your new cities start generating income, then you can decide whether to go after more cities or start pouring funds into tech for unit upgrades.

Civic Maintenance is like Corruption in Civ3 except it is spread out across all your cities instead of individually.

 

[cyberzen]

Judging by the 2 leader combo traits that they left out, which is ind/phi & cre/org the beta testers must have felt that these 2 combos were too powerful.

Although it may not be apparent now for new players to fully grasp the strength of the org/cre combo, I for one would give some credibility to the beta testers who have been playing this game for a lot longer than any of us.

Sulla himself has said that they(beta testers) had predicted that the org trait would be the most misundertstood trait.

 

[narmox]

If the Romans have Organzied instead of Aggressive, there must be something to it. I still don't quite understand how Org works, but it'll slowly become clear I'm sure.

 

[dar]

Try running police state, vasalage and theocracy in a medium to large empire without Organised and you'll start to appreciate it. The half priced courthouses are nothing to sneese at either.

 

[blueinf]

From my own experience I am more successful when using Organized in monarch. although I do not understand how it works. I have a tendancy to play very aggressively (war for some turns, get some town, pillage everything you can on cities you can't take, then ask for a cease fire).

I often go for police state after the pyramids and use barracks + Hereditary Rule + the other religious civic that gives exp to units produces in towns under state religion. Units can start with a decent amount of exp before mid game helping you to take out towns even if you are slightly technologically behind.

Or maybe it has something to do with the UUs .