Mercantilism vs Free Market

[GnafGnaf]

As the topic states when to use which civic?

I think the main reason why i dont know which of the 2 suits me best is that i dont understand trading routes.

Can someone entlighten me which civic is suited best for which situation? And i would especially like to know how much my opponent gains for me being in Mercantilism or Free Market.

 

[Bleys]

The free specialist from Merc is OK if you are in Rep, but overall, I only use Merc when most of the other AIs are in Merc. Otherwise, its FM or SP.

 

[apenpaap]

I really love SE, and often build the Pyramids for early Representation, so I think Mercantilism is better.

 

[Yxklyx]

As the topic states when to use which civic?

I think the main reason why i dont know which of the 2 suits me best is that i dont understand trading routes.

Can someone entlighten me which civic is suited best for which situation? And i would especially like to know how much my opponent gains for me being in Mercantilism or Free Market.

If you were to use the BUG mod you would see how much money you are making from foreign trade routes and how much from domestic. That helps a bit.

 

[Yeosol]

FT is better if you have AI's to trade with. When they are all in Merc which has a 'no foreign trade route' addition it mean YOU cant trade with them. When this happens to most of the AI's you cna only get domestic trade meaning your routes wont be worth much. Then it's better to go Merc.

If you're spiritual Merc can sometimes be helpful allowing for extra production or GPP temporarily.

 

[Ghpstage]

Mercantilism is something that gets considerably stronger as you get larger particularly through war as:
-You get more specialists from more cities
-Your rivals have less cities so theres less to trade with
Merc has nice synergy with both caste and as already mentioned representation.
Also worth remembering is that you can still trade with vassals while in Mercantilism and you will likely pick up vassals along the way.

If I'm Spiritual I will likely swap to this for at least some a game for some reason or another but otherwise I usually think of it as a "poor man's" state property using the free (usually) merchant to help offset some of the costs of a large bloated empire when I'm warring a lot.

 

[mtr12]

I usually run Mercantilism to help warmonger, run merchants (as was mentioned), and just because I'll often play a game without reaching Economics (but I'll have Steel and MScience for Cannons and Grenadiers).

 

[AlessioCerci]

Never use mercantilism now tbh. In warlords and vanilla i found many civs staying in mercantilism for ages so it was pointless switching to free market. Now in BTS they seldom use it and often dont even revolt to it at all; so you can take advantage of free market more. Coastal cities with intercontinental trade/customs house bring in loads of commerce. With regards to corporations: if i want to found and spread one of my own then obviously free market is great (25% discount on maintenance) and if i dont want one, then state property is ideal. The problem is when you're in free market and have a corporation of your own and then some annoying AI spams executives at you. It sometimes requires you nullify their corporations, and if your cities are all size 30 thanks to Sid Sushi then you cant very well switch to SP. In this scenario, rare as it is, i would use mercantilism.

 

[SnowlyWhite]

just spam back imho; can't lose sushi because the ai spams you and frankly, even if you pay some for replacing sushi or mining, it's certainly less then you'd pay for addin' in corp. maintenance through the whole empire - losing fm can drop the slider 10% easily if you spam your corps. properly.

regarding the initial question - merc when spi. and most are in merc. Otherwise, it's a really poor civic nowdays with custom houses. Or in pangea, where you don't have intercontinental trade routes, but even then, it's worst then free market.
The bonus is that, while you lose, supposedly the ai loses even more, but that's really level dependant(usually the ai will have far better infrastructure then you at deity in the average city, but I doubt it's true for noble too - so here it depends on what level you play). Plus, if they don't hate each other much and have ob with each other, you'll just be left out of the loop while their cities will still have foreign trade routes between themselves...

 

[GeorgeF]

If you're like me and end up warring with everybody towards the end of the game, then merc is a fine civic. If you have overseas vassals, you still get big trade routes in your major cities even in merc, which is all you really care about anyway.

 

[vormuir]

They're both good civics. It depends!

As everyone has said already, Mercantilism has nice synergies with Representation, the Pyramids, the Parthenon, and Caste System. And if you're Philisophical or running Pacifism, the double GPPs make it even nicer.

On the other hand, those extra trade routes do add up. On a standard map, by the middle ages the trade routes will be running 4 to 6 commerce each in your core cities. To keep things simple, let's say you're running 50/50 gold/science. That's 2 or 3 commerce for each, multiplied by probably 50% for buildings (market + grocer, or library + university... will be less in some cities, but much more in the capital with an Academy or University of Oxford.)

So, 3 to 5 each of gold and beakers vs. a free specialist. If you're not running Representation, it's no contest -- trade routes are better; the extra route is like having a merchant /and/ a scientist. If you are running Representation, it's competitive.

There are other complications (how much are those GPP worth?) but that's a rough sketch.

As other people have pointed out, Mercantilism becomes more attractive when your empire is bigger. On the other hand, Free Trade gets more attractive in the late game, when AI cities are big (because trading with bigger cities gives better trade routes).


Waldo

 

[Killroyan]

Merc is ok as long as you don't have any corps. As soon as you hit medicine or can get the mining corp I usually switch to free market. Damn it, I am a corp addict.

 

[Ghpstage]

To totally honest the extra GPP from a single free specialist is of limited value by the time you get mercantilism, plus most of the extra GPP will be wasted in cities that will never produce a Great Person.

 

[budweiser]

To totally honest the extra GPP from a single free specialist is of limited value by the time you get mercantilism, plus most of the extra GPP will be wasted in cities that will never produce a Great Person.

That depends on several factors like the turn number you get Merc, how many cities you have, how many GP you have already made, etc. A smallish empire could run Merc and get a GP from every city.

 

[Iranon]

Before corporations: Free Market will, under most circumstances, be better for one's own tech rate.

Mercantilism is usually better for one's tech rate relative to the AI, especially if

- we are involved in a lot of wars (closed borders)
- we have vassals (we still have foreign trade routes with them)
- we are in Representation (doh)
- we have a large empire (the smaller partner usually gets more out of the deal)
- many AIs are in Mercantilism themselves
- most trade partners are direct competitors we don't care to feed

So the choice boils down to whether we want to accelerate global tech rate (better tech partners = faster civilian victory) or whether we care more about being ahead (wanting to secure crucial wonders or plan a military victory where we need a tech lead).

*

After corporations, Free Market is usually far more attractive, unless we constantly need to displace foreign corporations. This is very rarely a problem these days.

 

[gfm]

As the topic states when to use which civic?

I think the main reason why i dont know which of the 2 suits me best is that i dont understand trading routes.

Can someone entlighten me which civic is suited best for which situation? And i would especially like to know how much my opponent gains for me being in Mercantilism or Free Market.

Like everybody said : it depends . Basically, here is how I choose beetween the two :

Mercantilism

• Most of my rivals are in Mercantilism (No possible between them and me)
• I'm warmongering and getting closer to win by conquest (Every time I declare war, I'll lose )
• I've got vassals (Mercantilism doesn't prevent with them)
• I plan to become Best Friends Forever with Tokugawa

Free Market

• I'm not huge so most of my are foreign
• Many of my cities are coastal (they are eligible to build harbors and customs houses)
• Both my rivals' cities and mine are large (15+), netting us both more
• I plan to found corporations

Both are powerful, but I lean towards Free Market when I start isolated or semi-isolated (and I try to play my diplomatic cards right with my intercontinental rivals to keep my precious trade routes). Mercantilism is often more beneficial to warmongers on their way to a conquest victory.

EDIT: Listen to Iranon, he summarized the logic behind the economic choice quite nicely.

 

[GnafGnaf]

thanks for the entlightment, some clues like when most (all) AI's are in mercantilism i figured myself. But i am happy by the new insight you gave me.

 

[Negator_UK]

Mercantilism if :-

1. I have a big empire, representation and SoL or
2. I want to impress Toku or
3. No-one seems to be trading with me and I'm spiritual, so can afford to messs around changing civics

 

[Dirk1302]

What Iranon said. But i lean more to Free market. If other ais are not in merc and you are then you miss out big time. They get (at least some) foreign routes, you don't. 1 Rep specialist comes no where near the ~ 4*8 = 32 commerce that goes into your capital with 4 foreign trade routes. Only one ai not in merc already lets you break even IME compared to merc.

Not being spiritual i can remember only one time i went merc and there i had 30+ cities.

 

[troytheface]

you can switch and see if it has more or less money. if it has less then switch back.