More thoughts on academy spam

[futurehermit]

I was trying this out a bit tonight with Liz but kept getting maps that didn't fit the strategy. This indicates that playing to the map continues to be the best approach.

However, if you have a gpfarm (a city with high food surplus early) and some commerce cities (preferably with snaky rivers) then this could work out with phil and/or fin leaders (it could work with others too but with less oomph).

The goal: Get your gpfarm city going early cranking out GSs. Get your commerce cities going. Use your GSs to build academies in these commerce cities. Grow your commerce cities nice and large so they are working many cottages to get full benefit from the academies. This usually means hereditary rule early. You will need at least one good production city to defend your empire.

A comparison:

Without representation a GS settled in the eventual Oxford city nets you 6 beakers * 100% (Oxford) * 25% (library) * 25% (university) * 25% (observatory) = 16.5 beakers/turn. Not too shabby for the renaissance era.

A commerce city following DaveMcW's rule of thumb will be working at least 10 cottages. Assuming 1-2 food tiles that means we need size 10-11 to work them all which is feasible by this point in the game for cities built early enough and/or that have enough surplus food. For non-financial civs let's assume the cottages are on average size 3 (village) and that we run the science slider on average at 70% and that we have printing press (reasonable if we're going to assume we have astronomy for observatories). This means 10*4 (3 base, 1 from pp)*.7 = 28 beakers. An academy is only bringing in about 14 beakers here (assuming no other tile commerce which there probably would be).

In the short term, the settled GS wins, but over the long haul the academies are going to win out. Once they grow to towns and we add free speech that is an extra 3 commerce/cottage. 10*7*.7=49 with the academy bringing in 24.5 beakers. Once the city grows large enough to be working more cottages it will far surpass the specialist.

Even if we assume representation the specialist gives 9*100%*75%=~25 beakers. Good, but still only on par with the above example and eventually in a CE you will be wanting to transition to US.

Now of course a number of factors come into play. Are you running a SE? Are you playing an Obsolete-style economy? etc.

But assuming a traditional CE with 1 gpfarm and a number of commerce cities and a low enough skill level (monarch and below) that you are teching most of the late-game techs yourself, I think this could be the best use of great scientists (and arguably great people more generally) earlier in the game.

Liz would be the shining example here with philosophical generating GSs and financial powering the commerce cities (making an even stronger case for academies > settling).

However, in the end a lot of it comes down to the map, but if you have the map for taking this approach (1 gpfarm, good commerce cities) I would suggest going for it, assuming you are playing a traditional CE and playing monarch and below (it could work higher, but I can't speak to it because I normally don't play higher).

EDIT: Nabbing the GL and NE can help speed up GS production, especially if not philosophical. Also putting the parthenon in a production city can help as well if not philosophical.

 

[DarkFyre99]

As always, the question of the production of any specialist (including great people) vs other means is a matter of time.

A settled Great Scientist produces beakers from the moment its settled. A great scientist that founds an acadamy has to wait for the city to grow, the cottages to mature, the required techs to be researched, etc...

Then there's the issue of short-term gain over long-term investment, whether researching a tech three turns earlier now is more valuable than researching a tech three times as expensive faster later.

For great scientists, I generally favor settling early-game, acadamies mid-game, and bulbing late-game. But there so many variables that this is more of a "when in doubt" rule as opposed to an actual strategy.

 

[futurehermit]

I'm clearly thinking of the long-term investment here. And if short-term needs are what is a priority then bulbing/settling are of course viable options as always. I'm just thinking of those games, which are the majority, where I'm researching the 2nd half of the tech tree myself. It seems to me that those academies would be really pulling their weight during that whole period of the game.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

Bulbing vs. settling (academy or super specialist) is not really short-term versus long-term. It's a matter of style, because bulding nets you an advantage which escalates. Acdemy in capital is almost always worth it, that and probably my GP farm and science city. Late game - do I bulb or settle? Neither - I launch golden ages. Do the math.

 

[DaveMcW]

You forgot the academy and monastery in your capital.

As much as I'd love to have multiple cities with 10 villages pre-printing press, I usually end up focusing on production to kill a neighbor. But if you can get 14 at that point it's definitely worth building an academy.

 

[markiz2001]

Without representation a GS settled in the eventual Oxford city nets you 6 beakers * 100% (Oxford) * 25% (library) * 25% (university) * 25% (observatory) = 16.5 beakers/turn. Not too shabby for the renaissance era.

you forgot:
* 50% (academy)
=19.5 beakers

 

[Jet]

^ No, no, no. 6 * (100% + 25% + 25% + 25% + 50%) = 13.5.

 

[futurehermit]

Well, I didn't forget it per se I just didn't include it. Yes, if you have an academy then that will add an additional 3 beakers/turn and if you have a monastery that will add an additional .6 beakers/turn for a total of 3.6 beakers/turn. This brings us in at 20.1 beakers/turn without representation.

Anyways, here are my conclusions:

1) In the long run any commerce city working 10+ cottages to maturity will make an academy well worth the investment over settling in the oxford city

2) In the short term settling and bulbing can be more advantageous. Short term is often > long term

3) If you are planning on going for space victory from early on in the game it might well be better to tolerate the lack of a short term burst for the gains over the long haul.

It is really point 3 that I am trying to make in this thread.

 

[madscientist]

^ No, no, no. 6 * (100% + 25% + 25% + 25% + 50%) = 13.5.

NO, NO , NO

6 base beakers
+6 from Oxford
= 12

Add
3 from academy

= 15

4.5 from three lesser buildings

= 19.5

Your thinking it is straight multiplication
6 x 2.25

, it really is

(6 x 2.25) + 6

PS: I almost always make this same mistake, I usually catch myself before I post it!

 

[DaveMcW]

3) If you are planning on going for space victory from early on in the game it might well be better to tolerate the lack of a short term burst for the gains over the long haul.

It is really point 3 that I am trying to make in this thread.

GS's are easier to obtain than commerce cities. So you will end up settling one at some point.

You just need to be sure you have enough GS's in the pipeline to build all your future academies before you settle your current one.

 

[futurehermit]

Yeah that's the thing though. I usually conquer huge empires as lately I like to go for domination wins that go late in the game making use of a lot of modern armor and stealth bombers If that is the case you can end up with a lot of commerce cities that could all benefit from an academy if you obtain them by renaissance/industrial era. And at this point the GS production starts slowing down. So it can be hard to judge I guess.

But if you plan to have a smaller empire and have a more accurate sense of how many GSs you will need and approx how many and when you will generate them then you can take that approach and settle them where applicable or lightbulb for liberalism or whatever.