Philosophical/Industrious

[azzaman333]

I tried playing as Ind/Phi (Toku of Japan) and while I cruised ahead real early in the game, that was because as soon as I finished a Grass/hill Mine in my capital it discovered Gold, and there was almost unlimited seafood in the area.


Also, Fin/Org is the perfect combo because Fin gives a lot of free money early in the game and Org really starts to shine when Fin starts losing its edge.


Between Fin/Org, Phi/Ind and Agg/Cha, there is (at least) one super-combo for each player, Fin/Org for CE, Phi/Ind for SE and Agg/Cha for Mass Warring.

 

[JP Vieira]

Yes...Combos can make it.

 

[Bhruic]

Because you have a further cheap source of GPs that are IN ADDITION to the specialists you can run in your cities. These snowball and help to counter the increasing cost of specialists - each Wonder GP source is effectively doubled... and each Wonder costs half.... that's a ludicrously powerful synergy.

Nitpick - Industrious doesn't make Wonders cost half, it makes them cost 67% (if you want to approach it that way). In other words, it only gives +50% to Wonders.

I know you've said "just try it", but one "just try it isn't going to prove/disprove anything, so I'll just ask. If I start a game as Ind/Phi, and don't have Stone or Marble, is my chances of building Wornders not less than someone without Ind who does start with Stone and/or Marble? In other words, wouldn't a more powerful "combination" be something like Fin/Phi, or Org/Phi, with Stone/Marble? Yes, I know that an Ind player can get Stone or Marble too, but that's tangential to what I'm after. Since the resource provides a bonus to a lot of the Wonders, especially the early ones, aren't you more likely to get them using the resource? So wouldn't you, in fact, end up benefitting more from the resources than you do from the trait?

Admittedly, there are wonders without resources, and, of course, there is the Ind + resource (although that's actually not as powerful, proportionally, as it sounds). But considering the benefits and secondary benefits of other Traits, I have a hard time believing that they can't be leveraged more powerfully if someone starts with Stone/Marbe.

Why do I bring that up? Because if my surmise is correct, if Ind/Phi is "too powerful", then one must conclude that "Phi/Any" is too powerful if one starts with Stone/Marble. But yet the game does not stop Phi leaders from having access to those resources. Perhaps it shouldn't stop people from having access to Ind/Phi either.

Bh

 

[Bastian-Bux]

Actually its like this:

Assumin you need 30 turns to build the wonder without any boni:

non-industrioust - no resource: 100% -> 30 turns or 100% buildtime
industrious - no resource: 150% -> 20 turns or 67% buildtime
non-industrious - resource: 200% -> 15 turns or 50% buildtime
industrious - resource: 250% -> 12 turns or 40% buildtime

So overall industrious isn't that strong, and its expecially weak if you happen to have the resource.

What makes this combo so strong is surely philsophical. Lets face it:

You wanna play a SE: philosophical
You wanna play a CE: financial
You wanna play a WM: aggressive

Those three traits are defining your play style. Any additional trait is welcome, specialy if it synergies well. Aggressive is surely arguable, but only due to the fact that warmongering is influenced by more factors, where economy is more heavily "integrated".

Industrious is to philosophical what organized is to financial: a damn good synergy. Industrious alone is, well ...

Think through it: if you do choose a leader for the current game you plan, what are the first priority traits, which are the second priority, and which do you rate "only if I get a good UU/UB to make up for a useless trait"?
The three "high grade" traits should probably not show up to often as third category, if you don't play a diametral strategy.

Thus arguably PHI/FIN is a much more powerfull combination in most games then PHI/IND could be. Why? Because PHI/FIN is much more flexible, and combines two of the 1st priority traits. Yes, given a specific playstyle, a clever player, and to top its, stone, marble and copper nearby, yes then PHI/IND is almost unstoppable. Without this, it can be usefull, or break down like a card house.

 

[Spearthrower]

Nitpick - Industrious doesn't make Wonders cost half, it makes them cost 67% (if you want to approach it that way). In other words, it only gives +50% to Wonders.

Fair enough... it's still a lot!

I know you've said "just try it", but one "just try it isn't going to prove/disprove anything, so I'll just ask. If I start a game as Ind/Phi, and don't have Stone or Marble, is my chances of building Wornders not less than someone without Ind who does start with Stone and/or Marble? In other words, wouldn't a more powerful "combination" be something like Fin/Phi, or Org/Phi, with Stone/Marble? Yes, I know that an Ind player can get Stone or Marble too, but that's tangential to what I'm after. Since the resource provides a bonus to a lot of the Wonders, especially the early ones, aren't you more likely to get them using the resource? So wouldn't you, in fact, end up benefitting more from the resources than you do from the trait?

If you get neither resource, you still have the trait. If you get say stone, but no marble.... you still have the trait.... if you get both AND you still have the trait... well... in all cases you benefit from having IND.... having a resource is just a cherry on the top of each example. Obviously, if you don't have IND, then the stone/marble are relatively more powerful. But you only benefit more from the resource than the trait if you a) have it and b) don't have IND..... I normally go with everything you say Bhruic, but you have lost me here!!

Admittedly, there are wonders without resources, and, of course, there is the Ind + resource (although that's actually not as powerful, proportionally, as it sounds). But considering the benefits and secondary benefits of other Traits, I have a hard time believing that they can't be leveraged more powerfully if someone starts with Stone/Marbe.

IF is a fairly large word there that's hidden deep within that sentence.... there are a lot of IFs in the game.... choosing IND is something you can rely on always being there and always having the effect. IF you also get the resource, all the more power to you as an IND leader.

Why do I bring that up? Because if my surmise is correct, if Ind/Phi is "too powerful", then one must conclude that "Phi/Any" is too powerful if one starts with Stone/Marble. But yet the game does not stop Phi leaders from having access to those resources. Perhaps it shouldn't stop people from having access to Ind/Phi either.

Again there is a situational element here that is not present in all games, but if you were say FIN/PHI and had stone in your capital and marble on the horizon.... don't you think you'd be rubbing your grubby little mitts with glee? It doesn't happen often and you most certainly can't rely on it. While I agree that when it does happen it is overpowered, it is a chance element while selecting IND is a chosen one.... and a choice that is thereby relatively unbalancing. I don't think you can equate a set of long-shot circumstances to a pre-planned selection. The former will be overpowered on the rare occasion it happens, while the latter will always be overpowered no matter what happens.... adding in the same situation as the former just makes it even more diabolically good.

 

[azzaman333]

IF is a fairly large word there that's hidden deep within that sentence.... there are a lot of IFs in the game.... choosing IND is something you can rely on always being there and always having the effect. IF you also get the resource, all the more power to you as an IND leader.

Ind is only good if you get a good production city or 2, otherwise youll be getting +50% production of... next to nothing.

 

[Spearthrower]

I always focus on production anyway - to me, production is king in this game. I can count on one hand the number of games I've had where I haven't had at least one decent production city.

Whereas, I often lack stone or marble.

 

[Bhruic]

If you get neither resource, you still have the trait. If you get say stone, but no marble.... you still have the trait.... if you get both AND you still have the trait... well... in all cases you benefit from having IND.... having a resource is just a cherry on the top of each example. Obviously, if you don't have IND, then the stone/marble are relatively more powerful. But you only benefit more from the resource than the trait if you a) have it and b) don't have IND..... I normally go with everything you say Bhruic, but you have lost me here!!

I think you've missed my point. I'm not talking about having the trait. I'm talking about having the resources. If you have Stone and Marble, does that not lead to a superior Wonder building situation than not having Stone or Marble, but having the Ind trait?

IF is a fairly large word there that's hidden deep within that sentence.... there are a lot of IFs in the game.... choosing IND is something you can rely on always being there and always having the effect. IF you also get the resource, all the more power to you as an IND leader.

Of course "If" is a large word - but I'm speaking hypothetically here. Realistically, of course you're not likely to have both Stone and Marble in a large percentage of your games. But the beauty of speaking hypothetically is we can ignore that for the moment.

Again there is a situational element here that is not present in all games, but if you were say FIN/PHI and had stone in your capital and marble on the horizon.... don't you think you'd be rubbing your grubby little mitts with glee? It doesn't happen often and you most certainly can't rely on it. While I agree that when it does happen it is overpowered, it is a chance element while selecting IND is a chosen one.... and a choice that is thereby relatively unbalancing. I don't think you can equate a set of long-shot circumstances to a pre-planned selection. The former will be overpowered on the rare occasion it happens, while the latter will always be overpowered no matter what happens.... adding in the same situation as the former just makes it even more diabolically good.

Ok, but I think that looks like you're dodging the point instead of addressing it. You agree that starting with Stone and Marble would be overpowered, yes? Perhaps even more overpowered than Ind/Phi? And you'll agree that while it doesn't happen often, it does happen?

I don't think you can dismiss it as merely "when it happens". If it's overpowered, even more so than Ind/Phi then it shouldn't happen. That is to say, if Ind/Phi isn't in the game because it's overpowered, why should a situation that's even more overpowered be in the game?

Anyway, I don't think I'm going to convince you based on your last post, but I think it's a valid point. Personally, I'd probably change the Phi trait to not increase the GPP generated by wonders, only by specialists. That would certainly eliminate the Ind/Phi "overpoweredness", while not really impacting normal Phi situations severely.

Bh

 

[Spearthrower]

You're right.... it doesn't convince me!

I go with what you are saying to a large degree.... but only when you say a PHI leader getting BOTH stone and marble... but that really is the luck of the draw (100% luck).... how often statistically will that happen? Very very rarely.

Whereas, EVERYTIME I select IND, I get that bonus... without fail!

Now add back in that statistical (im)probability of having both builders resources, because you can't deny that it is valid to look back at this situation with your hypothesis. Consequently, having stone is better, having marble is better, having both is better and having both AND industrious is clearly the best. The chuck Philosophical into the equasion and there you achieve overpowered.

 

[onedreamer]

I think you've missed my point. I'm not talking about having the trait. I'm talking about having the resources. If you have Stone and Marble, does that not lead to a superior Wonder building situation than not having Stone or Marble, but having the Ind trait?

Actually, this has been MY point before yours !! read post #64.
And I dare saying that having Phi + Marble OR Stone is still better than having Phi + Ind without the resources. They will also help you building other stuff which is not wonders (walls, castles, cathedrals). And since Industrious by itself is not the best trait out there, I really don't think that the combo Phi+Ind is so much more powerful than others with Phi to deem it unbalanced. As I said in post 64, the real strength is in the Philosophical trait. The reason is simple. You CAN build all wonders you want even without the Ind trait. You don't mathematically need it. The real bonus, mathematically, comes from Philosophical.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

You all claim Phi is the real winner because If you get Marble/Stone, then the Wonders are easy

what Spear is saying is that Ind is like a Guaranteed Marble/Stone (but less)

after all Phi is a waste because you can get the Parthenon..., or run Pacifism, or build a National Epic

The fact is Fin/Org is NOT synergy making they tend to cancel each other out. ORG is Far better for the civ with low income

people who are poor [non-Fin] benefit the most from a tight budget [Org]

Fin Org are both thing that Add to eachother, there is no synergy.

Agg, Cha you get some synergy... cheap Barracks and free combat 1, get better experience which is good for Cha and helps its promotions

The problem is in IND PHI , the Synergy is both ways

IND supports PHI by increasing a source of GPP
PHI supports IND by allowing faster teching (the other impediment to getting Wonders)

No other trait has that, (possibly Charismatic Imperialistic...it was fun pumping out level 7 units from my WP General city with the Persians)
some add in the same direction (Fin-Org)

but IND PHI has the only strong synergy (and a strong synergy in the civilian realm...which is more broadly useful than the military realm)

 

[L4zXX0r]

So many people talk about not getting these resources, as a player who exclusively plays single play, if I were to go ind/phi, I'd just regen the map until I saw stone or marble or both early game. The IF factor here is not very high for me. I'm going to test ind/phi right now. And I'm going to use unrestricted leaders, so I'm going to pick Rome so I can abuse the forum bonuses as well.

 

[Cvntpumeler]

Admittedly, there are wonders without resources, and, of course, there is the Ind + resource (although that's actually not as powerful, proportionally, as it sounds). But considering the benefits and secondary benefits of other Traits, I have a hard time believing that they can't be leveraged more powerfully if someone starts with Stone/Marbe.

Why do I bring that up? Because if my surmise is correct, if Ind/Phi is "too powerful", then one must conclude that "Phi/Any" is too powerful if one starts with Stone/Marble. But yet the game does not stop Phi leaders from having access to those resources. Perhaps it shouldn't stop people from having access to Ind/Phi either.

Bh

Spectacular points.

 

[ShunNakamura]

I finally got up and modded it so that Isabella of Spain had Phi and Ind. I decided to do the go up two levels since that seems to be how people express if it is broken or not. I got my deary rear handed to me so hard I wanted to cry. Particularly after I went a whole game in very solid condition with the Byzantines on that same difficulty level and won a score victory. To make matters worse my start with Isabella was NICE[where as my byzantine capital suffered from food shortage]. I had a capital with two corn[one irrigated], 2 flood plains, 2 grassland gems, 1 desert hill gold, 2 grassland hills, 2 plains hill[one of which I my city was settled on]. And I had some good city spots around me.

I will give another go tonight at one level up. I will admit I had some serious good luck rolls as the Byzantines so that may have been what saved my but.

 

[Spearthrower]

Stuff

I agree with all your points there.

I'm definitely not denying that any PHI leader who gets both stone and marble is in a winning situation.... but that's why the game is random in those areas - in 50 games, you might get that situation once. With Industrious, you get that benefit EVERY game AND you still get the 1/50 chance to have both stone and marble.

So many people talk about not getting these resources, as a player who exclusively plays single play, if I were to go ind/phi, I'd just regen the map until I saw stone or marble or both early game. The IF factor here is not very high for me. I'm going to test ind/phi right now. And I'm going to use unrestricted leaders, so I'm going to pick Rome so I can abuse the forum bonuses as well.

Well, actually when talking about game mechanics I always imagine as if it is played with no game mechanic abuses... otherwise it is hard to make significant points. If you always abuse the mechanics to get stone/marble then I expect you also always win because you are basically handing yourself a free third trait. It's SP and you can do what you like, no worries there.... but cheating doesn't figure in to any discussion of strategies on a forum.

 

[ShunNakamura]

Well I was doing well on my try at the Prince level until it crashed to the Desktop.

My take on it is that it is a powerful combo but not game breaking[at least if you count the praet and that sort of stuff non-gamebreaking] unless the UU/UB are also powerful.


I guess an example would be to pick a Parthian ruler who could classify as Phi/Ind[if there are any]. The UU would be another mounted unit. A mounted swordsman or axeman[after all they had armies that were nearly ALL cavalry]. It may sound good at first but remember they would now lack CR promotions, require Horseback Riding, horses, and iron. I doubt the Stable xp+1 extra moves would make up for the lack of one of those units. And that would be a VERY late axeman. Perhaps a more expensive unique monument or something that gives free flanking to mounted units.

 

[L4zXX0r]

Well, actually when talking about game mechanics I always imagine as if it is played with no game mechanic abuses...

So then you can't really know if this is an over powered combination?

If you always abuse the mechanics to get stone/marble then I expect you also always win because you are basically handing yourself a free third trait.

What's wrong with always winning? Do you have a problem with always winning? Why shouldn't I regenerate the map to get a great starting position?

It's SP and you can do what you like, no worries there.... but cheating doesn't figure in to any discussion of strategies on a forum.

Ok, who are you to tell me I'm a cheater? Did Sid Meier come to you in a dream and say "People who use map regen are cheaters?" To paraphrase your own argument, 'your condescending tone has absolutely no relevance in a discussion of strategies on a forum'. Infact, my experiment, testing Ind/Phi with a best possible start figures more into this discussion than the fluff you just posted at me. Regenerate Map is different than world builder. Unrestricted Leaders, is ALSO different than world builder.

 

[L4zXX0r]

Now that I've dealt with spearthrower, time to report on my phi/ind experiment. What I did was change Churchill over to Phi/Ind, and since I want to completely abuse (not cheat) the mechanical synergy of Phi/Ind, I used unrestriced leaders, and gave myself Rome. The real problem I have with being a builder in this game, is that sometimes I probably over build. What I can say is, the Pyramids and the Oracle get built quite quickly, even if you don't have marble, or stone, or either. I built the 'mids in my first city, and the oracle in my second city. I use the oracle to get a religion (code of laws), and what happens is, the religion is then founded in the oracle city. I make sure to build the Pyramids first, so that I get my great engineer early.

Here is my problem. I'm not exactly sure which Wonders I would consider 'must haves' early on.

My questions are this..

Should I forget about founding a religion? What should my wonder priority be?
Which wonders should I pass on? Should my wonders be concentrated in one city? Two? Three? How fast should I build cities? Also, should I research basic improvement techs (like ag, or animal husbandry) before I go for Masonry or priesthood or bronze working?

These may seem like basic questions, but I'm trying to maximize this combo to it's fullest.

Any help, not some lame condescending comment, would be appreciated.

 

[Bhruic]

Founding a religion is quite useful, as you are likely to get at least one GP, so that makes the shrine buildable early on. The extra gold is very valuable, especially early game.

Bh

 

[L4zXX0r]

Founding a religion is quite useful, as you are likely to get at least one GP, so that makes the shrine buildable early on. The extra gold is very valuable, especially early game.

Bh

Yeah. Two reasons why I like founding a religion... money, and the early science boost with monasteries. Now with Rome and a Phi/Ind leader, how would you tech to your religion? Would do what I did, and get it via oracle? Or would you attempt for a different path, and use the oracle for something else? Though I'm sure it's all dependent on what the situation is. My biggest issue here so far, is how I should tech early on. Normally with Rome, I already have a set strategy, but I need to refine it for a different type of leader.