MrCynical said:
Other sources of research gold and culture merely add on the top of the beakers/gold/culture generated from commerce, or from specialists. They have no effect whatever on interconversion and are therefore of no relevance whatever when comparing commerce to beakers from specialists.
If the situation under which SE is run permits additional research, gold, or commerce not available to CE, then it is of relevance. Likewise, vice-versa.
MrCynical said:
Alright, assume the gold modifiers don't exist. No matter how stupendously incompetantly the CE is managed a base beaker from a specialist cannot be worth more than two commerce. That's if you run the CE at 100% gold with only science modifying buildings, which is moronic.
What's "worth more" mean?
Assuming you mean worth more commerce, then it makes no sense. We have no means for transmuting research into commerce.
If you mean the reverse, worth more research, then you're saying that a civ running at 0/0/100 (max gold) with 2 commerce income and a Library produces more research than another civ with a 1 research income. That makes no sense either.
MrCynical said:
Even if you bias against the CE by ignoring gold completely, there is no way with remotely competant management that a base beaker from a specialist can be worth more than 1.4 commerce.
Unless the specialist permits other benefits which result in additional research, gold, or indirectly happiness (if happiness forces the culture slider), or any of a number of other benefits that affect or are affected by research generation.
People usually maximize research generation. Thus why most people prefer to run the slider at 100%. We can't ignore the negative effects of maximizing research generation, especially when they're different between CE and SE.
MrCynical said:
Now you can argue that research is only one component, but fact is that it is a very major component of a game.
Sure. So, at minimum, we can't ignore other sources of research permitted by the SE.
And at maximum, we should also take into account other components of the game permitted under both situations: if either a CE or SE permit a benefit not available to the other, then it has to be part of any realistic comparison between the two.
MrCynical said:
It lacks credibility to claim that it is not a significant problem for an SE to be researching at least 50% slower than an equivalent CE after just 30 turns.
We can't ignore other sources of research and then make a conclusion about total research which is based upon only one source.
MrCynical said:
The term "anecdotal evidence" really grates on me. Feels oxymoronic. Someone round here has a wonderful sig with the reminder "The plural of anecdote is not data".
The conditions under which an example is possible are the same conditions under which facts are obtained.
Taking facts and coming to a hypothesis which contradicts multiple examples is a hugely strong indication that some facts were missed, and that the hypothesis is invalid.
MrCynical said:
There's also the point that even your anecdotes tell you nothing about how a CE did under those conditions. At best it tells you that a human run SE without pyramids can beat an ineptly run AI half hearted CE (sometimes).
I told you I've run the same game both ways.
Thomas G. said:
It has been shown that it is best to generate all GPP in one city, known as the "GP farm". This city will be a feature of a CE.
Agreed.
Thomas G. said:
Spreading out GPPs like a SE will do will be less than optimal use. And indeed, a city using 2 scientist generating 6 GPPs will NEVER produce a Greater Person if it is running against a decent GPP farm.
Disagree with both of these comments. Early game, spreading out GPPs is optimal (precisely because it's impossible to concentrate until you get things that allow GPP concentration). In other words, a "decent GPP farm" is not possible early game.
By spreading out you are able to generate GPPs in parallel. 4 cities each with 2 scientists produces 6 GPP / turn each. One of them outstripping the others is not an issue... it may have a couple extra from Pyramids or something, but it's not going to "lap" them (which is how outstripping is possible). So, the 4th city is going to produce a Great Scientist by reaching 400 GPP on turn 67.
Thus, spreading out will get you several GPs early, particularly for a Philosophical leader. This benefit is simply not available to a CE.
By the time your GPP Farm (if you have one) is kicking in for your SE, that's when your comments become relevant, I think.
Thomas G. said:
Without doing a detailed analysis, I will theorize that extra GPs will be generated in SE compared to a CE (obviously), but these will mostly be early ones. In the late game I would disregard the the GPP from most specialists altogether.
Agreed. The benefit to the SE is getting GP earlier.
Regardless, the 2nd purpose of the specialists (or the 1st, depending on your point of view) is to get research. This continues throughout the game, of course.
Thomas G. said:
So this argument:
"PHI SE = 3 commerce + 6 GP = 15 commerce equivalent"
might look good compared to:
"Standard CE = 3 commerce for 10 turns, 6 for 20, 9 for 40, 12 afterwards"
but in reality those GPP have less and less value. I do not buy that.
I agree with that conclusion. Then again, I wasn't sure we could effectively compare GPP to commerce anyway.
Thomas G. said:
Like someone else said, its hard to get a lot of science specialists early in the GP farm, but then again you can get the other types and just use them anyway. Lightbulb, great specialist, trade mission, shrine, or even a GA.
An "early" GP farm only really starts after NE, both because of NE and because of the timing... it takes that long to accumulate wonders and buildings/civics that permit specialists. By that time, the SE GPP benefit is declining fast. The SE will still get a ton of GP, but because of its farm (whether they have a farm or not, the SE will still have one city with more GPP income than other cities.).
Hmm, I wonder if you could run a SE and carefully balance cities so that 4-5 of them stay neck-to-neck in GPP? Would be nice to spread out wonder production, and you should get more GPP that way. Though, you will lose a lot of GPP from the NE (the multiplier is only affecting a part of your GPP instead of the majority of it). Probably it would be a lot of trouble and get you to about the same place as a good GP Farm.
Thomas G. said:
Speaking of GA, they are not used much, but are a lot more useful to a CE compared SE....
Why is that?
Wodan