We/sse?

[Unconquered Sun]

Simply case, player 1 has 4 cities with every wonder in the game in the capital and player 2 has 6 cities with 0 wonder. Assume all cities are of similar quality, In the long run, player 2 can beat player 1 easily in a war since all the wonder would not help you with more troop production since one city can at most produce 1 unit/turn, player 2 can still overwhelm player 1 and win.

That might be true for equally skilled players.

In your typical CIV game, there are no equally skilled players. The AI gets far less profit from units than humans do, to the extend of the likes of 10:1 compared to top players. The AI wonder profit ratio is much better, might be as high as 2:1.

This makes SSE/WE one of the best, if not the very best, approach to defensive games on limited land. "Defensive" here is defined as the resource gap between:

costs of defending current holdings (may be anything from units to diplo bribes) + costs of developing current holdings (workers, city maintenance, rushbuy, etc)

compared to

costs of successful further expansion (units, settlers, diplo penalties, etc) + costs of developing both current holdings and the holdings expansion would bring


Certain games v the AI will have a significant gap between the two. Typical examples include defending key chokes on high difficulty AW games, but being unable to press forward at reasonable cost; limited land deity starts where going to war is costly in units/diplo risks/economy tanking, while staying-in-peace costs are low.

Conventional CIV wisdom (or as I call it, the Excel spreadsheet wisdom) might dictate the player who hoards wonders like Broadway on deity AW should lose, but games like Snaaty's King of the Hill challenge prove otherwise.

 

[futurehermit]

I have read some of Obsolete's threads and started some discussions in his latest Bismark game.

He finds ways to win his posted games, but he hurries some games without taking the time to take care his empire at times.

I suggest you do this, take a look at any of his game at 1800AD, then go around the forum and find another Deity game and also look at 1800AD and compare the "Economies" in terms of:

Domographics, pop, beakers, hammers, cuture, gold, military and anything you consider "Economy" and tell me which "Economy" you rather have.

I care much more about what my economy looks like at 80AD and 800AD than I do at 1800AD.

 

[ABigCivFan]

I care much more about what my economy looks like at 80AD and 800AD than I do at 1800AD.

Then try what i suggested at 80AD and 800AD and tell me which "economy" you rather have to play further from.

 

[mi6agent]

I had a game this morning that really called for WE/SSE. I was HC. Production capital? Check. Stone in 2nd city and marble in 3rd city? Check. Ability to get 6 cities before being closed off by the Mayans? Check. Control of the diplo situation? Check--Mayans and Ragnar and I all Hindu, eventually all friendly with defensive pacts.

Wonderspammed. First to lib. First to democracy, got SoL. Ox/IW in capital by around 1300-1400AD (normal speed).

have a look at my 6 cities thread I build no wonder no gp farm and still lib around 200 AD also on emperor.
WE/SSE game only good if there is a Philo/Ind leader .

 

[Iranon]

The nice thing about wonderspamming is that it often allows you to control the game better.

No runaway AI far away because it manages to hog all the important wonders. No problem with culture pressure. If you're settling the specialists until the late game and trade cautiously, you greatly slow down the global tech pace. Wonders fit in nicely with a 'slow' cultural victory (as opposed to 'beeline liberalism, shut off research').
A compact empire often makes defense easier.

Wonderspamming can give one enough sustance to compete with a small footprint... excellent option if isolated on a small continent, boxed in and a war would be risky or when expanding heavily could mean being left behind out of trading distance.

I'm not going to break my highscore with this approach... but I could well maximise my chances to win a given game by going that route.

 

[futurehermit]

Then try what i suggested at 80AD and 800AD and tell me which "economy" you rather have to play further from.

I play all economies right now at emperor level. I will REX, cottage spam, wonder spam, run a SE, TRE, etc. I play the map. Sometimes a map/leader really calls for a REX and cottage spam. Sometimes a map/leader really calls for a wonder spam.

If you're Mayans and you start in the green belt and you have room to expand, then sure, REX and cottage spam is the way to go. But, if you're playing as Roosevelt, you have stone in your capital and marble nearby, then it makes sense to wonderspam imo.

 

[ABigCivFan]

Again, I wonder spam sometimes too when situation calls for it, check out my "Wonder Heaven on Deity" thread.

But wonder spam does not make it an "Economy". You still get majority of your research/hammers from your base commerce/hammers + multipliers. Wonders simply enhance your economy in different ways.

 

[vanatteveldt]

I think the point of SSE (like most OCC's) is to get the hammers / research from settled specialists. A settled specialist is like 1-2 extra citizens (a great scientist is 1h9b, so between one and two cottages, an engineer is 3 hammers and 3-6(?) beakers, so like a grassland mine plus half a farm and some extra commerce). So, a size 10 city with 6 settled great people is a bit like two size 10 cities in terms of production. In that respect, the name SSE is much more appropriate then WE, excepting the wonders that give direct resources, like GLib and Parthenon.

Obviously, this only goes so far. Getting five to ten GP's fairly quickly is doable, but the next 10 are a lot harder; so, while REX-like strategies aim for long term exponential growth, SSE aims for quicker but (sub)linear growth. This is why I think it makes sense to wonderspam and settle until ~literature, and then start

The synergy lies in having extraordinary resources at one place and multiplied with as many extra multipliers as possible.

 

[futurehermit]

Again, I wonder spam sometimes too when situation calls for it, check out my "Wonder Heaven on Deity" thread.

But wonder spam does not make it an "Economy". You still get majority of your research/hammers from your base commerce/hammers + multipliers. Wonders simply enhance your economy in different ways.

Depends how large your empire is and what you define as economy. If you only have 6 cities and the majority of your and are coming from specialists/settled great people from the wonders your production capital is cranking out, then I would say it is a "WE/SSE" even if you are still pulling in modest from trade routes and tiles in your outlying cities. When I think of an economy, I care more about where the is coming from, although I admit that and (and ) are important too.

 

[Dirk1302]

I firmly agree with ABigCivFan that a wonder economy as such doesn't exists.I have huge doubts about terms as HE/TRE/WAE (war economy or so i'm told ) and a hundred of others as well. If i'd have to define the economy i play in my games it's never one of those as i match tile improvements/buildings to my cities (specialization to use yet another term). Probably what others here define as a hybrid economy but that's an other empty term that really says no more than "Hey i improved my tiles".Take for example TRE, isn't it just simpler to say "i built GLH and ToA"?

When i came to the forums ~3 years ago there were really huge debates going about SE vs CE. But even then it was never so very clear what SE meant, some would say mids + specialists, other would say farm/specialists and a whipping war as early as possible. They were so fanatic in these debates that they made clear mistakes farming floodplains around the capital because they were "SE players". Some SE players saw that this was wrong and converted to cottaging the capital but still called their economy SE. So then where were 3 variations. The stupid debates have died down probably because it's difficult to have a fight over ~10 ill defined economies.

 

[madscientist]

Whatever the term about being an economy, the idea of WS/SSE is a type of strategy at least. My view is that it is an economy as most of the beakers come from a stronge capital that is running Bureacracy, representation, with settle specialists VERY early. It causes an entire different thinking to settle those GPs in one city, and the idea is to get many more GPs than normal, thus the WonderSpam aspect.

It is a poweful strategy given the right leader,and terrain, and I have successfully run this type of economy in off-line games and RPCs, at least up to emperor level on both normal and marathon speed.

A few of my comments

1) IND and PHIL are the best traits for this strat. Ramesses is the best leader due to great starting techs, a powerful early UU, and a UB that promoteds alot of early Prophets which are preferable.

2) You need an early second city which should serve as the worker/settler pump. I suggest NOT playing Obsoletes way of limiting cities, the more the better.

3) Wonders do offer advantages, and the more settled specialists which provide hammers (Prophets and engineers) the easier and less troublesome it becomes.

4) Land is key, meaning ALOT of early food, hammers (hills), and little or no coast.

5) Do not attempt it if there are dangerous leaders nearby that need to be rushed or taken out early.

6) Once you have 2 other cities, consider the capital a Wonder pump and the other 2 as your normal play style cities.

The strategy definitely works well, but is situational.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Whatever the term about being an economy, the idea of WS/SSE is a type of strategy at least. My view is that it is an economy as most of the beakers come from a stronge capital that is running Bureacracy, representation, with settle specialists VERY early. It causes an entire different thinking to settle those GPs in one city, and the idea is to get many more GPs than normal, thus the WonderSpam aspect.

If you did really, really well and got 8 great people by 1000 AD, and settled them all in the capitol with representation, AND somehow managed to have 200% worth of science multipliers there already without bulbing, AND the average settled spec was worth say 7 beakers (some scientists, some engineers, some priests/merchants/artists, but one used to get the academy for the multipliers), you'd be getting less than 200 BPT from this "economy" even still.

I have to go with ABCF/Dirk on this one. Even I sometimes have twice that beaker rate by 1000 AD in good games crappy micro and all, with maybe an academy and a bulb total. Unless you're totally neglecting your overall output, this super capitol does not even comprise 50% of the output you'll need soon at that point...and the spec generation rate goes slower from there (and 8 great people by 1000 AD is very generous!).

Wonders are not a substitute for worked tiles, they're a bonus. Although you can slow down the AI by building wonders, you can slow it down by taking a higher % of the land, too.

 

[muxec]

What about farming great merchants early and settling them in wall street city?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

What about farming great merchants early and settling them in wall street city?

That will let you kick your slider up, but it's very hard to "farm great merchants" with wonders (great lighthouse gives merchant GPP, ToA gives a split chance for one...and the colossus? W/o a coastal capitol it's not looking too hot). If you're wanting merchants it's probably easier to get the GPP just by running 4 of them somewhere with some multipliers on GPP rather than trying to use wonders to get them. Priests can help too...but to what avail? If you're going to wonder spam the slider has a less significant (but still material) impact. However the # of cities you have won't be huge so it's hard to picture not getting a better benefit from engineers/scientists to settle in oxford rather than gold guys in wall street.

Wall street isn't exactly an early game endeavor, either.

 

[Iranon]

When I try to categorise economies, most revolves around 'what I do in my generic cities', i.e. those devoid of things like national wonders + maybe an additional military city or two which will end up with a military academy.

*

Wonderspam sacrificing expansion is a little different because it pushes you towards a specific setup in a different way: we'll have well-developed cities to make settled Great People as good as always, but a) we have less population to support juicy lightbulbs b) we don't have much control over which type we spawn so making deep lightbulb-driven beelines becomes harder.

If we want to expand forcefully once it becomes feasible, our economy will cease to be defined by a wonderspam... we probably want to give up the iconic Representation + Bureaucracy that allows our few cities to shine for some brute force across the board:
Most truly impressive lategame economy setups will come at a cost though... cottage madness for ridiculous rushbuy or police state for regular production will gimp our settled specialists, trading the bonuses for our shiny capital for the ability to draft is only going to pay off if we're going to gain a LOT of cities to draft from. Personally I tend to like Environmentalism in compact empires - I always go for a strong National Park city if at all possible, and here it affects a good percentage of tiles in addition to limiting health trouble. This works at cross purposes with other ways to break the game - high-powered SP improvements or corporations.

If I can ride a compact wonderspam to a victory (usually possible because as I pointed out in an earlier post, this approach actively keeps the AIs down and they generally aren't very good at translating superior size into a timely win), I often don't bother changing a winning formula. Since this type of game is unlikely to result in a highscore even if I go nuts towards the end, that is not an incentive either... if I don't come out of the floodgates with guns blazing (or axes chopping...) I simply play to win.

 

[futurehermit]

Yes, I have to agree with Iranon here. I qualify my comments here by saying that I am more macro-focused in my play than micro-focused. Although I certainly specialize my cities according to what they will do best, I care more about my overall strategy than about specific details. That is why I am more comfortable using SSE/SE/CE/TRE/etc. than maybe some others are. They speak to general strategies, albeit they do not address all the specific details.

If I am riding a wonderspam to victory Obsolete-style, then I am comfortable saying that I am running a SSE, even if my 5+ other cities may have some cottages and so forth.

 

[DABegley]

In my experience the WE/SSE works well up to Monarch in a good percentage of starts but at emperor you need a really good position for it to work. My current game as Frederick (Phi/Org, random rulers with Monty, Gil, Vicky, Gandhi, Zara and Isa being in the mix) on emperor is going quite well and I am running a form of WE/SSE. However it is only working because I was able to block off a large chunk of land and get friendly early with my only two neighbors. The org trait allowed me to expand quickly so I could turn my capitol to wonders while the rest of my empire went into standard cottage economy. Settled a good batch of merchants and scientists in my Bureaucracy capitol and ran the rest of my world as if the capitol didn't exist. If I hadn't been able to block off all that turf, 11 cities worth at full development, the loss of production from the capitol churning out wonders would have made it very nearly impossible to compete.

 

[Dirk1302]

WE/SSE is a bit better defined than some of the other terms. It leaves many questions though. Obsoletes focuses 200% on the wonders not caring too much about city growth, he also doesn't build cottages. Others will give some more consideration to city growth, some will build cottages, others farms. So if i only hear WE/SSE i'm still not really informed about what has been done.

As Obsolete has shown this strategy can lead to success if the circumstances are right on deity.
If i'd play this way i'd give more care to city growth/micro but i won't argue with success.

 

[madscientist]

Just one more point to add here. WonderSpamming also get's you the benefits of that wonder, something lost in the Settled Specialist talk. Granted you can get anyone of those wonders in a normal game, but getting susch a slew of them gives you a big advantage.

@TMIT. By Astronomy (Observatories) my WS/SSE capital is usually getting 400-500 beakers alone with representation. I do not really recall the time period as I am shifting from Marathon to normal and timing is different. Also as with any game, land is power and there is nothing stopping a WS/SSE game from having a sprawling empire, in fact it's better as your capitla has alot more time to WonderBuild. I will say though that warring is a bit more limited or at least needs to be timed, it's a builder's game not really a war-mongers.

One final comment. Ramesses is a great leader, but also is Agustus due to the overpowered UB for this game, the Prats which reduces the number of units needed early (using them peacefully), and IMP for getting those early settlers out in time.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

@TMIT. By Astronomy (Observatories) my WS/SSE capital is usually getting 400-500 beakers alone with representation. I do not really recall the time period as I am shifting from Marathon to normal and timing is different. Also as with any game, land is power and there is nothing stopping a WS/SSE game from having a sprawling empire, in fact it's better as your capitla has alot more time to WonderBuild. I will say though that warring is a bit more limited or at least needs to be timed, it's a builder's game not really a war-mongers.

Are you going astro before edu/lib? Probably not. With that being the case, if you don't lib astro you won't be getting it until into the 1000's AD if you settle everyone. If you do go astro first in SSE you definitely won't be pulling 400 stable bpt when you get it.

What sets you back in terms of a sprawling empire is the hammer investment necessary to start the wonder spam early in the game...a sprawling empire will need to involve war then most likely, however the SSE special tech advantages don't really materialize instantly, especially when compared against bulbs, so wars will tend to be later. If you go full-out wonders there won't be a sprawling empire.

We have to assume one speed here because marathon makes comparisons to non-marathon completely useless...and even other speeds have some variance.