When do you NOT spam cottages?

[Dirk1302]

Please note: I am taking a theoretical approach here. I fully appreciate that it is not always possible or necessary to make the changes once a game is already won. However it is useful to have a clear idea of of which approach is more efficient. I simply say Hybrids are theoretically less efficient than either the SE or CE used in the same situation.

So your ultimate comparision is a situation where all civics can be run and all relevant techs are researched. I tentatively agree with you that a mix of cottages and farms is not the strongest setup in that case. All cottages is imo strongest most of the time assuming all cities have grown to happy cap. A cottage has slightly more output than a spec. But this is a very theoretical situation, and i could argue that some games with mixed improvements are still stronger than a pure farm game since all cottages is better than all farms. Most games feature Workshops and watermills as well, watermills are especially good with financial leaders.

In the same situation, for instance when we just switched buro mixed improvements will almost always win out against a onesided approach.

 

[Artichoker]

High commerce is good...

High GPP flow is also good...


The key to running a successful economy is being able to balance both. It is possible to have a high GPP flow with a good percentage of your tiles as cottages.

Food supply is more important than food surplus, and it is possible to have a city with high food surplus and low food supply, and vice versa. In terms of GPP generating potential, a city with low food surplus and high food supply is often better than one with high food supply and low food surplus.

Pacifism and Golden Ages are the key to maximizing GPP flow without investing a huge amount of your tile improvements in farms. With proper fine tuning of both, you can have good commerce from cottages and good GPP flow as well.

 

[Dirk1302]

^Yes i agree with all that. Timing is key in civ4.

 

[UncleJJ]

I don't understand why you think there is "no room for a hybrid." I run a SE/CE 'hybrid' in pretty much every game I play. Some cities are better suited to cottages while others are suited to specialists. I think it would be pretty rare to have land that would even be suitable for a pure CE or SE. When you've got 'too much' food in a particular city, you have basically no choice but to run specialists. When you've got a city surrounded by resourceless grassland that is difficult to irrigate, then clearly cottages are the ticket. For civics, the only significant conflict of interests is between representation and universal suffrage. Hybrid ftw!

Have you read all my posts in this thread starting with #56? I think most of your points are answered in them taken together.

Given that you run a hybrid what sort of map do you play and which victory conditions do you head for? How do you build an army? I am assuming that you will need to defend yourself against significant military threat even if you go for a peaceful victory. What other civics do you tend to run alongside Rep + FS?

Rep + FS seems a strong research combination at first sight but has severe problems when you look at the whole picture. The lack of production is telling. The problem with Rep + FS is the cottage cities don't get their infrastructure fast enough in most cities. That loses huge economic potential, usually far more than is gained from Rep. Switching to Rep after US has installed all infrastructure is a more viable option. Without Nationhood specialist cities have to get 2 happiness from somewhere which usually means building more infrastructure. Nationhood is arguably the most powerful civic in the game, paying 15 food for a draft rifle or musket is the most efficient trade off I can think of.

If you think Hybrids are better what specific advantages do you think they have over either a CE or a SE played on the same map (depending on which type it favours most)? Do they give more research? More production? A quicker response to a military situation?

 

[GoodGame]

If I'm not using a Financial leader, I tend to use cottages very sparingly. Usually only on rivers, and just to offset budget imbalances. Lightbulbing GPs is a more effective means of research IMHO.

 

[Dirk1302]

@UncleJJ, i don't think you answered Karadoc's points. A hybrid, assuming it's a good one adhering to the >= +6 food surplus/city guideline, means that enough farms are built to support either slavery or workshops under caste/sp. So no problem running fs/rep. It's why CR is such a nice wonder to have, if i have it i often switch from one combination to another.

 

[UncleJJ]

Indeed CR is a special wonder in that it lets you have the best of both worlds switching between civics freely with few long term penalties. I was assuming it was not available during the period. Having Spiritual also allows many of those advantages much earlier in the game but on a 5 turn cycle rather than every turn. Rapidly switching between civics has consequences and is harder to analyse. I think it is better to understand a basic non Spiritual situation first then consider situations where civics can be switched rapidly to advantage - unless you can argue convincingly otherwise

I could have made all sorts of assumptions about how karadoc runs his Hybrid as you just have. I thought it best to wait for him to answer my questions so I understand his position better.

Incidentally, my use of the phrase "No room for the hybrid" was rhetoric used to answer a specific part of a TMIT post, where he wanted to compare 2 cottages against a single farm and spy under SE civics. It is not a general criticism of Hybrids.

 

[Tecibbar]

First, read the sentence in context. The poster I was responding to was implying that you can't outtech while stealing techs, a thing that it is emphatically untrue.

Second, and unlike it seems if you take the sentence out of context, the discussion had nil to have with a economy based on stealing techs. It was simply a discussion of the comparative merits of a specific tile improvement vs a non-rep spy. But if you want to bring this to here, I still maintain that most people in here underestimates badly espionage ( BTW your second sentence pretty much implies that you are running cottages en masse ... )

when I quoted "1:beaker:", of course I didn't literally mean it. I stole a couple of techs, like guild and banking on my way to eco. But I only run spy in food rich and no acadamy cities. If there is a plain cottage, most of the time I will first work on that. There are only a handful of tech I would to steal, others I could just trade for them. Also, most of time the victim is too far away for reasonable stealing, because I would like to keep my neighbors backward and weak. Another reason I don't favor spy is because they are delayed gratification, the spy points will be useful dozens of turns later. Much like running 2 scietists for 200 turns and eventually pops the 12th great people, not worth it.

In a game where I had scottish yard, a settled Gspy, running my own relgion and being hated by every one. (They were baddies who hated me no matter what) I stole more techs than I researched. It was really fun, but situations like that is very rare.

 

[karadoc]

Given that you run a hybrid what sort of map do you play and which victory conditions do you head for? How do you build an army? I am assuming that you will need to defend yourself against significant military threat even if you go for a peaceful victory. What other civics do you tend to run alongside Rep + FS?

If you think Hybrids are better what specific advantages do you think they have over either a CE or a SE played on the same map (depending on which type it favours most)? Do they give more research? More production? A quicker response to a military situation?

Map types etc... usually shuffle or fractal, normal or large - I aim for whatever victory conditions I feel like at the time. In my most recent game I was very peaceful - I was only in a few short wars (and only when I was declared on), and I only built 4 cities. I won a cultural victory in 1836AD. That was a normal size pangea map. But more typically I tend to conquer one of my neighbours and then use the land advantage to win peacefully (or continue on for domination/conquest if I want to finish quickly). I always play on emperor difficulty.

To build armies, early in the game... well I could go into the details about what I do but I don't think it is really relevant - surely it isn't possible to specialise to with CE or SE in the early game. There are essentially no civic choices, pretty much every city is restricted by happiness, you can't get enough specialists, the cottages haven't grown, etc. So late in the game, I typically have productivity centers that do most of the army building - these are cities that are completely dedicated to productivity. They'll have all the great generals, great wonders, and military national wonders. If I don't need the productivity, then I'll turn the miners into specialists.

For civics I almost always use representation. I typically use free speech - I only switch to nationhood if someone declares war on me when I'm not ready (or if I'm a spiritual leader I'll just switch at the start of a war regardless so that I can get a troop surge to win the war more comfortably). I'll use caste system if I can afford the happiness, emancipation if I can't. Free market if I can get a couple of good corps, state property if I can't (or rarely mercantilism if I don't have any good trading partners). The religious one depends a lot on the diplomatic situation, and on where or not I'm getting special bonuses from religious buildings and stuff like that.

About the happiness boost of nationhood. It's useful - but there are a lot of other ways to get happiness. I prefer the better cottages and better culture of free speech, unless it's war time. About drafting - it can be pretty useful, sure, but I'm not sure why you are bringing it up. It is equally useful for CE/SE/hybrid.

About the infrastructure for cottage cities - Most of those cities will have had their buildings whipped/chopped to completion back in the dark ages, but typically I'll let them have a mine or a workshop or something like that to give them the productivity if they need it. It's uncommon to have a city that has nothing but grassland around it anyway.

As for my perceived advantages of a hybrid. I think the main thing is flexibility. I figure that cottages produce better commerce per pop (and continue to give food), but only after a long time investment. It usually isn't work setting up new cottages late in the game, even with emancipation they just take too long to grow. Specialists don't need any tiles to work, their jobs can be chosen to suit the buildings in the city, and they are more easily moved to productivity if required. Oxford Uni, Wall Street, and of course National Epic are all most efficient in specialist cities. Cottage cities will often have a food resource or some farms anyway to help them grow to full size. Once they are fully grown, the extra citizens will be specialists. When a city has a lot of food resources, you don't have much choice but to use it to run a bunch of specialists. There is only a choice for cities that have lots of grassland.. and for those I'll run mostly cottages. If I capture a city that is surrounded by towns, I'll leave it that way; but if it just has a mishmash of improvements I'll turn it into either a specialist city or a productivity city, because those are faster to set up (even still, I'll leave any towns that it has around it unless I need the tile for irrigation).


-- ack. This post of mine is really long, and probably pretty boring as well. I just tried to answer all the questions. The short version is just what I said in my previous post: different cities are suited to different tasks. High food cities will have at least some specialists. Flat grassland will probably be better with cottages. Captured cities will have what they have. And I think that trying to fully specialise towards CE or SE will only give marginal benefits for the cities can do anyway, and will harm the cities that are less flexible.

 

[Tecibbar]

Rep + FS seems a strong research combination at first sight but has severe problems when you look at the whole picture. The lack of production is telling. The problem with Rep + FS is the cottage cities don't get their infrastructure fast enough in most cities. That loses huge economic potential, usually far more than is gained from Rep. Switching to Rep after US has installed all infrastructure is a more viable option. Without Nationhood specialist cities have to get 2 happiness from somewhere which usually means building more infrastructure. Nationhood is arguably the most powerful civic in the game, paying 15 food for a draft rifle or musket is the most efficient trade off I can think of.

I ran Rep + FS in late game a lot. By then drafting infantry is not really profittable, corporations gives surplus food, infrastructure in commerce city are mostly setup. Without factory, Hammers in commerce city is near useless. The way I see it, if you specialize your cities enough, there is no room for US.

 

[bigfatjonny]

My (very simple) thoughts on the matter.

GPP - 100% is not double!
Ok, actually it is, well the first 100% is. If you are non philosophical then pacifism will double your . If you are philosophical then pacifism will not double your .
Eg 20 + 100% = 40 (Non phil)

20 + 200% = 60 for philosopical.

60 is not double 40, it is only a 50% increase.
Therefore philosophical does not scale in the same way that other traits do as the bonus is not applied before other bonuses. It is not changed at the base level. Financial adds directly to the base commerce, and then is effected by bonuses.

Universal Suffrage and Representation are not opposites
There is a certain synergy between certain civics & economy, eg cottages + US, FS & Emancipation or Specialists + Rep, caste & state property.
However you don't have to use this synergy - US creates not , Emancipation only helps towns grow, if you have fully grown towns then you don't need emancipation (if you can copy with unhappiness).
The only civics that directly create wealth are FS - from cottages and Rep from specialists.

If you dont need and want to maximize wealth then a hybrid of cottages and specialists using Rep, FS (& possibly caste) will create the greatest wealth.

 

[kossin]

The strength of Philosophical comes from two things:

-earlier GPs = when they count the most
-cheap Universities = fast Oxford

If you're going for space and need more research, then yes probably running Rep will be better than US. When you have everything you want, workshop over everything, turn the slider up and go to caste.
Still, US with Kremlin and FS-Towns is about the most powerful production combo.

 

[UncleJJ]

karadoc: thank you for a full and clear answer to my many questions. I much appreciate having a view from someone who plays the game so differently from me. However, obviously I have not found your approach to be as useful as you have and I'm wondering why. Tentatively I'm guessing that it is due to the maps and rate of expansion you have at certain critical points in the game. I am probably a more aggressive player. You seem to have not found the need for a huge increase in production in the middle game that I take for granted is needed on Emperor and Immortal. Let me explain briefly my general approach to a game.

I play several different ways (what I would describe as CE, SE and hybrid) and and on a range of maps from continents, fractal to archipelago, only avoiding pangea, if possible. My overall gameplan often involves an initial expansion by REX, or axe, and then a beeline to Liberalism using a lightbulb or two. From there I expand to between 20 and 30 cities before deciding finally what path to victory to attempt. The resources and population I've gained enable all types. I use whatever military technology gives me the edge and it ranges from drafted muskets and cannons to cuirassiers/ cavalry with spies and rifles. On water maps galleons and frigates are used and if the wars drag on I prioritise oil for destroyers and Flight to maintain naval / air superiority.

If I play as a CE then after Liberalism, Democracy is the key to power up my economy and military. I might use Nationhood and Slavery to turn specialists into units as a suppliment to US for an initial military push. From then on CE civics are usually run including Emancipation to get cottages to towns asap. The switch from HR to US can have happiness problems and needs attention. Also when Biology and Astronomy allow access to more food and resources from overseas trades my cottage cities can grow and run more cottages including turning some farms into cottages so Emancipation tends to stay particularly as it puts pressure on other civs that aren't yet in it. The strength of this economy is largely determined by the number of towns in cottage cities with good infrastructure, they're worth roughly twice a town without infrastructure


If I play with a SE variant then Constitution (Rep and jails) is the key technology amplified by Biology and Communism (IA and Kremlin). Nationhood and Slavery are the way I turn food into military adding to what the HE city can produce. I like a very rapid military build up and tend to be aggressive with the neighbours earlier with a SE than a CE. If I'm behind in research then I'll frequently adopt a late game espionage approach to suppliment research using EPs for stealing and disrupting AI economies.


If I play as a hybrid then research priorities are harder to formulate. I want Constitution and Biology for the specialists and PP and Democracy for the cottages. Civics are a nightmare; I want to run Emancipation to complete the cottages and Slavery to make good use of food in cities with no cottages. I want US for the hammers and rush buy in cottage cities and Rep for the happiness and beakers in specialist cities. I want FS for the extra commerce and Nationhood for the rifles. It even permeates the religious civics, as I want Theocracy when drafting and OR for installing infrastructure. Now if I'm playing a Spiritual leader then meeting these conflicting demands in turn can be quite fun, but if I'm not it gets frustrating and some parts of the economy are always sub optimal and lagging.

I have tried the Rep + FS option you are advocating and as long as most of the infrastructure has already been installed in core cities, and I already have an adequate defensive force, it works well and can be better at research. But it is terrible at raising an army. It is terrible in newly captured cities that have to rely on whatever hammers they produce naturally and that's seldom enough. They need either Slavery or US to get them contributing to the economy instead of draining it. Caste System with Rep + FS seems to be the worst option in my games. A few cities can build workshops and gain hammers but many can't. Slavery is much better in high food cities with low hammers and no workshop option. Emancipation is good for avoiding the happiness issue and for maturing any captured villages into towns. These conflicting requirements can't be met at the same time. It seems all your civics are peacetime ones. I guess I'm just too aggressive.

Since you have no problems with wars I suspect you're using a larger number of dedicated military production cities than I would. That in itself can be considered an inefficiency if those cities could have been developed to produce research. So perhaps what we have is simply a redistribution of the research effort and military production.

 

[karadoc]

Yeah, it does seem like we have different play styles. For example, I haven't really watched many of other people's games but compared to TMIT I typically use a smaller army to fight with and spend more time micromanaging the individual units. So maybe I'm a bit sloppy with my choice of civics and economic specialization, but somehow make up for it by being more careful in other areas. I don't know.

Slavery certainly is good for getting small towns going, but I don't use it for bigger cities (except for special cases), and I kind of get sick of checking what I can whip all the time... so recently I've been using caste workshops to help smaller towns set up if they need the extra productivity. Caste system is also handy for running artists in newly captured cities (and of course for the general goodness of better-than-mine productivity before railroad).

About the dedicated production cities, like I said mentioned, if I don't need the productivity I sometimes turn the miners and workshop-guys into specialists for awhile, so it isn't a complete waste.

 

[Iranon]

Slavery is very hard to top for getting new cities up and running.

It shines when you need infrastructure quickly, before you grew into your caps. First you work food-rich tiles to grow (allowing you to work more food-rich tiles). Then you convert the accumulated food into production at the often favourable rate of 30/(size+10).

Things get a little tricker once you have grown into your stable caps, but a little micromanagement can go a long way... particularly switching around food resources and zero-food tiles between cities according to their current point in the regrowth cycle.

Last not least, it's invaluable for places that can get no decent production in any other way... like island cities, which conveniently have access to plenty of 2-food-tiles for regrowing. Slavery is usually more efficient for this than CS workshops.

 

[bigfatjonny]

Now if I'm playing a Spiritual leader then meeting these conflicting demands in turn can be quite fun, but if I'm not it gets frustrating and some parts of the economy are always sub optimal and lagging.

Spiritual is fast becoming my favorite trait because of the flexibility it allows you. Without it the civic changes you make need to be long term decisions, unless you have a golden age, rather than short term efficiency savings. I wouldn't advocate Rep & FS unless you know you are going into a long period of teching without needing hammers.

Caste System with Rep + FS seems to be the worst option in my games. A few cities can build workshops and gain hammers but many can't.

I am thinking of my current game where I have conquered my entire continent and spent a time investing infrastructure (Slavery etc) but I am now some way behind in tech. I dont really need any hammers apart from in a few mined/hammer specialist cities. Rep FS, caste/emancipation, FR, is a zero hammers very high commerce situation, but sometimes fits what you need.

I have never really tried the espionage approach, shame I didn't read this earlier or I could have tried that instead.

I like how (nearly) all the civics can be used in certain circumstances depending on your needs. Spiritual definitely gives you more flexibility with this though.

 

[karadoc]

I reckon spiritual is probably the most powerful trait for the kinds of games I play. Nothing beats the just-in-time defense boost of being able to switch to nationhood + slavery to whip and draft troops at the drop of a hat. And that's just one of the many cool things you can get from being spiritual.

I also like that most of the civics are useful. The one that stands out to me as being not useful is serfdom (except perhaps at the start of advanced-start games.) But every so ofter I see a thread on these forums that says such-and-such civic seems useless, and then a bunch of people show up to say that the civic doesn't suck and it's actually the best and it's their favourite civic etc. -- But I'm still going to out on a limb and say that serfdom sucks. I'll just build 50% more workers, thank you very much.