Why am I too stupid to understand corporations?
- Thread starter Hangly Man
- Start date
OTAKUjbski
TK421
Inflation does not need to be tweaked.
We just need to better understand Corporations.
Check out this thread:
Corporate Maintenance Explained
We just need to better understand Corporations.
Check out this thread:
Corporate Maintenance Explained
Your theory is flawed at its core because it assumes that it was designed for corporations to get worst with time. You also didn't show anything special in your post that most people don't already know.
There is another critical error in your post that you don't seem to graps: having 2 foreign corp per 1 home corp just to subsidize it is IRRELAVENT.
The corp must pay for itself, the subsidy of foreign corp is irrelavent because that money would be coming in whether or not you ran the home corp.
So in fact you are still paying outragous prices for the domestic crop which doesn't come even close to being worth the 80
per turn but in your head you say: "its ok because I have foreign corps to pay for it".Foreign corps are just like domestic commerce, it doesnt matter that the income comes from foreign corps, its still money that you've earned, hence domestic corps need to be beneficial on their own terms.
Secondly, I was running 50% science happily, then suddenly one civ went SP and now I had to drop my science to 20%.
Finally, if corps are SOOOOOOOOO bad that you need 2 foreign corp for 1 domestic, then everyone except for the corp owner will always go SP/CS because they don't even have the HQ and by your flawed logic a corp should only be useful if you have the HQ and foreign branches.
And since everyone is SP, then by your own flawed logic again you must go SP as well because you will no longer be able to have 2 foreign corps per 1 domestic corp.
Your flawed logic comes again when you consider that if the current model is correct, then the HRE and Zulu UB are FAR FAR overpowered because they effectively halve the cost of corporations compared to other civs.
You logic is flawed because by your own methods, then you could never ever capture the world because then the foreign corps would no longer exist and you would have to run 100% tax since you dont have the 2:1 ratio for a subsidy.
Finally your logic is flawed because the AI spread your corporation to themselves, and end up going broke when inflation rises. Surely if corporations are a weapon they wouldn't do this?
And don't use the:
"corporations aren't like religions because you can't spam branches" we all know this, and its pretty annoying when people without experience come out and say this ridiculous baseless statement, you made a pretty good post and its a shame you ruined it with your condescending attitude.
What we DO SAY is that corporations are VERY SIMILAR to religions.
VERY SIMILAR means that have things in common.
aelf
Ashen One
There are 3 situations in which Free Market would be good:
- When the other founders of corporations are not beside you
- When you are more advanced than your opponents, such that they you are founding corporations earlier than them
- When you have founded all the non-competing corporations
To put it simply, there may be a golden window of opportunity in which Free Market would benefit you. This is worth considering, especially if you are Spiritual.
If you do not meet any of these 3 conditions or are starting to see foreign corporations spread rapidly within your neigbours' empires, your should run Mercantilism or State Property. Of course, if you have managed to be saddled with lots of foreign corporations, you would have no choice but to run State Property, but that is your fault.
mrt144 said:
Caste System does not deprive you of corporations, and neither is the opposite true, so I don't consider that as something that weighs against the latter. And State Property does not necessarily give you the same benefits as corporations at a lower cost. To get those benefits (extra food and hammers), you would probably have to build over existing improvements, especially cottages. This means there is a significant requirement, and you are actually paying for it, just in a less tangible way. Corporations don't require you to demolish your cottages, so you might just be paying for it as much as you are paying for the effects of State Property in real terms.
Are you talking about in the real world or in the game? The concept of corporations in the game is nothing like that of the real world, so a comparison here is moot. And if you have to pay for the benefits of domestic corporations, so what? I believe it has been established that corporations are not like religions. If you are paying a lot for them, ask yourself why and take steps to correct that in your next game. If you choose to play in such a way that makes corporations a burden at a certain stage, then you should and deserve to switch to State Property.
Nikis-Knight
Deity
It doesn't have to match the real world, but it should make sense, and I think a lot of players will be confused by the current implementation. "You can't mindlessly spam them" is an understatement. You must use them with the utmost care or they may ruin you in the late game (which is, after all, the focus of the expansion!)
magicalsushi
Prince
Let me see now, what are the two things they did tell us about corporations before the game was released?
1) They provide a use for having multiple instances of a resource.
and
2) They are a nerf to State Property, which had previously been overused. To help reduce the effects of this nerf, State Property has been improved with a hammer bonus.
Those who claim that there's nothing wrong with the current implementation of corporations are saying that they're *meant* to be used as a weapon, and that there's nothing strange about the fact that the AI spread your corporations throughout their own empires, crippling themselves by helping you to spread your weapon. If corporations are meant to be harmful to the empires they infect, why were we told that SP's anti-corporation effect represented a nerf? And as for issue (1), are you *sure* the intended new use of multiple resources is "they allow your opponents to screw you over with corporation maintenance"? I was assuming multiple resources were to be given a *positive* use. As things stand, we're seeing people suggest pillaging your own resources to get rid of them.
Wake up and smell the coffee, people. It couldn't be more obvious that corporations are not working as the designers had intended them to.
jkp1187
Unindicted Co-Conspirator
Just some observations from my first completed game. FWIW, Joao/Portugal, Standard sized Big/Small map, Noble difficulty, 11 civs.
I actually played to lose, just so I could play around with some of the new features. I ended up founding one corporation and three different colonies to see how they worked. I ended up with a ridiculously small empire -- only six cities directly under my control (which was bad). As a result, I could not build any national wonders that had pre-req buildings, because I would have needed a seventh city. (I went a little too crazy creating colonies, I suspect.) No FP, no Wall Street.
Anyway, I founded a corporation -- Mining, Inc. I spread it only to one other city (although 2 out of 6 is still a sizable porportion.) On the other hand, I did as much as I could to spread it overseas. My colonies received a branch in every city, and every civ with open borders and a corp-friendly economy civic received a branch. The AI started spreading it amongst their own cities, too.
I did experience the usual inflation toward the end. I noticed, however, that I was able to keep ahead of the curve by continuing to spread corporate branches in other cities (and, thus, 'grow' my way out of the inflation hole.) Still, thanks to my spy network, I noticed that Mansa Musa was having an hard time keeping up with technology. (At one point, he was taking 500 turns to research Plastics). Naturally, Mansa was one of the guys who spammed corporations, too.
The two titans of the game were Churchill and Pericles. They kept warring with each other, and eventually both went for State Property.
The game ended in a cultural win for Pericles, who had no corporations.
I actually played to lose, just so I could play around with some of the new features. I ended up founding one corporation and three different colonies to see how they worked. I ended up with a ridiculously small empire -- only six cities directly under my control (which was bad). As a result, I could not build any national wonders that had pre-req buildings, because I would have needed a seventh city. (I went a little too crazy creating colonies, I suspect.) No FP, no Wall Street.
Anyway, I founded a corporation -- Mining, Inc. I spread it only to one other city (although 2 out of 6 is still a sizable porportion.) On the other hand, I did as much as I could to spread it overseas. My colonies received a branch in every city, and every civ with open borders and a corp-friendly economy civic received a branch. The AI started spreading it amongst their own cities, too.
I did experience the usual inflation toward the end. I noticed, however, that I was able to keep ahead of the curve by continuing to spread corporate branches in other cities (and, thus, 'grow' my way out of the inflation hole.) Still, thanks to my spy network, I noticed that Mansa Musa was having an hard time keeping up with technology. (At one point, he was taking 500 turns to research Plastics). Naturally, Mansa was one of the guys who spammed corporations, too.
The two titans of the game were Churchill and Pericles. They kept warring with each other, and eventually both went for State Property.
The game ended in a cultural win for Pericles, who had no corporations.
homan1983 I appreciate the fact you're going to great length to debate this with the many posters who state in very succinct terms that one needs to be careful about corp spreading etc.
In my opinion it seems clear that corporations are not working in the game as the designers intended them to. Corporations were designed so as to give benefits to the cities that held them, with an associated cost of course. The use of corps as a weapon via spreading them to foreign civs was meant be like this: The trade-off is that they get the benefit (ie. hammers etc.) of the corp but also pay maintenance, while you collect the corporation payments in your HQ city. The idea is that you're helping the enemy but helping yourself more, for a net gain I guess. This is supposed to be the complication of using it as a weapon - not the drowning of civs in inflation costs.
I think it is clear that corporations should in general give a net gain regardless of the era, (with the possible exception of neglecting to build courthouses - these should be necessary). At the moment, I see very little point in doing the following things which are the necessary costs for utilising corps:
It's not my intention to make a suggestion for the fix (though I do make one shortly
), but I'm agreeing with those who think the mechanics for corporations (specifically the tie with inflation) is broken. The fact alone that I from now on don't even want to found a corporation makes it pretty apparent to me anyway.
And to those who say that the corp is useful for specific purposes like say putting some extra hammers in your HE city or beakers in your science cities... seriously, the gain is too small to make founding the corps worth it, and this should be even more apparent if you are not spreading the corp to very many cities.
I think corporations should be changed so that as they become larger they become more powerful in some way. For example, perhaps the corp maintenance cost in a city could decrease over time - rewarding a player who has kept a corporation running for some time. This could mean it would be a slight loss to spread your corp initially, but it would pay off in the long run. This seems more logical and strategic IMO than having the early gain and losing out in the long run.
Note, some of what I said andrewlt mentioned as well.
For such a hefty thread, that's my 2 cents.
In my opinion it seems clear that corporations are not working in the game as the designers intended them to. Corporations were designed so as to give benefits to the cities that held them, with an associated cost of course. The use of corps as a weapon via spreading them to foreign civs was meant be like this: The trade-off is that they get the benefit (ie. hammers etc.) of the corp but also pay maintenance, while you collect the corporation payments in your HQ city. The idea is that you're helping the enemy but helping yourself more, for a net gain I guess. This is supposed to be the complication of using it as a weapon - not the drowning of civs in inflation costs.
I think it is clear that corporations should in general give a net gain regardless of the era, (with the possible exception of neglecting to build courthouses - these should be necessary). At the moment, I see very little point in doing the following things which are the necessary costs for utilising corps:
- Building the HQ. Requires a Great Person. In most cases this GP is a valuable one.
- The cost of spreading a corp to a city. Typically this is at least 100 gold. It's more if you buy out an existing competing corp.
- The cost of building the executive. This includes the lost opportunity for building other things.
- Specific techs. Getting some of the techs for founding the corps requires deviating from the more useful tech paths IMO. This means you sacrifice a bit of military advancement for the sake of getting to a corp first.
It's not my intention to make a suggestion for the fix (though I do make one shortly
), but I'm agreeing with those who think the mechanics for corporations (specifically the tie with inflation) is broken. The fact alone that I from now on don't even want to found a corporation makes it pretty apparent to me anyway.And to those who say that the corp is useful for specific purposes like say putting some extra hammers in your HE city or beakers in your science cities... seriously, the gain is too small to make founding the corps worth it, and this should be even more apparent if you are not spreading the corp to very many cities.
I think corporations should be changed so that as they become larger they become more powerful in some way. For example, perhaps the corp maintenance cost in a city could decrease over time - rewarding a player who has kept a corporation running for some time. This could mean it would be a slight loss to spread your corp initially, but it would pay off in the long run. This seems more logical and strategic IMO than having the early gain and losing out in the long run.
Note, some of what I said andrewlt mentioned as well.
For such a hefty thread, that's my 2 cents.
double post, sorry. My internet has been playing up badly.
Well I guess I could use this post for another idea.
How about have another building which is made available only in the very late game, which is specifically designed to target corporation maintenance costs. It could cost, say, 150 hammers to build and it would cut the corporate maintenance cost in half for that city only. It could require a corporate office in the city before it can be built.
Or I like the other idea people had of a national wonder which targets the costs. I think there should be a national wonder called something like the Stock Exchange (would have to rename England's UB), which does something like halve the inflation due to corps or makes corps run at half price. I'm not all that imaginative in this area, mainly because I don't pretend to have any understanding of economics and how corporations work realistically.
By the way, I suspect one of the necessary conditions to trigger the World Bank (or whatever it was called) random event is having more than a certain amount of gold in your treasury - probably 1000 gold. I've never seen this random event and that could be because I always run my empire with a treasury of typically no more than 300 gold.
Well I guess I could use this post for another idea.
How about have another building which is made available only in the very late game, which is specifically designed to target corporation maintenance costs. It could cost, say, 150 hammers to build and it would cut the corporate maintenance cost in half for that city only. It could require a corporate office in the city before it can be built.
Or I like the other idea people had of a national wonder which targets the costs. I think there should be a national wonder called something like the Stock Exchange (would have to rename England's UB), which does something like halve the inflation due to corps or makes corps run at half price. I'm not all that imaginative in this area, mainly because I don't pretend to have any understanding of economics and how corporations work realistically.
By the way, I suspect one of the necessary conditions to trigger the World Bank (or whatever it was called) random event is having more than a certain amount of gold in your treasury - probably 1000 gold. I've never seen this random event and that could be because I always run my empire with a treasury of typically no more than 300 gold.
what makes you think you would establish cottages in a corp adverse strategy from day one? what makes you think that you dont have land that is readily available to use as workshops, etc?
no one is saying that they give completely equal benefits. i am saying that the benefits of state property are almost without risk. saying that it's your fault for allowing foreign corps in and not establishing your supremecy on that front ignores the fact that you could actually ignore that entire responsibility or risk by playing a corp adverse/espionage exploitation game.
OTAKUjbski
TK421
Very similar based on what? Based on the way you think they should work or based on the way they do work? (As the work now, they are similar but with fundamentally different strategies and approaches.)
If the flaw at the very core of my logic is the assumption that when I pulled the game out of the box and installed it that it was complete and working-as-designed, then I am entirely guilty of just such a flaw.
If the flaw at the very core of my logic is that I use every means available to gain the most out of my Corporations, then I am equally as guilty of that flaw.
When I first started playing BtS, I liked the look of Corporations, so I first set out to determine how they work and how best to make them profitable.
Basically all I did before I made that post was figure out the mechanics so I could use them to my advantage.
In doing my research, I determined that for nearly every weakness in the current model, there is also a corresponding strength to act as a counterbalance.
So far, I haven't seen all the problems other people are seeing. I keep spies handy for necessary Civic-influencing, prioritize my small cities for incorporation and spread my corporations to Vassals & Colonies first.
Whether this is a flaw or not, I don't know. I wasn't on Firaxis' design team, so I have no clue what they intended to do with Corporations. All I know is that the game I picked up and took out of the box is so far treating my Corporations well.
And no, not every city has to be a self-sufficient microcosm. If this were the case, then we would never specialize any of our cities, because we would immediately see each microcosm of a city cannot sustain itself. Everything has had a balance in the past games, so I felt it safe to assume Corporations and the high Domestic costs also have a balance -- that balance being Foreign Offices.
I also never said the AI doesn't misuse or misunderstand Corporations. I honestly haven't paid enough attention to their Corporate (mis)use to feel like I can make a call either way, so I have said nothing about the way the AI spreads Corporations except that I haven't seen anything yet that would lead me to believe they are bankrupting themselves with Corporations.
In the end, I'm not really supporting or rejecting the current Corporate model. If it's wrong, great. If it's right, great. If they change it for the hell of it, great. I'm simply saying that based on my games so far and the research I've done into the mechanics, Corporations are not the demon they seem to have been made out to be this past week.
BTW, we've all had BtS about the same amount of time. Some have surely played more than others but we're all relatively in the same boat. So I have to ask, who are these "people without experience"? Are we not playing the same game?
If the flaw at the very core of my logic is the assumption that when I pulled the game out of the box and installed it that it was complete and working-as-designed, then I am entirely guilty of just such a flaw.
If the flaw at the very core of my logic is that I use every means available to gain the most out of my Corporations, then I am equally as guilty of that flaw.
When I first started playing BtS, I liked the look of Corporations, so I first set out to determine how they work and how best to make them profitable.
Basically all I did before I made that post was figure out the mechanics so I could use them to my advantage.
In doing my research, I determined that for nearly every weakness in the current model, there is also a corresponding strength to act as a counterbalance.
So far, I haven't seen all the problems other people are seeing. I keep spies handy for necessary Civic-influencing, prioritize my small cities for incorporation and spread my corporations to Vassals & Colonies first.
Whether this is a flaw or not, I don't know. I wasn't on Firaxis' design team, so I have no clue what they intended to do with Corporations. All I know is that the game I picked up and took out of the box is so far treating my Corporations well.
And no, not every city has to be a self-sufficient microcosm. If this were the case, then we would never specialize any of our cities, because we would immediately see each microcosm of a city cannot sustain itself. Everything has had a balance in the past games, so I felt it safe to assume Corporations and the high Domestic costs also have a balance -- that balance being Foreign Offices.
I also never said the AI doesn't misuse or misunderstand Corporations. I honestly haven't paid enough attention to their Corporate (mis)use to feel like I can make a call either way, so I have said nothing about the way the AI spreads Corporations except that I haven't seen anything yet that would lead me to believe they are bankrupting themselves with Corporations.
In the end, I'm not really supporting or rejecting the current Corporate model. If it's wrong, great. If it's right, great. If they change it for the hell of it, great. I'm simply saying that based on my games so far and the research I've done into the mechanics, Corporations are not the demon they seem to have been made out to be this past week.
BTW, we've all had BtS about the same amount of time. Some have surely played more than others but we're all relatively in the same boat. So I have to ask, who are these "people without experience"? Are we not playing the same game?
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
No one is denying you can make a corporation pay for itself by spreading forigne corporate offices. But this in turn completely bankrupts the AI. Without the HQ income, and with inflation, each corporate office costs between 50-100 gold per turn by the year 2000. To most of us this is not functional for competative game play, (and in MP just forces entirely SP games) and we can really only consider using forigne offices as a means to exploit the AI.
magicalsushi
Prince
Also, why use foreign spreading to pay for your domestic corporate offices? You're much better off it you just do the foreign spreading without spreading it domestically. It's irrelevent that domestic corporation office maintenance can be offset (or almost offset) by spreading your corps abroad. You can spread them abroad WITHOUT creating domestic corp offices (except the HQ), then rake in loads of cash and spend it on something more useful.
the benefits of corps at home are worth it provided you come up with a ratio that makes sense over time accounting for inflation.
the current reasons this is broken though just for the AI; the AI gets hurt very badly because it has no judicious corporation spread mechanism, it doesn't know how to deal with inflation, it will vote in environmentalism, it won't apply the same methods to you in relation to spreading the corps, it wont go into state property or mercantilism soon enough, it wont use espionage to destroy courthouses in your city, it wont create tundra gold farms, and we surely will find more.
the current reasons this is broken for the player: you don't actively have to participate in corps to exploit them in the AI, you have to limit resource consumption for the sole purpose of avoiding costs in a city you already decided should have a corp, the decision making is based on whether i should even spread these corps to my cities not which ones should go in your cities and whether it's worth letting foreign ones in, while every turn you dont spread your own corps to your cities you and run free market you expose yourself to having to pay for them anyway by the AI spreading them so you are either screwed by yourself or others, and many more to be found as we go along
eric_
Emperor
That's what I was thinking. Someone somewhere mentioned an event that marked the creation of a "central bank," which reduced inflation. What if this were not an event, but a new national wonder?
jkp1187
Unindicted Co-Conspirator
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Someone made the comment that without the inflation we'd be "awash in cash" for the end game. Well, to be frank, I was expecting to be awash in cash once I got a corporation or two and started spreading it throughout the world. This sort of 'quasi-weapon' corporation is not at all what I was hoping for.
I kind of wish that there was an option to "turn off" a corporate branch -- where, even if you had plenty of resources, you could simply opt out, not receiving any benefits nor paying any maintenance. (At the same time, I think the corporate parent should still receive the +5 gold for the franchise.) Then the decision of how and when to use the benefits are completely in the hands of the civ that owns the city, and the decision of whether or not to go for State Property or Merc is more of how badly you want to deny gold to the owner of foreign corporate HQ's -- akin to the decision to go to Theocracy -- and not one of being forced into one of these civics because otherwise you can't hold your head above water.
aelf
Ashen One
I'm just answering your assumptions with my own set of assumptions.
mrt144 said:
My point is that it does have an intangible risk/cost. And saying that it's the game's fault for making corporations that way when you fail to establish your supremacy on that front ignores the fact that you can choose not to ignore that aspect of the game by playing differently or improving your game. It's like building the UN and then blaming that aspect of the game when you lose because you didn't pay attention to diplomacy.
If you want to play with corporations, you either found them much earlier than your opponents, run Mercantilism for most of the game, found all of the non-competing corporations or simply strive to win before inflation becomes less manageable. Sure, maybe they could use some fine tuning in the late game, but they are not buggy and they are not simply inferior to State Property.
corps can easily be brought down by state property via espionage and UN (pass environmentalism and then sabatoge as many courthouses as possible). and having all these contingents TO PLAY A SINGLE ASPECT of the game is a risk not worth taking if you can bring it all down in a much more passive and almost riskless way.
Playing without corps can lead to victory. You can also destroy corps via espionage almost eliminating the possibility for corps to get a win.
Playing with corps can lead to victory. it just costs a hell of a lot more. Espionage to force civics, normal espionage to destory courthouses, the cost of setting up, the GP, the limited time frame to use them due to inflation, the need to spread them beyond your borders, etc etc. all cost more than an active espionage "State property thorn in the side" strategy.
another thign to consider. even after causing headaches by destroying courthouses, if they switch to SP themselves post enforce enviromentalism they have to support these corps again at +25% cost.
also the UN comparison is stupid because the costs of the UN are so small but allow a direct path to victory.
aelf
Ashen One
And all this espionage stuff is effortless? Sounds like an extensive campaign to me. If you can devise this way to achieve world domination, I don't see why you can't devise a way to make corporations useful.
And aren't we talking about how corporations are only really expensive late in the game and on higher difficulty levels, since inflation is the cause of this? So it may be somewhat broken under specific conditions. That does not explain why you guys think that corporations are completely useless and not worth the effort.
mrt144 said:
So you are so smart that you can only see direct paths to victory?
Similar threads
