Why am I too stupid to understand corporations?

[homan1983]

I've been lurking since 2003

So my posts now are not great?

No they're still good

I don't have to run them to get production, though.

Not in SP/CS but in a Corporation economy you DO, thats the point, its just the is the middleman to getting

I did not. I owned them

Slightly irrelavent, the point is that only the BIG civs, or trade-loving civs can get that many resources. What I mean to be precise is that, not everyone in your paticular game can have like 20 "mining co" resources. And corporation should be rewarding you.

I don't care if I win this argument or not.

Good, nor did I, I don't care either way. I still win/won all of my games in BTS and from hereon I can use Zulu/HRE in games where I go for a corp. economy.

And the reason I make these posts and spend this time is not for my personal "benefit" just so in 1 game I can be better off, I genuinly want to make the game better.


And here is my post where I did show the situations I can see corps being used offensively, I just don't want corps to be pigeonholed into 1 thing when I know it has the great potential to be so multi-dimensional.

It can be used as a weapon in 3 cases:

- when the target doesn't need the corporation and hence ends up paying more than value they get out of it (remember the even standard ethanol and aluminium corp, give a secondary benefit to the resource, but sometimes its just not worth it)

- when the target WOULD benefit, but his economy isn't very commerce based [trade routes and cottages] and hence he can't afford to pay for them

- when the target is a poor country (as in real life) and has very few trades going on which means the number of corporation resources he has is so few that at best he gets 1-2 extra whereas with communism each city would get 10+ extra - i.e. opportunity cost.


But to say that corporation is merely and only a weapon is illogical, redundant (UN, Apostalic Palace, Espionage) and too one dimensional.

One of the most common replies I see is people who play the game, get corporations and think: "what the hell is this guy on about, corporations are GREAT".
The problem is that currently, corporation can be absolutely wonderful at one point of the game, and absolutely horrible at another.

Its a bit like the espionage "foment unhappiness" where someone playing epic or normal would say: "what the hell is he talking about, they're perfectly balanced" whereas someone else says "omg its crippling me and crippling the AI, this game's gotten a bit boring now, /resign"

edit: This is a discussion forum, I'm more likely to discuss things that are WRONG than things that go smoothly - the same as news tends to be more negative. The fact that corporations can be good at the start is a good thing, but that its flawed later is a very bad thing and hence it sort of needs to be addressed.

 

[mrt144]

corps dont need to be changed at all! we agree about this! inflation does need to be fixed and the AI's use of corps improved. that is all it needs.

 

[mrt144]

and i was right: you rigged the shots to not fully benefit SP+CS

 

[wayne07]

Yup. Thanks for spotting that. I switched from one civic to another to take a look at the effects and took the screenshot under the wrong civic (it was 4 a.m. when I posted) That said, this actually demonstrates the merits of Free Market. But, in any case, let me redeem myself and correct that now...

[EDIT: I was reminded that the city did have a courthouse, thanks to homan1983. I've added the courthouse and retaken the screenshots. Of course, the corp payments were reduced.]

Under Mercantilism, maximising hammer output:

Under Free Market, maximising hammer output:

Under State Property, maximising hammer output at a sustainable population level:

This time, I also turned off the espionage slider and raised the research slider to the maximum without going into the red. I hope you guys can get a clearer picture now.

It can be concluded from the new screenshots that under Mercantilism, the corps do take a higher toll on the economy. Do I still think that it's worth it? Yes. State Property only shaves two turns off the tech without giving me more extra gpt, and it still cannot match the production level of the corp. Inflation is rapidly eating away at cost effectiveness of the corp, but up to this point the corp is doing okay.

Free Market is the winner here. It's in somewhere in between SP and Mercantilism. Higher production compared to SP but lower costs compared to Merc. It produces more beakers in the city too. Why don't the AIs spread their corps to me? Like I said, they didn't get the chance to.

In any case, it doesn't change the fact that corporations can still work late in the game.

Haha... its strange. The SP screenshots seem to prove SP>all the others to me. Approximating production of the mining inc while increasing science... isn't that the best

Also, i know you are ignoring research at this point. But 2 turns off one late game tech is HUGE. If you research 5 tech. Its 10 turns.... and we all know late game tech are all expensive. I could have the sum of money to upgrade all of my army to the latest technology comfortably if i don't want the research boost.....

 

[homan1983]

Haha... its strange. The SP screenshots seem to prove SP>all the others to me. Approximating production of the mining inc while increasing science... isn't that the best

And thats not even including Caste System which adds another to each workshop tile Imagine then!

 

[Tonifranz]

Homan1983, I have a question. Why do do think that Caste System is better late game than Emancipation? I mean, sure, the positive benefits of Emancipation is negligible that late in the game, the negative benefits, that of preventing lots of unhappiness from other civs adopting emancipation, is a must have, especially in large maps where there are 12 or more civs who adopted emancipation, where the unhappiness could cripple you if you remain in Caste System or any other labor civics that is not emancipation.

Isn't it that the citizens gained by them not being unhappy about being unemancipated, especially in the larger cities near or at the happiness limit is greater than whatever benefits that Caste system might bring, as you would, in any case be limited in your specialists by the unhappiness factor?

I myself usually use slavery until near the end of the game, and switch to emancipation when three or more civs have adopted it and I have Universal Suffrage.

 

[magicalsushi]

Yup. Thanks for spotting that. I switched from one civic to another to take a look at the effects and took the screenshot under the wrong civic (it was 4 a.m. when I posted) That said, this actually demonstrates the merits of Free Market. But, in any case, let me redeem myself and correct that now...

Under Mercantilism, maximising hammer output:

Under Free Market, maximising hammer output:

Under State Property, maximising hammer output at a sustainable population level:

(I've cut out the pics since they're big and we've all seen them; they're also re-quoted in a post not far above this one)

These are much better than the first pictures, but I have another minor niggle: the specialists. You're running an engineer under Mercantilism, but only priests under SP. SP doesn't need priests, as you already have a larger gold surplus than under the other two civics. Please try using as many engineers as possible before allocating priests. Under the other civics, you may well need priests to get extra gold, but not under SP.

I'm not sure that this will make a massive difference, but not everybody is convinced that the pictures do demonstrate Merc/FM > SP, so presumably it's a close contest. Perhaps switching to engineers could swing the balance.

Also, I do think it'd be fairer to employ CS for the SP screenshot. By my understanding, we're currently looking at Merc + FS + Rep, FM + FS + Rep and SP + FS + Rep. Rep gives some synergy to Merc but not to SP. This is a bit biased. You could either change all of the non-economic civics back to Barbarism etc, or you could use the natural synergytic civics with their respective economic civics (meaning CS with SP). The former is perhaps fairer, but the latter gives a much more realistic picture. However, sticking with a fixed set of non-economic civics (other than Barbarism et al), as you are presumably currently doing, is going to bias the results in one direction or another - bias in either direction is not going to help you convince people to see your side of the argument.

I understand completely if you're getting sick of taking screenshots though!

 

[aelf]

Haha... its strange. The SP screenshots seem to prove SP>all the others to me. Approximating production of the mining inc while increasing science... isn't that the best

Unfortunately, it doesn't quite match the production of Mining Inc. And that is after reconfiguring all the city's tiles and losing 2 population points and specialists.

Again, I say that with Caste System, it does match the production (208 hammers). However, you are then locked into that set of civics. Considering that and considering the fact that I had been reaping the benefits of the corp till then, the corp is still a viable alternative to the SP + CS combination.

 

[wayne07]

And thats not even including Caste System which adds another to each workshop tile Imagine then!

Nope. I agree with aelf. Emanicipation is the late game tech. No caste system will give a better assessment of this.

But its just amuse me that although the screenshot shows that corp is maintainable under FM/Merc, it is way better under SP. And people still maintain they rather use FM/Merc than SP when SP seem to be better.

And we haven't even include AI corp spamming and the crazy late inflation cost in this example.

 

[aelf]

These are much better than the first pictures, but I have another minor niggle: the specialists. You're running an engineer under Mercantilism, but only priests under SP. SP doesn't need priests, as you already have a larger gold surplus than under the other two civics. Please try using as many engineers as possible before allocating priests. Under the other civics, you may well need priests to get extra gold, but not under SP.

Two words: Angkor Wat. The screenshots showed that before I edited them after adding a courthouse to the city (which I had forgotten about in the game out of habit, since it was my capital ). I shall add this info into that post.

Also, I do think it'd be fairer to employ CS for the SP screenshot. By my understanding, we're currently looking at Merc + FS + Rep, FM + FS + Rep and SP + FS + Rep. Rep gives some synergy to Merc but not to SP. This is a bit biased. You could either change all of the non-economic civics back to Barbarism etc, or you could use the natural synergytic civics with their respective economic civics (meaning CS with SP). The former is perhaps fairer, but the latter gives a much more realistic picture. However, sticking with a fixed set of non-economic civics (other than Barbarism et al), as you are presumably currently doing, is going to bias the results in one direction or another - bias in either direction is not going to help you convince people to see your side of the argument.

Alright, I shall give you one with US + CS + SP:

No idea why the output is only 202 hammers now. Oh, well. It's nicely equal to the output under FM Research is also similar to that of Rep + FM, except with slightly less gpt. So there you go - corps are a viable alternative to SP + CS. I would say it is better at this point because you are not locked into a set of civics.

 

[aelf]

And people still maintain they rather use FM/Merc than SP when SP seem to be better.

Have you seen new screenshots with courthouse added to the city? SP is not exactly better. It's about the same at this point in the game for that city, and only after much reconfiguration of the city's plots. It also caused the city to lose 2 pop points.

 

[mrt144]

but with SP you didnt spend a GE (which could have actually completed Three Gorges) nor did spend gold to plop it down.

is there a courthouse in the SP shot? for corps you had to add that correct? you paid for another courthouse then! thats another cost.

 

[wayne07]

Have you seen new screenshots with courthouse added to the city? SP is not exactly better. It's about the same at this point in the game for that city, and only after much reconfiguration of the city's plots. It also caused the city to lose 2 pop points.

hmmm, i thought i saw correctly.

FM = 202H, ECOLOGY at 4 turns. 40% research rate, +96 GPT
Merc = 207H, ECOLOGY at 5 turns, 30% research rate, +81 GPT
SP = 189H, ECOLOGY at 3 turns, 70% research rate, +105 GPT

SP > FM, Merc ?
SP = Less than 20 H difference. Higher GPT at Higher research rate.

That isn't clear?

The 2 pop shouldn't matter as long as production/commerce is comparable... isn't it the case when we are comparing things?

 

[magicalsushi]

Have you seen new screenshots with courthouse added to the city? SP is not exactly better. It's about the same at this point in the game for that city, and only after much reconfiguration of the city's plots. It also caused the city to lose 2 pop points.

Thanks for doing the CS screenshot, and reminding me of the existence of Angkor Wat! I haven't built it for a long while!

Similar output for less population is a good thing, in my opinon - you'd be further from your happiness cap, making you less vulnerable to WW or sabotage, and there'd be less unhealthiness and city maintenance. However, CS has greatly increased your unhappiness, which more than offsets the small gains from a lower population. More significantly, you had quite a few more GPP per turn under Merc - not a vast percentage, but enough to pay attention to. By the way, I'm wondering why the science output is lower with SP + CS than SP + EM. Are we now using US? I guess that's fair, since we've gained gold and lost hammers.

I'm definitely on the "corporations are broken" side of the argument, but I agree that, in the situation you've shown, you're better off under Merc. This might change if the game goes on for a while, but equally, you were probably even better off a few turns ago, so that balances out.

My take on the issue is that's it's possible for a wily human player to benefit from corporations, if they pay a lot of attention to them (that is, by being effective either at keeping them out, or using them to your advantage, or both), but that this does not mean they are working as intended by the designers. Your example shows that corporations can have a net positive effect on your empire, under favourable conditions (and I don't doubt that getting into those favourable conditions was part of your strategy - well played!). However, I'm very worried that the AI doesn't seem to understand them at all, and this makes me suspect the implementation is not having quite the gameplay effects that the designers expected.

The AI seems to think it's okay to spam them indescriminately, even ones they didn't found. This is *definitely* at least partly just bad AI - Firaxis have made it clear that thoughtless corp spamming is supposed to harm you. All the same, I suspect the AI was programmed this way because corporations were expected to be reasonably beneficial under most circumstances. It looks to me like it takes far more strategy and effort to reach those circumstances than we can expect the AI to cope with.

 

[aelf]

hmmm, i thought i saw correctly.

FM = 202H, ECOLOGY at 4 turns. 40% research rate, +96 GPT
Merc = 207H, ECOLOGY at 5 turns, 30% research rate, +81 GPT
SP = 189H, ECOLOGY at 3 turns, 70% research rate, +105 GPT

SP > FM, Merc ?
SP = Less than 20 H difference. Higher GPT at Higher research rate.

That isn't clear?

The 2 pop shouldn't matter as long as production/commerce is comparable... isn't it the case when we are comparing things?

The 2 pop can be whipped if necessary And they give more flexibility because they can be assigned as specialists to fit whatever plan I have for the economy. Don't discount them completely.

I say the differences between FM and SP are so small at this stage of the game, they are quite negligible. Doesn't that prove that corps are a viable alternative? And when the corp was first founded, inflation wasn't so high. I took an example from a point where the game is almost concluded.

 

[mrt144]

itd be interesting to see what effect this same scenerio would look like if it happened 20 years or 30 in the future

 

[aelf]

By the way, I'm wondering why the science output is lower with SP + CS than SP + EM. Are we now using US? I guess that's fair, since we've gained gold and lost hammers.

You said Rep is biased towards Merc so I also switched to US, which is the civic that is usually paired with SP since before the days of the new CS.

 

[jkp1187]

hmmm, i thought i saw correctly.

FM = 202H, ECOLOGY at 4 turns. 40% research rate, +96 GPT
Merc = 207H, ECOLOGY at 5 turns, 30% research rate, +81 GPT
SP = 189H, ECOLOGY at 3 turns, 70% research rate, +105 GPT

SP > FM, Merc ?
SP = Less than 20 H difference. Higher GPT at Higher research rate.

That isn't clear?

But again, higher population in FM/Merc than in SP. Population = points, more GPP. That needs to be included in the balance.

SP also means: devoting time to constructing workshops instead of farms or cottages (or ripping up farms and replacing them with cottages when you switch.)

But corporations also means constructing the courthouses and losing a GP to do so. And SP also has the advantage of being conceptually 'easier'. There are a lot of factors to contemplate in making a corporation work properly. With SP, you know what you're going to get, and don't have to devote as much time to thinking through the strategy. A simple plan is probably superior to a complex plan because of the likelihood of it being implemented correctly and efficiently. At least, that's my gut reaction to all of this -- it's hard to quantify all the variables that go into a Civ game, of course.


I guess bottom line is that corporations are "viable" under the current rules -- in the right circumstances, assuming that you've laid the groundwork for it, and assuming you don't go crazy spreading it in your own cities, and assuming that no one else starts spamming your cities with corporations, and assuming you can spread it around in some friendly foreign civs/vassals (assuming they're not running and/or switch over to SP or Merc,) and assuming that whatever resource is provided is one that you definitely want/need to have in the quantities that it is provided. The problem is (to echo someone -- I think it was mrt,) I was expecting corporations to be desirable, generally, much like religion is. All the conditions applied to desirability of corporations...well, just aren't fun. Even if I don't found a religion or intend to follow a religion-based strategy, I don't mind when religions are spread to my cities -- it can be helpful to do so, even though the religion's founder is also benefitting. I was hoping that corporations would similarly echo this mutually-beneficial relationship far more than they seem to. I was expecting corporations to be something everyone should ideally want a piece of and if you can't get to them, or if you wanted to pursue a more militaristic/domination-oriented strategy and not worry about such things, here's the SP/CS synergy to give you a fighting chance. Instead, we have corporations which you can break even on if you're willing to juggle things to be just right. It's almost like corporations were designed by people who were overly enamored of existing strategies concerning the use of SP, and so sacrificed the desirability of corporations so that they didn't have to change their preferred strategy.

If Firaxis does not alter the corporate model at least a little, I will definitely be interested in seeing what evolutionary changes the mod community can come up with.

 

[Danielos]

How do Firaxis explain the maintenance expenses? Why would it cost the government to get domestic corporations in their cities? Even foreign corporations are usually beneficial for a country, aren´t they? Sure, Coca Cola and McDonalds may not represent good culture or healthy products, but I don´t think they have damaged the economy of cities/countries which they have established in.

Sure, there needs to be balance and trade-offs, but there must also be some kind of realism in a feature, right?

 

[magicalsushi]

You said Rep is biased towards Merc so I also switched to US, which is the civic that is usually paired with SP since before the days of the new CS.

Oh yeah, I forgot I said that. It's definitely fairest to pair it with US. Rush-buying is the obvious thing to do if we're running SP. Don't forget, though, that we could now drop the science rate so we're producing roughly the same number of beakers as under Merc, and use any extra gold to rush hammers. I imagine we'll have better production than Merc then (whether that's Merc with or without US), and my understanding was that production was our priority here. Discussing that further would get complex though, since we'd have to look at the rest of the empire more carefully - other cities might stand to gain or to lose from US, and it'd be complicated.

I'm pretty much in agreement that corps are working out okay for your empire.