FIN : Most overrated trait

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by wodan11

b) You hadn't said it in the last post, so my comments were accurate (you gave a poor example)

Wodan

I gave a poor example because I was trying to answer a question that had been raised.

After giving the example I said that it was the wrong measure - ie that it was a poor example.

Just for clarification the main benefit of PHI civs is that they can generate the first few GP very quickly. Of these, the most important is the first, the second most important is the second, .....

[wodan11]

Originally posted by couerdelion


I gave a poor example because I was trying to answer a question that had been raised.

After giving the example I said that it was the wrong measure - ie that it was a poor example.

Just for clarification the main benefit of PHI civs is that they can generate the first few GP very quickly. Of these, the most important is the first, the second most important is the second, .....

Agreed!

Wodan

[Kataphraktoi]

All early great folk are overpowered and philosophical can get much more than 40% more in the early game. Try 100% more. The philo pops his second one at the same time the other kids are popping their first one.

Thats true but its also adding intangibles that cant be easily translated into percents. The benefits start looking incredibly good unless you also factor in the other civs traits intangibles. I was more talking about after the game, who had more GPs.

[sveint]

You are all wrong (and right).

Wether financial is overrated or underrated is subjective and relative to each player.

Farms vs. cottage: it would be foolish not to use whichever is appropriate to each city. Even in a specialist economy there are tiles that are best improved with a cottage. And in a cottage economy you'll want farms (and specialists).

Any hard rules that do not adapt to circumstance are worthless. Financial is a good trait for players (not necessarily the best, but never bad).

However, financial is a very good trait for the AI due to the way they run their economies.

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by sveint
You are all wrong (and right).

Wether financial is overrated or underrated is subjective and relative to each player.

Well that’s the proverbial red rag.

In truth though, the question as to the strength of can be assessed fairly objectively. At the most basic level, any trait can be compared with another by empirical investigation just changing one variable – that trait is replaced with another and similar starting positions are given so that two games are played out.

An objective scoring system can be identified and the two games are compared. Does CRE or CHA give more than FIN? This was even investigated in the dim and distant past with regard to ORG as a counter to the FIN trait and ORG came out quite strongly against the more favoured trait. Certainly CRE and CHA should be stronger than FIN and I would not be surprised if SPI was better also (in many combinations).

Obviously you can’t use exactly the same map since the second game would be at an advantage. But a crude scoring system would give a general indication of an equivalent sort of position which is at least fair to the two techs (eg a coastal site with two sea-food resources and gold would probably be seen as a little too favourable to the FIN civ).

Now you have these more objective assessments of FIN relative to other traits, you look at the polls which put FIN as the most favoured trait. The poll placed FIN higher than the objective review.

Ergo, it is over-rated.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by sveint
You are all wrong (and right).

Wether financial is overrated or underrated is subjective and relative to each player.

Farms vs. cottage: it would be foolish not to use whichever is appropriate to each city. Even in a specialist economy there are tiles that are best improved with a cottage. And in a cottage economy you'll want farms (and specialists).

Any hard rules that do not adapt to circumstance are worthless. Financial is a good trait for players (not necessarily the best, but never bad).

However, financial is a very good trait for the AI due to the way they run their economies.

I agree with your philosophy but disagree with your implementation.

The fact is that we have empire-wide benefits (and penalties) such as civics, wonders, health and happiness boosts, trades, diplomacy, and war weariness.

If the player blindly considers each city on its own, without regard to empire-wide conditions, then this is potentially sub-optimal.

Wodan

[Ming]

I think one of the best parts of Civ IV is the fact that there is no "set answer"

We play random civs in MP, and it really teaches you that you have to plan you game based on your civ, resources, and neighbors. There are no real cookie cutter strategies.

As to whether Financial is an over rated trait... who cares. In some cases it is a good trait... in others, it can be pretty bad if you can't take advantage of it.

There are worse traits...