When to get astronomy? (and other obsoleting techs)

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by wodan11
So, the question becomes, comparing the happiness benefit of Free Religion, to the miniscule (at best) benefit of continuing under a religion. Without a doubt, from a science standpoint, Free Religion is better.

The only imponderable is whether simply having the religion is better, from a diplomatic standpoint.

Wodan

Let me express my sincerest doubt on this issue.

Diplomatic benefits aside, Free Religion brings the following pros and cons

1) Extra culture from non-state religion
2) +10% science in all cities
3) +1 happy for every additional religion in a city

It loses

a) +2 beakers for every state religious building (with Sankore)
b) +2 gold for every state religious building (with Spiral Minaret)
c) Either
i) +25% production with Org and freedom to spread religions without a monastery
ii) +2 XP under Theocracy
iii) +100% GPP under Pacifism

If we concentrate on the capital for a moment and assume that it is bureaucratic. Lets also assume that it generates 300 beakers with a multiplier of +245% (Oxford, Academy, Library, University, Observatory and two monasteries). Working backwards, the pre-multiplier figure is around

We can get this from the two state religious buildings (via Sankore) - 4 beakers, 18 specialist beakers (2 from Great Library and 1 appointed scientist) and 65 from the share of commerce allocated to science. Working backwards this gives unadjusted commerce (tile, trade and palace) or 87.

Now let's lose the benefits of Sankore but add 10% to the beaker multiplier.

[87 * 150% (bureau) * 50% + 18] * 355% = 295.5 beakers. This compares to 301 beakers with the bonus from Sankore.

Now this is going to be in a city with a very large base commerce so the +4 bonus from Sankore will be relatively small. Put against that, the +10% is proportionally very small. When looking at a much smaller city, Sankore does a lot more than the miniscule benefit of an additional +10% science.

Apart from finding a city without any state religious buildings, it would be harder to find one that produced more with Free Religion than with a State Religion.

And I haven't even brought Shrines, Cathedrals or Spiral Minaret into the equation, neither is the benefit of the religious civic included.

[wodan11]

You're confusing the issue by throwing a lot of numbers at it.

Plus, the situation you describe is very ephemeral... you have had Astronomy long enough to build an Observatory in all your cities but do not have Scientific Method yet.

You pose an example, I'll grant, and all other situations will have their own pros/cons. Still, if we're going to take some things into account we need to take them all into account. e.g., civic costs, two cases for before/after loss of Monasteries.

Also, we should recognize that having all cities whip or build monasteries and 1/3 cathedrals simply to get the Sankore/Spiral benefits is a dubious thing to do. e.g., if I've got Education, Paper etc with your typical city which is busy making a Library, Market, or whatever, I have to stop and whip or build a Monastery, which will be obsoleted in a very short time. It's a dubious choice, at best.

Here's a simpler comparison we can do. Between 2-6 beakers from Sankore, with your average city having only a temple. With typical science multipliers, that's between 0-12. (Your average city is going to have 3-5.)

Now, simply compare to 10% of that city's base commerce.

Wodan

[ColdPhoenix]

Does free religion remove the monastery science bonus? I don't think it does.

The hammers cost of the monasteries shouldn't factor much into any calculations about whether or not to hold off on scientific method. It's wise to build them pretty early in the game anyway and so they're a sunk cost for a large number of cities.

I haven't done the calculations but my gut feeling is that I don't want to lose the monasteries 10% science plus additional hammers, gold, beakers and potentially culture (with sistine) as well as the GL by getting Sci Method early. If I haven't got those wonders then I may well rush to Sci Method.

As to free religion, if I've got those wonders then even after monasteries are obsolete I'll stay in Org Religion until I've built most of the buildings I want in my cities. The 25% bonus in addition to all the hammers, gold, and beakers is too much to lose. The extra hammers alone are a godsend in low production cities.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by ColdPhoenix
Does free religion remove the monastery science bonus? I don't think it does.

No it doesn't. So, Free Religion still gets the 10%, until Scientific Method anyway.

Scientific Method removes the monastery from the Spiral/Sankore bonus, is what we're talking about.

The hammers cost of the monasteries shouldn't factor much into any calculations about whether or not to hold off on scientific method. It's wise to build them pretty early in the game anyway and so they're a sunk cost for a large number of cities.

If you are correct about the latter, then the former follows, I agree.

I don't agree that you're correct it's wise to build them. Why do you think so? Maybe I'm missing something.

I haven't done the calculations but my gut feeling is that I don't want to lose the monasteries 10% science plus additional hammers, gold, beakers and potentially culture (with sistine) as well as the GL by getting Sci Method early. If I haven't got those wonders then I may well rush to Sci Method.

Oh, you must have misunderstood. I'm not saying it's wise to "rush to Sci Method", especially when you have all those wonders.

I do think that the wonders make it pretty much a break-even proposition. You gain some science with Free Religion, but you lose out on some other things.

As to free religion, if I've got those wonders then even after monasteries are obsolete I'll stay in Org Religion until I've built most of the buildings I want in my cities. The 25% bonus in addition to all the hammers, gold, and beakers is too much to lose. The extra hammers alone are a godsend in low production cities.

In low production cities, I agree. However, I find that in my good cities I am not making buildings anymore. I'm doing wonders, units, or (more likely) building Research. Thus, it's a choice between 25% hammers for my wuss cities, or getting better research in my good cities. Since I'm often in Slavery or Universal Suffrage, it's not so bad to lose the 25% hammers.

Wodan

[Dinner]

The type of game is key. I go for different tachs in a pangea game then I do an islands game. I also build different things in different orders.

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by wodan11
You're confusing the issue by throwing a lot of numbers at it.

Plus, the situation you describe is very ephemeral... you have had Astronomy long enough to build an Observatory in all your cities but do not have Scientific Method yet.


Wodan

The only way to compare these things is by using numbers. Admittedly you have to pick a typical city and/or capital for the comparison but there are not that many cities which would be better off under Free Religion.

Regarding the timing of Astronomy and Scientific Method, this thread highlights that there may be times when they are delayed - certainly well after Paper and possibly Divine Right. Then if you do have either of the wonders the building of the state religion monastery is almost obligatory. Temples too. Many cities will have these already but newer ones would put them high up the list of priorities.

It's pretty much sequential.

IF you have Sankore and/or Spiral Minaret then a typical city WILL have a monastery and a temple. Therefore, it WILL get a worse science output under Free Religion.

You'll need to describe for me a typical city which does better under Free Religion to convince me otherwise (though I'm likely to tell you that the city is not typical)

[Blake]

The advantage of Free Religion is from the happiness. It only really kicks in at 3 religions per city, but then the +2 happy can really count. For example bringing the city from size 13 to size 15 is a 15% increase in raw yields.

Minus happiness gains, FR is weak. But when you can get +2 happy in a bunch of cities, it's freaking sweet. If you have a small empire you wont have many happiness resources. If you have a large empire you're probably warmongering and hence have warweariness.

It wont always be worthwhile, but it's something you might be better off aiming for than building the State Religion wonders (which are obviously better in many ways if you're only bothering with 1 or 2 religions).

FR is not really worth it if you don't have 3 religions in your best cities (you might have more than 3 in your very best and largest cities, of course)

Also there are the diplomatic effects to consider...

[Petrus2]

Originally posted by Blake
The advantage of Free Religion is from the happiness. It only really kicks in at 3 religions per city, but then the +2 happy can really count. For example bringing the city from size 13 to size 15 is a 15% increase in raw yields.

I agree with your concept here, but not the calculation. Sure, 15/13=1.15

BUT!! You are preferentially working the best tiles, so tiles 14 and 15 are in the bottom third of productivity. I could make all sorts of assumptions to claim you only gain 5%, or 10%, or whatever, but that's fruitless. I'll just leave it at <15% gain

[wodan11]

I'll see if I can work up a typical city comparison that doesn't make the assumptions couredelion did. Can't do it right now but will try soon.

Also, in response to diplomatic effects... I said up front that I was stating a comparison of beakers, and that to be sure there are diplomatic effects that aren't really measurable. You switch out of Hatty's religion, she's going to look at you differently.

That said, there are often diplomatic benefits to change to FR. e.g., Izzy has been pounding on you ever 20 turns. You switch from an opposing religion to FR. You are no longer her worst enemy.

So, this goes both ways.

Wodan

[inca911]

I'm primarily an OCC player, so I generally use Liberalism to pick up the expensive 2000 beaker Astronomy tech (or Constitution if I missed Pyramids). The benefit of delaying Astronomy is outweighed by building the Observatory (+25% science) it enables, and the overseas ocean trade routes that open up. Don't forget the trade routes in the calculation, as these are typically juicy routes.

I generally delay Scientific Method until after Econmics, Nationalism, Constitution, Corporation, Steam Power, Assembly Line. You need hammers to build Apollo, and fitting in the Factory techs gives me time to reap the Great Library benefits a bit longer. After Sci Method, it's Physics, Artillery, Rocketry, Electricity, Industrialism (for Al), Railroad (for hammers on mine, lumbermill), then back to Radio, Computers, Satellites, etc to finish off the ship parts.

[joncnunn]

I'll have a go with that. It depends. If a majority of the AIs in your landmass is following the state religion you founded, diplomaticaly your much better off continuing with it.

You'll then have to weigh it against the economic effects to decide if it's worth it.

But if your state religion isn't even a plurality on your landmass you are generally much better off declaring free religion unless your the resident of the AP that someone else owns.

(The distant AIs on other contients can be ignored; it's not until Frigates and Galleons that they become any threat whatsoever.)

Originally posted by wodan11

The only imponderable is whether simply having the religion is better, from a diplomatic standpoint.

Wodan

[Blake]

Originally posted by Petrus2


I agree with your concept here, but not the calculation. Sure, 15/13=1.15

BUT!! You are preferentially working the best tiles, so tiles 14 and 15 are in the bottom third of productivity. I could make all sorts of assumptions to claim you only gain 5%, or 10%, or whatever, but that's fruitless. I'll just leave it at <15% gain

Not really.
By that stage of the game you're talking tiles like 2-3-0, 1-4-0, 2-2-1...

And you really have to take into consideration city-count upkeeps. These are based only on the city count, adding population doesn't increase it. Granted upkeep increases a little with population (unless you're like organized running vassalage ), but city count is the greater factor.

Basic fact of the matter is, a size 1 city, even working the very best tile, is a significant drain on the economy (remember you have to look not only at the upkeep in the city, but also consider that it adds upkeep to every other city and adds civic upkeep). Adding population vertically is cheaper than adding population horizontally, so it makes sense to add pop vertically whenever possible (of course you should do horizontally too to get more scope for vertical later).

To put it simply, the PROFIT comes from the higher population not the lower population, the lower pop just pays the costs.

[roadcage]

City maintenance is as Blake said. However, Civic Upkeep seems to be pop based. Or atleast it grows over time even without increases in city count or civic changes. So there must be something else.

I know this is OT, but could anyone explain how civic Upkeep is determined?

[Petrus2]

Originally posted by Blake


Not really.
By that stage of the game you're talking tiles like 2-3-0, 1-4-0, 2-2-1...

And you really have to take into consideration city-count upkeeps. These are based only on the city count, adding population doesn't increase it. Granted upkeep increases a little with population (unless you're like organized running vassalage ), but city count is the greater factor.

Basic fact of the matter is, a size 1 city, even working the very best tile, is a significant drain on the economy (remember you have to look not only at the upkeep in the city, but also consider that it adds upkeep to every other city and adds civic upkeep). Adding population vertically is cheaper than adding population horizontally, so it makes sense to add pop vertically whenever possible (of course you should do horizontally too to get more scope for vertical later).

To put it simply, the PROFIT comes from the higher population not the lower population, the lower pop just pays the costs.

Yeah but you said raw yield, not net profit. So I stand by my statement. Before we argue minutia, on a topic we pretty much agree on, I do agree that the profit is seen at the higher pops.

[realpolitic]

Obsoleting techs do give an incentive to get a few more military techs. With the Collosus, be careful that you can still produce enough beakers when it's obsolete.

The obsoleting of the monestaries value might be a reason not to build as many. One will give you enough missionaries.