Cottage econemy

[The Priest]

Well, Wodan, yes but

Late game biology, yes but of course by then cottages will be producing 6 or 7 commerce and perhaps a production. There are ebbs and flows across the game.

Yes if you have a coastal city with three fish, anyone is going to run specialists, there is nothing else you can do with the food. Its not as if a CE says 'never run specialists' - the point is it says cottage rather than farm, which is what this example was meant to compare.

Bigger cities, yes you are right. Of course on either model they will both grow to the cap. My point is that SE is always fundamentally about bigger cities because your have farms to produce more food to allow extra citizens (specialists), and thus is it dependent on the caps being high enough. In the example the comparison is only close because the SE city can be size 9, while the cottage size 7. If the cap was at size 7, the SW would look more tricky. You wouldn't be able to use the surplus food for specialists because they would be unhappy (which of course links to your post about how a SE often overlaps with a slave economy, which I do need to think about more).

Lightbulbs, yes exactly. This I guess is my point. Unless you have pyramids, the raw scores from a SE will generally be worse. The thing which makes it possibly better is the GP points. That then gets into complication calculations about how many of the GP points are ineffective because other cities are always getting to the threshhold first.

I basically agree with TriMiro.

The choice between the two is quite situational. If you get pyramids, SE suddenly looks very attractive. If you have one great GP farm, SE can be dodgy because the GP points in other cities with just a couple of specialists might never be used. How flexible do you need to be? Is your cottages being pillaged a danger? Where are the caps?

All of which is of course why Civ is such a great game.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by The Priest
Yes if you have a coastal city with three fish, anyone is going to run specialists, there is nothing else you can do with the food.

No matter what economy you're running, you hit the happy cap. The CE will maximize by working all cottage tiles. Can the CE run specialists above and beyond that? No. The food is wasted (you can whip, perhaps).

Meanwhile, the SE is able to utilize those high food tiles to run a higher percentage of its citizens as specialists.

e.g., say the cap is size 7. The CE uses 2 fish to grow fast and then works 6 cottages. Meanwhile, the SE is not running 4 farms and 2 specialists as the example would suggest. Instead the SE is working 2 fish and 4 specialists.

Bigger cities, yes you are right. Of course on either model they will both grow to the cap. My point is that SE is always fundamentally about bigger cities because your have farms to produce more food to allow extra citizens (specialists), and thus is it dependent on the caps being high enough. In the example the comparison is only close because the SE city can be size 9, while the cottage size 7. If the cap was at size 7, the SW would look more tricky. You wouldn't be able to use the surplus food for specialists because they would be unhappy (which of course links to your post about how a SE often overlaps with a slave economy, which I do need to think about more).

No comment on all this... I think we're going along the same thought processes now.

Lightbulbs, yes exactly. This I guess is my point. Unless you have pyramids, the raw scores from a SE will generally be worse. The thing which makes it possibly better is the GP points. That then gets into complication calculations about how many of the GP points are ineffective because other cities are always getting to the threshhold first.

That's the name of the game and it's manageable. If "other cities always get to the threshold first" then that's in part a failure of you to manage your empire, right?

For example, take cities A, B, and C. Work specialists and don't whip. Let each city build some stuff the long way and generate a GP. As soon as one city, let's say city A, generates a GP, we turn off the specialists and start whipping stuff. Crank out all the infrastructure. In time, city B generates a GP, and we turn off specialists there, too, and whip stuff. Then, city C rings the bell.

Another strategy I have spent quite a few games developing my "trick bag" is the SE->CE switch. SE is generally accepted to be most powerful early game, less powerful midgame, and it catches up a bit late game but still loses ground to the CE. Meanwhile the CE grows in strength all game.

So, the SE->CE switch. As each city generates a GP, you turn off the specialists and send in your worker hordes. Change all of the farms to cottages. Rinse and repeat for each city.

Combining these two strategies you can manage a complete empire with quite a few cities. And you can generate an incredible number of GP and even more important you can generate those GP early game rather than later. And you can do this without "wasting" one of your best city sites on a GP Farm. Instead, that city can be a commerce city.

The choice between the two is quite situational. If you get pyramids, SE suddenly looks very attractive. If you have one great GP farm, SE can be dodgy because the GP points in other cities with just a couple of specialists might never be used. How flexible do you need to be? Is your cottages being pillaged a danger? Where are the caps?

All of which is of course why Civ is such a great game.

Agree with all that of course!

Wodan

[The Priest]

Wodan, lots of agreement here. And I do like your tactics of Se>Ce switch and the ways of avoiding lots of cities gaining GP points which are always outdone by other cities which are gaining GP faster.

The only think I wouldn't agree with is the fish example. Of course you work the fish! If CE is meant to mean 'no specialists' then it is daft. The rule really has to always be 'work all resources' (cases where that isn't right are few and far between), and so with 2 fish is either going to lead to a production centre (use the surplus food by mining the hills), a slave centre, or specialists. Surely nobody would ignore the resource just to build cottages.

[The Priest]

Another situational factor, I think, is what happens right at the beginning, and what the starting techs are.

If, say, you are financial and start off with techs which get you close to pottery, and the situation means a worker start is sensible, it can be great to get a couple of cottages made, on rivers, right at the beginning. You can find that before you get a second city, you have three tiles each producing 4 commerce, which does start to make a real difference. On the other hand, if cottages are a distance away in the tree, you start with other things like work boats, or there are military needs, or some tempting stone or you are IND for the pyramids it looks different.

I always enjoy the fact that a careful examination of context right at the beginning can set you off in new directions

[wodan11]

Originally posted by The Priest
If CE is meant to mean 'no specialists' then it is daft.

I personally wouldn't think that running a CE means you can't run specialists.

We do have to recognize that it comes down to a choice: if you're running CE, then you have to choose between working the fish and 1-2 specialists, or working 2-3 cottages.

If you're running a CE then why would you pick specialists? (GP farm aside.)

When people talk about things such as "SE has bigger cities" we have to recognize that whether the player is running CE or SE, the player has to suffer the exact same happy cap. So, the SE will not literally have bigger cities. It will grow faster than if it was CE. But, the cap will still make the cities exactly the same size when they get there.

The rule really has to always be 'work all resources' (cases where that isn't right are few and far between), and so with 2 fish is either going to lead to a production centre (use the surplus food by mining the hills), a slave centre, or specialists. Surely nobody would ignore the resource just to build cottages.

I do it all the time. But, I run other-than-slavery more than most people.

Generally, in the early game, it's good to run slavery. So, the 2 fish example is perfect for slavery. You work the 2 fish and as many cottages as you can, and use the extra food to whip buildings. You're low on production otherwise, so this is a good thing. The Slavery choice, however, has nothing to do with the discussion of whether that city is running specialists.

If you are advocating a CE working 2 fish, a couple of cottages, and using the extra food to also run specialists, I definitely (and respectfully) disagree. That is not making that city as efficient as it could be.

Now, it's possible that city would make the best GP farm site for your CE. But in that case you wouldn't have any cottages at all... you would have fish + farms.

Wodan

[wodan11]

Originally posted by The Priest
Another situational factor, I think, is what happens right at the beginning, and what the starting techs are.

If, say, you are financial and start off with techs which get you close to pottery, and the situation means a worker start is sensible, it can be great to get a couple of cottages made, on rivers, right at the beginning. You can find that before you get a second city, you have three tiles each producing 4 commerce, which does start to make a real difference. On the other hand, if cottages are a distance away in the tree, you start with other things like work boats, or there are military needs, or some tempting stone or you are IND for the pyramids it looks different.

I always enjoy the fact that a careful examination of context right at the beginning can set you off in new directions

I agree with all that. There was just a big debate over in one of the other threads where people were advocating that BW first and whipping is always preferable to the occasional Pottery first, or something else that circumstances may indicate. In MP I could buy that, but that's because the AI won't rush you in SP. Not only is variety more enjoyable, but I honestly believe it can be a better opening move, depending on the game (leader, techs, and map).

Wodan

[wodan11]

Originally posted by wodan11
If you are advocating a CE working 2 fish, a couple of cottages, and using the extra food to also run specialists, I definitely (and respectfully) disagree. That is not making that city as efficient as it could be.

A follow-up comment. A hybrid can be very powerful, also. The above hypothetical city can run 2 oddball specialists specifically and purposefully to generate a specific type. Maybe you need a prophet to make your shrine, or whatever. Having this 2-fish city perform that chore is probably a perfect choice in that situation.

Wodan

[The Priest]

I agree, and this points to the issue you raised much ealier that the terms CE and SE need to be defined more clearly.

In the case you suggest about the fish, I would use this as a city for specialists (call it a GP farm if you want), or for production, depending on whether the surrounding terrain is hilly or flat.

Why, well even if you are in general wanting a CE you still want GP. For me the distinction is between in general in most normal cities going for cottages (CE) or specialists (SE). Even if you are going for cottages normally, you will still want to choose some places to get GP from and which are particularly suited to specalists, and because of the way specialisiation works, in those pleaces you want to go full-on for specialists.

This works because of the progression in GP point threshholds. 1000 GP points gives you (OK dependent on speed etc.) four GP (100,200,300 and 400) double that doesn't even quite give five (100,200,300,400, 500 and nearly 600). So producing half as many GP points in a given time doesn't give half as many GP. Which is why in terms of GP production, a CE with one or two specialist sites might be worse than a SE but isn't as much worse as one might initially think.

So I agree with you when you say

Now, it's possible that city would make the best GP farm site for your CE. But in that case you wouldn't have any cottages at all... you would have fish + farms.

if I want specialists from this city, which it sounds like I would do, then yes farm rather than cottage flat land for this city.


When you say

If you are advocating a CE working 2 fish, a couple of cottages, and using the extra food to also run specialists, I definitely (and respectfully) disagree. That is not making that city as efficient as it could be.

I think you are also right, and giving a warning that needs to be heard. If in generally you are going for cottages, you do need to realise that when you nevertheless identify a particular city as a good place for specialists/GP, you do need to go for it full-on, not mess around with half way houses.

Which only goes to show that talking in general about CE and SE shouldn't blind us to the fact that good play is really going to be a clever blend between the different strategies available, even if in any particular game,or for a particular part of a particular game, your emphasis is one way.

[TriMiro]

CE needs a few specialists for GP (especially since the golden ages are stronger for CE) and SE needs a few cottages to help pay the bill (specialists are generally strong for science not cash).

The typical CE that I use is something like that:
in each city, I mine all the hills and leave the forest on plains for health and limber mills. Then I build just enough farms to make sure I have enough food for all the mines and forests. Then cottage everything else.

I would have a specialist city, but use that mostly for GP and not income.

A CE city would not have more people than workable tiles, while SE city would always have more people. Thus the illusion that SE cities are larger. I tend to let CE cities take the entire fat cross, while SE cities would overlap (no point working all the fat cross tiles AND have specialists due to the happy hap).

CE and SE work only if used in the proper civic synergy ( Rep. Univ Suff. Free Sp. Case Sys, Pacif, Emancipation ...) A switch from SE to CE would be tricky and something I have been thinking about trying. The question is, when do you change civics. Also, if you build cottages in late game you need Emancipation for them to grow fast enough and even then it would take about 35 turns for a cottage to grow and use all the free speech bonuses. Depending on how many workers you have, it may take a while to change all the farms. If you are making a change in economy, you need to make it fast.

Another question is how do you resolve the leader synergies. Do you pick FIN or Phil? You can change civics, but not traits.

I will eventually play a game where I try an economy switch and I will post. Also if someone else want to try it, please post the results.

[wodan11]

Agree with what you said Priest... got a conference call in a minute so short on time.

Originally posted by TriMiro
CE needs a few specialists for GP (especially since the golden ages are stronger for CE)

That's what you have a GP farm for.

and SE needs a few cottages to help pay the bill (specialists are generally strong for science not cash).

Cottaging your capitol (in a SE) is very powerful, because it leverages bureaucracy.

Otherwise, I would disagree... there are other sources of cash. Just the background income from rivers and such will give you enough to pay a lot of maintenance. In addition, there's trade income, shrines, etc.

The typical CE that I use is something like that:
in each city, I mine all the hills and leave the forest on plains for health and limber mills. Then I build just enough farms to make sure I have enough food for all the mines and forests. Then cottage everything else.

Generally I don't waste worker time improving more tiles than I have citizens. I often put 1-2 farms in my CE cities, to kick start growth and get them to the cap faster. Then I cottage FP and grass. Early game I either run Slavery or put 1-2 mines in each cottage city.

I tend to let CE cities take the entire fat cross, while SE cities would overlap (no point working all the fat cross tiles AND have specialists due to the happy cap).

The point would be to plan ahead for when you're able to increase the cap. Otherwise I agree... you can sometimes squeeze in an extra city or two, which in SE means 2+ free specialists, basically (though you do have some extra city maint costs).

A switch from SE to CE would be tricky and something I have been thinking about trying. The question is, when do you change civics.

Emancipation is the first step, possibly along with free market. Let that churn for 20-30 turns or so, then start thinking about Univ Suffrage. Generally I just eyeball my empire to see how many Towns I have.

Keep in mind that Representation is not a bad civic for a CE, because of the happy bonus, plus it helps your GP farm with +3 beakers/specialist. Univ Suffrage gives more production to your CE and allows cash buying, but depending on the game you might prefer the happy bonus. Ditto for Police State, etc.

Depending on how many workers you have, it may take a while to change all the farms.

That's why I send in a bunch of workers to each city and do that city all at once.

Serfdom is also a good intermediary civic. By then you're done with Slavery anyway.

Also, consider Hagia Sophia. If you plan this strategy, it's a good wonder to make sure you get.

If you are making a change in economy, you need to make it fast.

On the face of it, it might seem that way, but in practice it's not all that time critical. You stage the civic switches as I explained, and it just evolves naturally.

Another question is how do you resolve the leader synergies. Do you pick FIN or Phil? You can change civics, but not traits.

Choice of CE vs SE depends as much on map as on trait.

Trait can be leveraged whether you're running CE or SE. e.g., CE with a nice GP farm can make full use of PHI, and you get cheap universities which is huge. SE with FIN is trickier but one type of SE works best on archipelago maps, working coasts + specialists; you aren't building or working cottages at all.

I will eventually play a game where I try an economy switch and I will post. Also if someone else want to try it, please post the results.

Well as I said I've done it quite a bit. Maybe 30 games. I guess I could post a walk-through with screenshots.

Wodan

[TriMiro]

Would be great if you do Wodan.

An interesting comparison would be to start SE and then make a save at some point. Then compare the flip to CE vs stick with SE. Compare the state of the economy after 30, 60, 100 turns and see which one is better and by how much.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by TriMiro
Would be great if you do Wodan.

An interesting comparison would be to start SE and then make a save at some point. Then compare the flip to CE vs stick with SE. Compare the state of the economy after 30, 60, 100 turns and see which one is better and by how much.

Been there, done that. There are so many game-dependent variables that drawing any kind of general conclusion is impossible.

i.e., we can do it, but we cannot then effectively extrapolate that to any kind of conclusion. Other than what we already know, which is that as the game goes on, CE gets stronger and stronger, until it maxes out in the modern era. Meanwhile, SE if done well, gets a tech lead and can leverage that to early and midgame gains in territory and such that are more difficult for a CE to accomplish.

These type of changes also make it extremely difficult to maintain a comparison between the two. Okay, so the SE now has 3 more cities, with added research but also added maint costs. From this point the games diverge and grow steadily further apart, which means the basis for comparison grows steadily more difficult. Add lightbulbing and other things to the mix, which means SE gets techs earlier, etc etc.

Basically it just becomes an exercise that's a ton of work and really just shows us that SE and CE evolve very differently. It does not give any indication as to which is "better". Frankly I'm convinced they're pretty well balanced... Firaxis did a good job.

Wodan

[Shalkai]

I, for one, would be really interested in seeing a comparison game played out, Wodan. I'd bet plenty of others would, too. Not to see which is "better" - they're both great - but just to see how they are done right.

Talking about SE and CE in general terms, and how to switch from SE to CE, is very helpful...but actually seeing it done by an expert would be even more helpful. Those of us who are fuzzy on some of the details could see how it all really works.

Maybe make it an Apolyton University setup?

Anyway, just a thought. I do fine with CE (that's my basic strategy), but I know I don't do early SE or a full-scale SE real well. I've picked up a ton here at Poly (SE, slingshots, GP farms, the list could go for pages...). Anyway, the threads I've learned the most from are those where tactics have been discussed, then actually applied in a game as an example. I'm one of those types who learn best when I see how something works - then I can take it and modify it for other situations. Velociryx's threads were great, for example. I'm sure there are others who would learn plenty from seeing a CE/SE comparison. Plenty of people are missing the fine points of one or the other.

If there's already a really detailed SE scenario played out somewhere, then someone please just point me that way, and I'll be a happy camper.

[wodan11]

Well I could volunteer I suppose. We would have to determine which flavor of each (CE and SE) gets demoed, map settings, choice of leader, skill level. Thoughts anyone?

There are detailed SE scenarios over on CFC but I would probably get shot for pointing you over there.

Though, I am not aware of any good SE->CE switch demos. So I wouldn't mind doing it for that reason alone.

Wodan

[Supr49er]

[SIZE=1] ... There are detailed SE scenarios over on CFC but I would probably get shot for pointing you over there. ... Wodan