AU: A MOD for the curiculum

[alexman]

Originally posted by lockstep
However, higher overall corruption actually means that v1.05's free maintenance for Communism is even more powerful compared to a trade bonus, because a larger part of the bonus would be lost.

Sorry, not sure what I was thinking!

[Harovan]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
Anyone suggested setting up an AU PBEM game yet?
It wouldn't take much time if you're only playing 2-3 turns each per week...

I'm in, if there's still space (or else we'd have to make a tournament out of it ). Ah, I'm already signing up for the 3rd PBEM and don't even have the game yet. Hopefully next Wednesday I will.

5:17 AM, I really should sleep now, 1503AD is just as bad as Civ .

[vmxa1]

Is 1503AD a TBS or RTS?

[Theseus]

SR, your avatar IS Civ3.

Anybody got great ideas for 1) an AU PBEM, and 2) 202?

Also, OT, we need to assess build preferences for all AI civs. I'm not sure, but I think there have been MANY more AI tweaks than expected (Soren, a little help?).

[nbarclay]

Even with no maintenance costs, Communism can't cut it financially compared with Democracy unless you have a pretty big military. My AU 201 game is in the middle of the industrial era, and I'm exceptionally well built up for that era thanks to huge amounts of build-and-disband and rush buying. (It is an Ultimate Power game, after all.) My empire has two cores on two continents, and the second one is just starting to reach the point where its biggest cities have built everything worth building.

The figures below aren't completely scientific since the communist figures are coming off anarchy while the Democracy figures are after a regular change of turns (giving the Democracy an extra marketplace and bank, and maybe causing a few other differences). But if I'm remembering right that WLTQD doesn't affect gold, just production, that shouldn't be too bg a deal compared with the size of the difference.

Democracy: 2905 net gold with zero science.
Communism: 1860 net gold with zero science.

So why is the difference so big? I suspect that previous analyses failed to fully consider the compounding effect of marketplaces and banks. If it's 1.5 for the marketplace times 1.5 for the bank, each gold of Democracy's bonus can turn into 2.25 gold. (I'm not quite positive that's how it works, though.) I'm sure Communism could close the gap some in the modern age, but even so, I don't think we have to worry about free maintenance making Communism better than Democracy for a builder empire. (And let's not forget that even if Communists can accumulate gold, they can't spend it on rush buying without changing governments.)

A couple more notes about this particular game: (1) I do NOT have Smith's yet. If I did, Democracy would have even more of an advantage. (2) My military is almost within the AU mod's free support range even for Democracy (currently over 100 units!), so Communism's free support is not providing any real advantage. (3) Every city that matters has a courthouse, and the vast majority have police stations.

Unless further evidence refutes this analysis, I think the free maintenance for Communism is probably a good thing. It doesn't seem to overbalance in favor of Communism, and it does make Communism a lot more competitive than it would be otherwise.

I'm going to post F1 screens from the two branches, first Democracy and then Communism. Here's the Democracy F1 screen:

[nbarclay]

And here's Chairwoman Cleopatra's version of the empire.

[lockstep]

nbarclay, could you post a save of your AU 201 game? I'd like to go into anarchy, wait for the government change and then compare Democracy and Commmunism for the same turn.

[nbarclay]

If anyone wants to take a closer look at the empire involved, here's the save file from the end of the turn before.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Is 1503AD a TBS or RTS?

RTS, aka clickfest. Buggers me just as much as the lots of bugs it still has.

Theseus, how is my avatar Civ3? It's a ten minutes exercise with Paint Shop Pro. I bet Firaxis worked longer on the game .

[lockstep]

Originally posted by nbarclay
Even with no maintenance costs, Communism can't cut it financially compared with Democracy unless you have a pretty big military.

After taking a look at your savegame, I think you're right, and I stand corrected.

The figures below aren't completely scientific since the communist figures are coming off anarchy while the Democracy figures are after a regular change of turns ...

Democracy: 2905 net gold with zero science.
Communism: 1860 net gold with zero science.

The figures for both governments comming off anarchy:

Democracy: 2863 net gold with zero science (860 corruption, 1154 maintenance)
Communism: 1860 net gold with zero science (876 corruption, 0 maintenance).

So why is the difference so big? I suspect that previous analyses failed to fully consider the compounding effect of marketplaces and banks. If it's 1.5 for the marketplace times 1.5 for the bank, each gold of Democracy's bonus can turn into 2.25 gold. (I'm not quite positive that's how it works, though.)

Actually, the overall bonus factor is 2.0 - you have to add the marketplace and bank bonus and then apply the outcome to the 'raw' commerce income minus corruption. My former analysis DID take this into account, but my failor was to compare a 'free maintenance' Communism with a hypothetical 'trade bonus' Communism instead of a Democracy. The difference - and the likely explanation of your results - is Communism's communal corruption. Although the corruption figures of your savegame seem to be quite similar (860 for Dem vs. 876 for Comm), the latter one is in fact much higher, because it stems from 'raw' commerce income without a trade bonus. (There's no easy way to calculate the real overall corruption rate for Democracy, but Communisms real rate is about 43% - in your capital Thebes, of 42 'raw' commerce units 18 are lost due to corruption). Conclusion: Even free maintenance obviously can't offset the negative overall effects of communal corruption.

A couple more notes about this particular game: ... (2) My military is almost within the AU mod's free support range even for Democracy (currently over 100 units!), so Communism's free support is not providing any real advantage.

Your units-per city-ratio of 1.2 (104 units, 88 cities) seems to be quite low even for the late stage of an 'ultimate power' game - in one of Arrian's savegames where he built up an offensive force, the ratio was about 3 units per city. Still I suspect that there aren't many game situations when the free support range of vanilla Civ3's Communism will be exceeded, and that the AU mod's additional free support actually doesn't make a difference.

Unless further evidence refutes this analysis, I think the free maintenance for Communism is probably a good thing. It doesn't seem to overbalance in favor of Communism, and it does make Communism a lot more competitive than it would be otherwise.

I have to agree.

[Theseus]

SR: No end in sight.

[lockstep]

I didn't notice until now that alexman has already updated the AU mod to v1.06 and dropped Communism's free maintenance. Oh well ... maybe we can re-introduce this feature in a later (PtW) version of the mod.

[nbarclay]

Actually, Thebes isn't my capital anymore. I built my FP in Delhi so I could move my palace to the other continent, and then moved my palace to Pompeii back in 790. Still, a courthouse and police station do a lot to keep Thebes's corruption rate down under Democracy.

I always run a very lean military, probably a good bit leaner than I could get away with against human opponents. My units-per-city ratio was actually significantly lower when I conquered the second continent than it is now! The only reason it's so high now is that I've had several centuries where off and on, several cities had nothing better to do than to build troops. (And even so, I've disbanded more for the shields than I've kept.)

Communism would do better (relatively speaking) in the mid or late modern era, with airports, mass transit systems, research labs, and maybe eventually recycling centers adding to maintenance costs. And it would look a lot better if my palace and FP were not well-placed. Combine poor capital placement, additional buildings, and a large military, and Communism probably does have a niche where it could match or even beat Democracy for gold/science generation. But it would be a niche government at best during peacetime.

Nathan

[Theseus]

As Nathan says, very late empires will benefit... I would add that it now will be viable for truly sprawled empires, which most of us avoid (i.e., more than two cores).

And I'll still use it for drafting, when on a path of aggression; most effective when the conquered enemy are (or were) culturally weak.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by nbarclay
Actually, Thebes isn't my capital anymore. I built my FP in Delhi so I could move my palace to the other continent, and then moved my palace to Pompeii back in 790.

I should have said 'former capital'. I cited Thebes as an example for corruption because it had the highest no. of commerce units.

Combine poor capital placement, additional buildings, and a large military, and Communism probably does have a niche where it could match or even beat Democracy for gold/science generation.

This needs to be tested, but I still think your solution is better than vanilla Civ3's Communism. Maybe there are possible additional tweaks if free maintenance becomes unbalancing in the modern age.