How many of you are free marketeers?

[Maniac]

Oh yeah, since there's a high concentration of superFMers here, I'll ask a question:

Under FM in the early game, how do you deal with drones after you've crossed the bureaucracy limit, and bases already have their first citizen as a drone? (Edit: And you can't use the easy way out of building the HGP or PTS)

This question also counts for the Gaians (and I think Pirates) btw. They can't profit from the benefits of free market, but neither do they have easy drone control like the other factions better run under Planned (Hive, Sparta, Cult).

[Chaos Theory]

I make Social Psych a high priority (after IA) so I can plunk down rec commons as bureaucracy becomes a problem. I might delay building a few bases or use some doctors if there's a gap between bureaucracy and Social Psych.

If I do have the HGP or I'm playing Lal, this little problem goes away, of course, leading to coveted turn advantage!

Gaians can use police to bridge the gap. The Pirates can use FM and reach +2 econ with it, but the tradeoffs are much different than for landlubbers.

[cal_01]

Originally posted by binTravkin


I don't really get your point here but I suppose youre advertising planned over FM in early game.

For an answer I have only one advice to you:

Open scenario editor, put 2 equal factions on map, probably PKs (they're good both at Planned and FM), run them both for awhile with the only difference that one is going for Planned/Wealth and the other - for FM/Wealth.

You will see difference in who is the first to arrive to Wealth.

If you do better with Planned than FM means only one thing - you've been running too little FM.

There's actually some common pitfalls of new SMAC players and the inability/unwillingness to run FM over Planned is one of them.

As soon as you learn to properly use FM you'll understand what Im talking about.

A couple of MP games whether they're PBEM or TCP/IP will give you pretty much an insight in FM advantages.


I know this looks like another "you're newbie, so listen to elders" post, but there's indeed such thing as expierence and a knowledge base.
Reading SMAC academy over at CGN and/or Vels guide will give you quite much advice and you should actually do it and come back arguing after you've done it.

I bet your viewpoint will be very much different after you've read the knowledge base existing and tried that out in MP.

But then, here's my problem then: if we're talking about benchmarks being "who gets to x technology/SE first", then of course FM beats Planned hands down; I never disputed that point. Nor did I ever dispute that FM will beat Planned at the rate it gains tech.

My main problem with FM is the main tenants that it's said to be superb on and why its problematic to think in these ways: rush-building, tech, EC, warfare, and so forth.

And to make it clear, I'm not bashing FM or am I anti-FM. All I'm trying to do is provide a fair assessment of FM in contrast to the "pro-FM" posts and provide a somewhat detailed few of why FM has its pitfalls.

[cal_01]

Originally posted by Lazerus


The PBEM matchup will prove nothing, just because cal is preaching against FM does not make him the best anti-FM player around, and likewise i do not know how good Aaron is at running FM. In short the only way to prove something would be to have the same player who has a sound understanding of the best way to run all SE choices repeat using multiple factions using a mix of SE settings on the same map conditions (factors like pods can still alter even this dramatically) such as 3 games all FM, 3 games all planned, 3 games planned then to FM at x years,z years and q years etc then again using a different faction.
Then you also have the issue of quantifying this power, people would argue well this way has higher tech, then again this way has double the minerals so if he declared war it would destroy that method etc

FM is powerful, but i wouldnt say it was the see and end all of SE choices, if FM was such a must have then it would win most times yet in many of the tourney/ACDG games you see aggressive factions running planned/green winning just as many.
However overall i'd say due to small tricks like punishment sphere bases and specialists to get rid of war drones it does edge out the others in its large flexibility in that it can tech, rush and then boom with a GA or quick SE switch.

Thanks for your balanced post. I tried to make my posts balance out the FM posts, but I think I may have came out too adversarial. (Is there a spell check here?)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Civgaming - Builders Primer Early Game

Again the games are almost exclusively won or lost by the strength of the early game.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Just going through some golden moldies over at cgn

Someone asked about Pirates

SE Choices Discussion Thread Including some Good Pirate Discussions

[Tommar]

Originally posted by Lazerus

FM is powerful, but i wouldnt say it was the see and end all of SE choices, if FM was such a must have then it would win most times yet in many of the tourney/ACDG games you see aggressive factions running planned/green winning just as many.

FM isn't very useful to an aggressive faction. It's very useful to a builder a faction.

With FM, you have to sit in a defensive posture due to the -5 police, while you build and research with +2 econ.

[Tommar]

Originally posted by Maniac
Oh yeah, since there's a high concentration of superFMers here, I'll ask a question:

Under FM in the early game, how do you deal with drones after you've crossed the bureaucracy limit, and bases already have their first citizen as a drone? (Edit: And you can't use the easy way out of building the HGP or PTS)

This question also counts for the Gaians (and I think Pirates) btw. They can't profit from the benefits of free market, but neither do they have easy drone control like the other factions better run under Planned (Hive, Sparta, Cult).

Yep, as noted by Chaos Theory, rec commons is the first base facility that is built. I also tend to play University (before I found a copy of SMAX), which receives Network Nodes automatically. Very useful combined with the wonder that makes Network Nodes count as Hologram Theaters (whose name escapes me, been playing Civ3 *barf* in anticipation of Civ4's release, trying to decide what would make me buy the dang thing - conclusion so far that it be more like SMAC. )

[Tommar]

Originally posted by cal_01


My main problem with FM is the main tenants that it's said to be superb on and why its problematic to think in these ways: rush-building, tech, EC, warfare, and so forth.

If you choose to play a rush-attack faction rather than a rush-buiild faction, then FM might not be your best choice.

[Lazerus]

FM isn't very useful to an aggressive faction. It's very useful to a builder a faction.

With FM, you have to sit in a defensive posture due to the -5 police, while you build and research with +2 econ.

yet in many of the tourney/ACDG games you see aggressive factions running planned/green winning just as many.

I didnt say FM factions were aggressive, later in the game they can be, but i said its usually planned/green who can wage all out war easier.

[Lazerus]

The easiest way to really bring FM crashing down to earth would be to have the pacifist drones appear at a random base rather then their home base. This would really force some problems such as a must SE switch in times of war and only the tiniest possible standing army allowed giving opponents a massive chance to strike and conquer before retaliation.
It seems rather daft that the drones only get annoyed at the prospect of troops from their own base fighting, its like people from x city not really caring that forces from another city in their own country are bombing somewhere in the world.

[molly bloom]

I play free market only when I play as Morgan.

[Commy]

Originally posted by binTravkin


Bah, are you Commy blind?

Go read the quote to which I answered with this!
Noone questions the goodness of FM in early game!

I never run the same SE for entire game for the sole reason that it's 200% better to have a city of pop 14 while you've been running planned for the last 15 turns than to have city of pop 3 or 4 whose each citizen gives you 1 more EC!

Planned = popboom.

I couldn't explain it simplier..

If it makes you feel better, I don't do Free Market, I do planned the entire game...all I'm saying is is that you could do Free Market the entire game, and it would be very beneficial...

I have to ask, do you do ICSing? Because if you do, your SE strategy will be much different than mine, as I don't ICS...

[cal_01]

Originally posted by Tommar


If you choose to play a rush-attack faction rather than a rush-buiild faction, then FM might not be your best choice.

Actually, I'm mostly a builder when possible.

[cal_01]

Originally posted by Lazerus
The easiest way to really bring FM crashing down to earth would be to have the pacifist drones appear at a random base rather then their home base. This would really force some problems such as a must SE switch in times of war and only the tiniest possible standing army allowed giving opponents a massive chance to strike and conquer before retaliation.
It seems rather daft that the drones only get annoyed at the prospect of troops from their own base fighting, its like people from x city not really caring that forces from another city in their own country are bombing somewhere in the world.

I've always wondered about this too. Why not make them create universal drones too?