Hey guys, want to ask you a question for my games. What is the best eco civilization? Poles? Tatars? Tell me on comments
Chinese or Cumans
But very hard to play them properly
2 Likes
Depends on the game stage I think.
Overall I’d say Indians or Persians, 20% cheaper vills (in castle age, usually when people boom or spend good amount of time) means you can have more for the same food.
Faster working TCs and docks, given the resources, means simply more vills/ships.
2 Likes
Chinese cumans vikings and Burgundians would be my top 4.
5 Likes
My personal top 10 are according to this order Vikings, Chinese, Cumans, Burgundians, Mayans, Celts, Poles, Aztecs, Khmer, Huns.
This rank is for only on Arabia and similar maps.
3 Likes
My top 5 are Vikings, Chinese, Teutons, Poles (assuming protected folwarks) and Bohemians. The latter really have an underrated eco with faster working villagers, free mining upgrades, a wood discount on important buildings and faster working markets for team games.
1 Like
It depends on wether you are referring to arabia or arena full boom.
On arena khmer, burgundians, persians, malay are really cracked.
Khmer give you you 400 wood once you hit feudal age, because you don’t need the buildings, and the building time. Also you have +10% farm rate and can click wheelbarrow much later.
On arabia they are not that strong, because you need other buildings anyway and the farmdrops are not as dominant.
On arabia chinese, vikings, malay are really good, because they get extra vills (e.g. by having less tc research time) without having to add tcs.
2 Likes
Thank you all! i will use vikings now a lot!
1 Like
Why do you want an eco civ? Just curious.
1 Like
Chinese, mayans, celts, burgundians and vikings.
2 Likes
just because i went to the (small) effort of typing it out, i might as well copy/pasta it here
vikings: this is just a quick calculation so someone can correct me:
feudal age:
by the time the opponent takes WB, vikings can train 3 vils
WB kicks in IMMEDIATELY on feudal , so even if you gave another player the 175f 50w they would still need to research WB, meaning vikings are still ahead for 75s of res gen, almost no one takes WB start of feudal, meaning vikings are ahead for minutes, never mind 75s, and many builds only have WB in castle
castle age becomes a little more murky and dependent on multiple TCs, but either way its still 300f 200w + vil time dependent on TCs but at least 1 vil ahead
so vikings eco = +475f +250w +4 vils on top of the upgrades coming in earlier meaning some multiplicative of res income on all vils…
that is the issue, not their tech tree… Vikings have the worst kts in the game, yet regularly win using kts… lack of TR wont change that
IIRC some redditors made a big thing out of trying how long it takes every civ to full boom and cumans were at the stop, followed by vikings, chinese and malay (possibly not in that oder)
This is only correct answer.
Theoretically it is 2.2 villagers. If anything, Vikings with their free Wheelbarrow, I’d say they can afford 2nd and 3rd TC earlier than most of the civs. In that case free Handcart is another 3 villagers lead for Vikings.
1 Like
Can you link this to me please? I made a calc for this myself: (I’d be interested to compare my results)
Edit: Note for poles I decided to chose 1 Folwark for 8 farms each, so it is the “best case” scenario which is basically only achievable in Maps like arabia currently. Other civs which great “flexible” feudal age eco bonusses like burgundians or aztecs (and even mayans) don’t perform as well as they would in a real game as their biggest advantages over the other civs comes from the delay the military interaction causes to the midgame. So this only shows the impact of the eco bonusses to a full boom, not anything else. The orange bars represent approximated possible improvement by adjusting the build, cause I chose to calc with the same build for each civ (directly into 4 tc boom, which I calculated theoretically superior to the common fc into 3 tc strat).
1 Like
If these numbers are accurate this would be a very helpful ressource to have as a relative indication for the booming potential of the civs.
Here some questions to understand better on what level of detail the analysis was done:
- what are the times on the graph showing? Time to reach a certain amount of villagers - if so how many vills?
- what was the build order used for these calculations? How many vills up and did you factor in 3 deer?
- when were the wood and food eco upgrades researched? Before placing the first batches of farms or afterwards?
- how many farms for 4 tc - only the ~24 or even less required to sustain vill production - so a pure boom without any other investments into something like gold tech?
- did you factor in house ressource cost, lumber camp and gold mining wood cost to reach castle age?
- how did you do the calculations in general? I don’t think you virtually placed vills on resources but rather calculated the required total ressources for each civ and applied civ bonuses to that and to gather speed and with that information calculated the villager seconds/minutes required. Is that correct or did you chose another approach?
- was build time and villager walk time and sheep/deer/boar food decay considered in some at least easy way to simulate some delayed resource income making it harder to research some stuff in time
Here some observations where I would have assumed eco bonuses to be weaker/stronger:
Tatar’s sheep bonus having such a great effect is nice - some people mentioned that basically the dark age +400 food (or less with decay) from sheep is like putting two villager on a farm early (120 wood safe). For dark age that is probably true.
In castle age even less thanks to heavy plow and horse collar. In theory you wouldn’t need many farms to get the benefit of 2 sheep per TC - so that would be another around 70 wood per 2 sheep in value. So for 4 TC boom with this theory it would mean its only like 330 total wood savings.
BUT this theory doesn’t factor in that it delays the needed wood which gives you the opportunity to get the farm upgrades before seeding the first farms and to get the boom up and have work for many vills on the sheep from the new TCs in castle age so that your wood vills have enough time to get the wood needed for further farms.
Is this how you got such good results for them? Did you go into such detail for your calculations?
I am also surprised that the Teuton Farm bonus is so weak in your calculations - franks can achieve the same boom speed as 36 wood farms?
Franks are probably around 60 food ahead with faster berries and get 200 food 200 wood for free with horse collar and heavy plow. Thats around 460 ressource advantage
You would probably have around 30 farms by minute 24 and reseeded 10 or so feudal farms so 40 farms x 24 wood cheaper = 960 wood savings which is more than double the savings from the Franks.
Even if you calculated with less farms that should still be 700+ wood savings.
These wood savings let Teutons easily boom with 1 more TC than most other civs if pure booming is the goal. Since you said you used 4 TC boom for all civs thats probably the reason why Teutons are not top tier on your list.
And the sicilian boom seems really good - probably the combination of the super fast TC creation speed and delaying next farm reseeds which lets one delay the heavy plow tech to a time where its easier to afford
1 Like
Meanwhile Indians sit at the third position, according to that graph and nobody (except me :D) even mentioned them.
Quite strange.
2 Likes
That’s really a lot of questions. I could answer them all with detailed description but I will keep it as short as possible as it would go way too far into detail.
The calc consists of two parts, one build I did for FC into 4 TC boom with Magyars. This I use as Reference for all the other calculations. When I calc a different civ, I will approximate all the eco bonusses the other civ got at a given timestamp (18 Minutes). This is basically a sum of all the advantages and (possibly compensations for the advantages like for the tatars sheep I calc them as the food they provide but substract the time needed to collect in form of wood).
Then I have developed a tool that estimates that having Ressources Earlier is better than later. Assuming that when you full boom your eco will double in a certain amount of time. This means after each of this time delta called HalfWorthPeriod (HWP) ressources available at that point are basically only worth half of their current worth. WIth this assumption I can calculate how much economical prowess a vill, farm and tc has and how much investment is needed to make them. This allows to reciprokely calculate the HWP and ressource worth of each civ by setting the investment/gain of farms and tcs + vill production each to 1.
This values then can be used to calc the economic power of each civ at the 18:00 Timestamp and a timespan they need to double that power. Then I just chose a Economic Power to reach to be “fully boomed” and calculated for each civ when it would reach it. I chose this because there are several civs which have very different economies and therefore just looking eg on vill numbers would be inaccurate. Instead I just set a specific economic power I found reasonable. I think it approximately corresponds to a 120 vill economy, but I never actually compared this. As it is also basically impossible to compare, as you never have a “hard” stop in booming u usually just decide to not add more tcs but add military buildings instead.
That’s the basic concept how it is calculated, the most easy explanation I can come with.
Answers to your questions:
Yes.
The build was optimised to get them asap for best result.
Yes.
Yes and ofc all civ bonusses that reduce that kind of investment.
As I used a build for the first 18:00 minutes, this is included naturally for that time period, but I also regard this in two ways later: Civ bonusses that have influence in that are regarded. Also walking time (towards ressources) is inherent element of the worker efficiency calculations.
I will now try to get into some of your civ specific mentions as I think this is way more interesting to discuss here:
Here I calculated how much impact it has to send the 5 vills that made the TC directly to the spawned sheep. This way tatars benefit way more from the extra sheep as if they would get like 2 farms for free, as the food gathering from the sheep would be much faster and allow them to place extra tcs earlier than other civs. This is ofc a theoretical opimized use of that bonus, as we all know how hard it is to find the right eco balance for tatars with that bonus. But I made the deicision to not account for poor buildorders. just assuming that you have found the “perfect” balance, even if you have no idea how to achieve it.
Yes, this is an interesting point. The key is that the teutons bonus comes in later than the franks one. So the franks initially start with an eco already better than the Teutons, but the Teutons can alrady catch up until the end of their boom. From that on the Teuton eco is just better than the franks one.
But yes, it’s an interesting result that shows how strong franks are actually.
But I must admit, I think it is the franks before the foraging nerf, I think I forgot to adapt for it, goes on my todo list.
Food is way more worth than wood at this stage of the game. For most of the civs I get a 1:1.887 proportionalty factor between them. Interestingly Teutons, because of the Farm bonus have one of the best ratios with 1:1.695 (Only Poles have 1:1.55). That means while Booming the wood savings don’t have that big of an Impact. Also as I told before, Franks just have the better initial start to the boom, it takes time for the teuton player to compensate for having to invest into the farm upgrades and the berry bonus. The better initial start of the boom gives the Franks player a nice advantage to snowball.
The super fast TCs are the main factor there. Note that because of this building time advantage the sicilian player does economically best by building the extra tcs with 2 vills only. NOt only are they faster to build this than other civs. 3 Vills can be left on wood to gather ressources while the others would need move and build - a nice eco advantage worth about 140-150 wood in total. The better farms don’t have such big of an impact - and probably sic are indeed even better if you would skip heavy plow. But in my calc I didn’t. The main benefit comes from the TC bonus.
Well it’s “only” place 3 for the civ that comes to mind first when talking about booming… I’m quite dissappointed they aren’t strictly number one. The vill discount is such an insanely strong eco bonus, I expected them to be number one actually. And they were before Cumans and Poles mixed things up.
3 Likes
How did you calculate Saracens? How much resource they are theoretically buying/selling?
1 Like
I chose to not implement this yet. Besides the whole Idea to mak this actually starte from wanting to know how much market abuse potential you can get for your boom, I haven’t implemented this yet.
The thing is, if I would do it I needed to take different buildorders into account too, which I also haven’t. It could also turn out that I would need to manually adjust buildorders and the optimal amount of gold for them to to convert to food… It would be a complete mess. And I like that I still somehow have the overview over my calc besides it is already very complicated ;).
But Maybe I will insert an approximation for the saracen market abuse at least at some point. But don’t expect it to pulverize the other civs. It will maybe bring them in the range of civs like Italians or Vietnamese. Note that it would only take the initial market abuse into account, I can’t make an approximation for the Vill time lost by the need to relocate the gold miners after their job to initialize the boom is done.
BTW the most “surprising” civ is actually spanish. The faster building vills have a huge impact, much more than I expected.
1 Like