A Commercial trait commercial

alexman · February 5, 2003, 20:26

There is no trait in Civ3 more maligned than the Commercial trait. Romans, Greeks, and Carthage are somewhat saved by their UU, but the rest of the Commercial civs are at the bottom of the popularity list. Just ask the English, Koreans, Spanish, Indians, and French how much love they get.

But before you start screaming about how your beloved Romans got the short end of the stick, stop and consider this fact: Tight city spacing in the ancient age is extremely powerful, and often a requirement if you want to keep pace with the AI on higher difficulty levels. Much to the dismay of the minimum-overlap builder dinosaurs left over from Civ2, tight city spacing works like a charm. You get to use more land without the wait for Hospitals, and without the need for cultural improvements to get border expansions. Your units can move quicker from one city to another. Your distance corruption is lower.

There is only one problem with tight city spacing: Corruption due to number of cities. With a bunch of cities around your capital, it can be frustrating to see a city in the second ring around your capital be 50% corrupt, even if it is just 5-6 tiles away from your palace.

Commercial break: Did you know that the commercial trait is just like having a free courthouse in all your cities, as far as corruption due to number of cities is concerned? Let me rephrase that: The Commercial trait takes care of the greatest drawback of the most powerful tool in Civ3. It reduces OCN corruption for the tight build pattern.

As with most traits, the Commercial trait works in synergy with some traits, while it clashes with others. Specifically, the Commercial trait is ideal when you don’t have cheap buildings for border expansions: Militaristic, Industrious, and Expansionist. Here are some examples of what the Commercial trait can do for some civilizations:

Rome:
Rarely do you find a civilization with traits and unique unit that complement each other as much. Use a tight city spacing and build nothing but settlers, cheap barracks, workers, and Warriors. Because of the Commercial trait, even your outer ring of cities will be productive. As soon as you have enough Warriors and enough cash to upgrade them, Legion-rush a neighbor. Use the leader from the war (you got one, right?) to build the FP away from your core of cities. Now you have a densely-populated military production machine in your old land, and a new land with AI spacing, ready for larger, wonder-producing and cultural cities.

France and Carthage:
What a flexible combination of traits! You can follow Rome’s warmongering route, with your fast workers offsetting the more expensive barracks, but you don’t need to commit suicide if you don’t have iron. Horses will do just fine, and you don’t even have to suffer an ancient-age Golden Age if you attack. But what if there is no enemy nearby? No problem. Just continue building. Find a good site for a new core, build a city there and let it grow. Your tight city spacing means that your capital is not large or developed, and you can afford a palace jump to your new core, after you have built your FP near your old palace.

England:
England is certainly not the best overall civilization in the game, but consider what you can do on large maps. It is a well known fact that the expansionist trait shines on these maps. But you also have room to build cities. Lots of cities! Lots of cities with low corruption, since distance corruption is low on large maps anyway! Make sure to build early granaries (look, how convenient: you start with Pottery). Your cities don’t need to be tightly packed on large maps, although it’s a good idea in the rare case where you expect to fight for room soon. England is tailored for large maps: A monster if left alone to build, with plenty of early punch when using a tight build. OK, the UU still stinks.

Greece and Korea:
Yes, scientific works against tight city spacing because you don’t need border expansions as much. But you will need some border expansions, especially in your coastal cities, or if you have room to expand. And what better way to get border expansions than from half-price libraries, when you start just two techs away from Literature? (By the way, the Alphabet is not just good because it’s on the path to Literature; it’s also is the most expensive starting tech, so it has good trade value).

So does the commercial trait deserve all the cursing and swearing it’s getting? Definitely not. Is it the best trait? Probably not. But if you know how to use it, you’ll get your money’s worth.

Nor Me · February 5, 2003, 21:28

What, as far as I know, does Commercial do:

a) Increase the OCN by 25% weirdly rounded down except in Communism when it's 10%.

b) Give every city +2 commerce and every metropolis +3 commerce

For a small empire b) can actually be more important than a). As long as it's worth it to build an aqueduct in every city, b) is also helped by closer cities. Beyond this closer cities are often a better idea if you're not Commercial (not that Commercial doesn't help).
Both these bonuses are small but they apply every turn and so make commercial a good trait. I'm not sure that Commercial is much worse than, say, Religious and it may be better in some circumstances.

The big disadvantage of most Commercial civs is their UUs. Only Carthage and Rome have good ones. Again I'd say the reason England is mediocre and the Iroqouis and Arabs are very good has little to do with their Religiousness.

The main reason that I don't like Scientific or Religious and Commercial civs is that they're hard to start with. They're both better combos than the Babylonians have.

I was going to try and judge the size of the Commercial bonus in a real game by modelling a game I've played by scenarios at various points. I've played the game as the English from an unseen random map but I've only got as far as a save in which I've only 5 cities. In that Commercial has no effect. Obviously it takes no time at all and is highly interesting. When(

) I'd done that, I was going to start a thread such as this.

BRC · February 5, 2003, 21:33

Excellent post Alexman!

Rome: The important thing to realize here is that you may not be able to oscillate as much as you want. Your Legions are powerful, but slow. I wouldn't even plan on warrior or archer rushing. Build a lot of vet warriors, save your cash, and then upgrade. Do not send them out in waves. Mass them and crush whatever civ is closest. I'd say stop once for techs, and then plow them. A key here is getting the land for 2 good cores established early. If you don't get a leader, but you time it right, you can still start building your FP during the GA. Also, you're probably not going to be able to clear your continent before they become obsolete, so you need to figure out what your long term plan is. Hopefully, you get that FP you needed. If so, this game could be one of the easiest you've had. Otherwise, you might have problems, as you have a huge number of Legions waiting to be upgraded to the very slow Medieval Infantry. Be prepared to switch over to builder style, with just one of the traits.

France and Carthage: From what I hear, these two can be pretty solid later on. No real experience, but does France or Carthage get the edge on UU's. The Musketeer is just a GA trigger, but it is outside of despotism. The cost is a little more reasonable also.

England: Played well, every civ can be good. This one needs to be played great.

Korea and Greece: I would have to say that Greece can be a monster in most games. The hoplite strikes fear into me every time I start near them. These two and Egypt are the ultimate builder civs in my mind. The fact that Korea can't start a GA with the H'wacha may cause problems, but people can say Greece GA prospects aren't much better. Still, Greece gets the nod, as I wouldn't want to deal with both China and Japan. The main problem with these civs is that you would have a hard time fighting early for your 2 cores, which I think is a neccessity at the higher levels.

My main points here is that every civ can be dominate if played to their traits. Alexman knows this, and has demonstrated how to best use the Commercial Trait. The best use for it may be getting your FP built earlier than the rest of the world, but we all know that nothing builds your FP faster than a Leader.

My nod goes to Rome and Greece. Greece could have a bigger hole to work out of, but their approach should be much less risky.

Disclaimer: I have played with none of these civs, so if you have played with one of these, and you have a different opinion, please take it easy on me.

Alexfrog · February 5, 2003, 21:53

okay, I am by no means a Civ3 expert....I dont post in here much.

However, I have read through all the "must read" strategy threads, and one of the things I read was that all that commercial did was give +1 commerce for metropoloses, and reduce the #cities you have by 1 for the purposes of the #cities corruption calculation.

Could someone who is an expert respond to this?
Is it really as Alexman says? or as I read somewhere in those must read strat threads...

I used to play the french but when I found out how little commercial did I stopped. cant beleive I ignored commercial and scientific for so long, dangit!

Anyway...back to longing for MoO3..........

Nor Me · February 5, 2003, 21:59

Alexfrog, I've tested it. If it's not what I said then it's something odd. It has been changed by patches but it was never what you suggest.

Alexfrog · February 5, 2003, 22:17

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=46801

a post started by alexman himself....

there was a long discussion on what commercial did, at first they thought it wasnt a factor, then a small one, etc, etc...

it also states thatthe commerce bonus is +1 for metropoloses

it may be old....it may not apply to new patches, I dont really know...

as I said, I'm not an expert, I am mostly looking forward to MOO3, but play some Civ.

Nor Me · February 5, 2003, 22:32

Alexfrog, that part is very easy to test by scenario (and I have tried random saves). It's definitely 3 in PTW v1.14f (and I think Civ 3 v1.29f). The trouble is that this bonus is confused with that for Industrious which really is just 1 production for metropoli. They may have started out the same but were patched differently because Industrious is much better than Commercial.

alexman · February 5, 2003, 22:33

Alexfrog, although the initial post is up-to-date, the thread you're quoting was started a long time ago, and much of the discussion is out of date because back then nobody really knew anything for sure. Since then, Firaxis has told us that the Commercial trait increases the OCN by 25% (it was 10% prior to 1.29f), and they also boosted the center-tile bonus. So to be clear, the Commercial bonus is as Nor Me says, verified not only by testing, but by Firaxis.

notyoueither · February 6, 2003, 00:32

alexman,

Why am I finding minimal differences between Rome and Egypt when:

Code:

Standard size world.
25 cities (2x optimal cities of 12 [+ 1]).
Regent Difficulty.

Cities at distance 10 from capitol.

Sh = Shields
Co = Commerce

                           Sh         Co
Rome, no Courthouse     64 of 95   67 of 100
Egypt, no Courthouse    63 of 95   66 of 100
Egypt, with Courthouse  77 of 95   81 of 100
Rome, with Courthouse   78 of 95   82 of 100

I am puzzled. With different parameters I am getting more significant differences, but in no case do I see Commercial equalling a Courthouse in every city. This is with PTW 1.14. Has something changed?

/Edit. The numbers are number of uncorrupt of total.

notyoueither · February 6, 2003, 00:55

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
But before you start screaming about how your beloved Romans got the short end of the stick, stop and consider this fact...

btw, I play Rome because it's the right thing to do.

alexman · February 6, 2003, 01:09

NYE, to be clear, the commercial trait acts as a courthouse only for the OCN-related part of corruption. The distance corruption is unaffected. Because the OCN corruption is minimal for your closest cities to the capital, the Commercial trait will have a negligible effect on the closest city to your capital, even if that is 10 tiles away, but a great effect on the farthest city.

Is the city you're examining (the one 10 tiles from the capital) the 25th city in proximity to the capital? Or is it the 10th, for example? The answer makes a huge difference in the number-of-cities corruption for that city, and hence in the difference due to the Commercial trait.

From the values you give (only 20%-30% corruption) I suspect that there aren't 23 cities between that city and the capital.

Catt · February 6, 2003, 01:18

I've enjoyed a few after-dinner drinks . . .

Sometime back near year-end, in a thread whose subject has passed completely from my memory, Jawa Jocky asked (more or less) "Who is ready to defend the commercial trait?" and I responded, more or less, "It's hard to defend from any perspective -- there is no hard science, just a feeling among Commercial's defenders of power in the industrial age, a real test would examine a 'typical' empire as a commercial civ and as a non-commercial civ." What a pain. I ended up trying to play with just such an experiment, and still have some saves and screenshots on point -- I developed no real conclusions about which I might pound the table; but I crystallized a view that commercial was, justifiably, a weak trait and that, interestingly, the 3-gold-per-metropolis-center seemed to provide more benefit than the 25% OCN change in certain circumstances.

Apologies for lack of my own test results in this post, and for anything incoherent due to the aforementioned after-dinner drinks . . . I will look for, and post, results of my quirky tests.

Catt

(ps - what's up with 'Poly's servers? tremendous problems through the early afternoon on many recent days - I abandoned any hope to comment on threads

)

notyoueither · February 6, 2003, 01:34

OK alexman. I agree, my first test was skewed, the city was closest to the capitol. Actually, there were 4 cities all at 10 tile distance all with equal numbers.

I did another round. Here it is:

Code:

Standard size world.
25 cities (2x optimal cities of 12 [+ 1]).
Regent Difficulty.

Cities at distance 10 from capitol.
8 cities closer than subject cities.


Sh = Shields
Co = Commerce

                           Sh         Co
Rome, no Courthouse     43 of 95   45 of 100
Egypt, no Courthouse    36 of 59   38 of 100
Egypt, with Courthouse  56 of 95   59 of 100
Rome, with Courthouse   60 of 95   64 of 100

I still don't see a Courthouse in every city.

alexman · February 6, 2003, 01:52

NYE, and all Rome-lovers out there:
The GOTM for February over at CF is Rome (Emperor).
That game was actually what made me start this thread.

Catt, your test results may very well not show a huge difference in favor of Commercial, but you need to remember that the trait shines in cities with many other cities closer to the capital. This happens most often when you have a tight build pattern. (And if AU 203 is any indication, your build pattern is very far from tight!

)

Here are a couple of examples:
(Monarchy, standard map size, Emperor)

10 tiles from capital, 12 cities closer, no courthouse:
Commercial: 57% Corruption
Non-commercial: 70% Corruption

15 tiles from capital, 16 cities closer, courthouse
Commercial: 57% Corruption
Non-commercial: 65% Corruption

Example of a sparse build pattern:
15 tiles from capital, 12 cities closer, courthouse
Commercial: 46% Corruption
Non-commercial: 52% Corruption

notyoueither · February 6, 2003, 02:01

I see that alexman. However, what I take exception to is the suggestion, which some others have picked up, that Commercial is somehow a 'free' Courthouse. As if any other trait gets a free building. No one else does, and in fact Commercial does not either.

Here are more extensive numbers measured by both number of cites and distance from capitol at the same time.

Code:

Standard size world.
24 cities (2x optimal cities or 12).
Regent Difficulty.

Terrain edited to give cities 100 commerce and 95 or 96 shields at 4 pop.

D=Distance
Sh= Shields
Co= Commerce

#1 Roman (Commercial, No Courthouse)
#2 Egyptian (Non-Commercial, No Courthouse)
#3 Egyptian (Non-Commercial, With Courthouse)
#4 Roman (Commercial, With Courthouse)

         #1         #2         #3         #4
   D

Sh    91 of  95  91 of  95  93 of  95  93 of  95
Co 0  96 of 100  96 of 100  98 of 100  98 of 100

Sh    87 of  95  86 of  95  89 of  95  89 of  95
Co 02 91 of 100  90 of 100  93 of 100  94 of 100

Sh    82 of  95  81 of  95  86 of  95  87 of  95
Co 03 86 of 100  85 of 100  90 of 100  91 of 100

Sh    76 of  95  73 of  95  81 of  95  83 of  95
Co 04 80 of 100  77 of 100  86 of 100  87 of 100

Sh    72 of  96  69 of  96  78 of  96  80 of  96
Co 05 75 of 100  72 of 100  81 of 100  83 of 100

Sh    65 of  95  61 of  95  72 of  95  75 of  95
Co 06 68 of 100  64 of 100  76 of 100  79 of 100

Sh    60 of  95  56 of  95  70 of  95  73 of  95
Co 07 63 of 100  59 of  90  73 of 100  76 of 100

Sh    54 of  95  48 of  95  65 of  95  68 of  95
Co 08 57 of 100  51 of 100  69 of 100  72 of 100

Sh    49 of  95  43 of  95  61 of  95  64 of  95
Co 09 52 of 100  45 of 100  64 of 100  68 of 100

Sh    43 of  95  36 of  95  56 of  95  60 of  95
Co 10 45 of 100  38 of 100  59 of 100  64 of 100

Sh    38 of  95  31 of  95  53 of  95  58 of  95
Co 11 40 of 100  32 of 100  56 of 100  61 of 100

Sh    32 of  95  23 of  95  49 of  95  54 of  95
Co 12 33 of 100  25 of 100  51 of 100  57 of 100

Sh    27 of  95  18 of  95  44 of  95  50 of  95
Co 13 29 of 100  19 of 100  47 of 100  53 of 100

Sh    21 of  96  11 of  96  40 of  96  47 of  96
Co 14 22 of 100  12 of 100  42 of 100  48 of 100

Sh    16 of  96   6 of  96  38 of  96  44 of  96
Co 15 17 of 100   6 of 100  39 of 100  46 of 100

Sh    10 of  95   5 of  95  33 of  95  40 of  95
Co 16 10 of 100   5 of 100  34 of 100  42 of 100

Sh     5 of  96   5 of  96  28 of  96  36 of  96
Co 17  6 of 100   5 of 100  30 of 100  38 of 100

Sh     5 of  95   5 of  95  24 of  95  32 of  95
Co 18  5 of 100   5 of  95  25 of 100  33 of 100

Sh     5 of  95   5 of  95  21 of  95  30 of  95
Co 19  5 of 100   5 of 100  22 of 100  31 of 100

Sh     5 of  95   5 of  95  14 of  95  25 of  95
Co 20  5 of 100   5 of 100  14 of 100  27 of 100

Sh     5 of  95   5 of  95  10 of  95  21 of  95
Co 21  5 of 100   5 of 100  10 of 100  23 of 100

Sh     5 of  95   5 of  95  10 of  95  17 of  95
Co 22  5 of 100   5 of 100  10 of 100  18 of 100

Sh     5 of  96   5 of  96  10 of  96  15 of  96
Co 23  5 of 100   5 of 100  10 of 100  16 of 100

Sh     5 of  95   5 of  95  10 of  95  10 of  95
Co 24  5 of 100   5 of 100  10 of 100  10 of 100

In no way, and in no case, does the value of Commercial come up to the value of a Courthouse for a non-commercial civ.

No, Commercial is not useless, but i think I have played the Romans enough to say that it is not that great compared to some other traits.

alexman · February 6, 2003, 02:09

NYE, your results are normal. You are seeing exactly the effect of a courthouse for the corruption due to number of cities. It's easier to see if you break down the corruption into its components.

In your test, you have 30% distance corruption without a courthouse, and 15% with a courthouse. (See the corruption formula). The Commercial trait makes no difference to this component of corruption, but it does make a difference to the number-of-cities corruption.

Code:

Corruption percentage for NYE's test
                        Total Distance Cities
Rome, no Courthouse      55%    30%     25%
Egypt, no Courthouse     62%    30%     32%
Egypt, with Courthouse   40%    15%     25%
Rome, with Courthouse    36%    15%     21%

These values are exaclty what you reported. Notice how the number-of-cities corruption is the same for Egypt with a courthouse as it is for Rome without.

notyoueither · February 6, 2003, 02:15

OK. However, this difference becomes overblown.

When accounting for rounding, the differences are not that great between a commercial civ and a non commercial civ.

What is more importent is that the non-commercial civ with a courthouse is way ahead of a commercial civ without.

alexman · February 6, 2003, 02:19

we keep cross-posting

I think you took my post out of context. In the very first post I sad that the Commercial trait has the effect of a free courthouse as far as corruption due to number of cities is concerned. If you got a free full courthouse effect, there would be no reason for me to suggest that the Commercial trait is better for a tight build than for a relaxed build.

As for the rounding, it evens out. In the ancient age, a 5% reduction in corruption might yield just one shield per turn, but that is the difference between a warrior (to be upgraded to a Legionary) in 2 turns or in 3 turns.

notyoueither · February 6, 2003, 02:58

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman

we keep cross-posting

I think you took my post out of context. In the very first post I sad that the Commercial trait has the effect of a free courthouse as far as corruption due to number of cities is concerned. If you got a free full courthouse effect, there would be no reason for me to suggest that the Commercial trait is better for a tight build than for a relaxed build.

I admit guilt in having an agenda here.

When someone says 'free Courthouse' it is natural to think that Commercial without Courthouse equals Non-Commercial with Courthouse as far as total production is concerned. I know you have not said that, but some others have dropped the qualification regarding number of cities.

In fact, the Commercial trait is akin to the second step of 4. The base line is Non-Commercial, the second step is Commercial, the next step up is Non-Commercial with a Courthouse, the final step is Commercial with the Courthouse.

Code:

Standard size world.
24 cities (2x optimal cities or 12).
Regent Difficulty.
Random map with 24 cites placed using 2 spacing (2 tiles between cities).

Default editor values for terrain.

Values empire wide
                                                Commerce
Roman (Commercial, No Courthouse).             169 of 328. 52%
Egyptian (Non-Commercial, No Courthouse).      135 of 300. 45%
Egyptian (Non-Commercial, With Courthouse).    180 of 300. 60%
Roman (Commercial, With Courthouse).           218 of 328. 66%

Harovan · February 6, 2003, 05:09

Here they meet, alexman with the pink frog, and Alexfrog himself.

Since Commercial has been fixed from 10% to 25%, it's one of my favorite traits for games, where I don't intend to play like Attila the Hun. I have played epic emperor games with France and India on huge maps (great for commercial!) and in both games easily outproduced and outresearched all AIs, even though it's not easy to keep pace with 15 techwhoring opponents. The commercial trait is a cash machine, especially when it comes along with industriousness. Due to less corruption even in farther cities, it also helps producing military units quickly in a big amount.

In my French game I archer/horse/swordsman rushed Egypt, England and Russia (my immediate neighbors), finished Russia with Knights, Egypt with Cavalries and Germany with Inf/Arty and later Tanks (England had been finished by a German/Egyptian alliance in the medieval age). This left France alone on a huge continent. Some of you may remember the map animation I once posted. Commercial and a good P/FP axis made, that none of my cities, including 2 nearby islands, had more than about 50% corruption, even though I remained a Republic till the end of the game. The only exception was ex Germany, which was poor terrain anyway and I didn't build up the cities there. As example may serve, that my Tanks fought against German Knights, that was the best what Bismarck had.

This game was about the time, when we talked about creating killer AIs. I had just played 2 games with Japan, and had China and France as killer AI opponents. In other games Greece, and even Rome were very strong opponents. This made me think, that on rough map the key for a killer AI is without any doubt the industrious trait, while on good terrain nothing trumps commercial. We all know, that the AI doesn't take any advantage out of the militaristic and expansionist traits, and in a mediocre way handles religious and scientific. Commercial and industrious offer their benefits without a special game strategy, what makes them very strong AI traits.

nutriphat · February 6, 2003, 07:08

i do not understand why everybody hates the french (except for the color). I remember i read a thread where the traits were quantified and commercial and industrous came out best. WHY WHY WHY do you hate the french???

Harovan · February 6, 2003, 08:08

I think nobody hates them here. Ask in the general forum, there may be some French haters left, but people here in the strategy forum see things a bit more sober. The French are a first choice civ for the builder and even for the moderate warmonger. Less corruption and quick developed terrain helps in any playstyle.

Alexman, with all respect, but I abstain from voting in this poll. There is no such a thing like a "worst trait". It depends greatly on world size and other map settings, the playstyle and the intended game outcome. If I want to go for a domination or conquest victory, I most likely won't use the Greeks, but for an intended space race victory they are among the first civs I would consider to use. Since there is neither a "depends" nor a banana option, I abstain.

Brundlefly · February 6, 2003, 09:49

Expansionist is the worst. Absolutely useless.

Anyone who "maligns" Commercial is a warmonger. Nothing wrong with that - it's just their style of play. My style of play is to be a builder and to play on large/huge maps. Commercial is the second best trait. Industrial is the best. I only play Industrial Civs. France, imho, is the best civ to play, followed by China and then Persia...

alexman · February 6, 2003, 09:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
There is no such a thing like a "worst trait". It depends greatly on world size and other map settings, the playstyle and the intended game outcome.

I agree 100%. That's why I didn't vote either. I thought most people would vote Commercial, so I was hoping to make a point by defending the trait that everyone dislikes the most. Evidently, however, people like Commercial more than I thought. By the way, who voted for Industrious? And Religious?

Harovan · February 6, 2003, 10:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Feephi
Expansionist is the worst. Absolutely useless.

Try a huge pangea with 8 civs. Build 20+ scouts and set research to 0%. You'll get all ancient techs out of huts or buy them from the AIs you meet very soon. Chances are good, that you get 1-2 settlers. Scouts are nice cheap and fast units to watch potential enemy activities. Building an early granary (you start with Pottery) works a charm on undercrowded maps. You will most likely get out of the ancient age first on any difficulty level, what mostly means, you won the game. Given these circumstances, expansionist is worth all other traits together.

I agree with you on a tiny archipelago with 80% water, though.

metalhead · February 6, 2003, 10:49

alexman, I don't think people have taken the bait to vote for commercial in this thread yet because your fellow commercial apologists, like myself, are probably the first ones to show up in this thread. I voted for Militaristic, because I've never had more success at war with or without this trait.

As far as commercial goes, I'll repeat what I've stated in the past - it is the most maligned trait because there is no tangible benefit to the trait. Every other trait gives you a new unit, a cheaper building, or a faster worker, while the benefit of the Commercial trait is not readily evident. I always have my best games and most productive empires as commercial civs, and I particularly think that the French (!) are the best civ in the game for SP.

alexman · February 6, 2003, 12:26

After the discussion with notyoueither, I'm afraid people are missing the point I made in the initial post.

The point was not that Commercial is some amazing trait that gives you a free courthouse in each city, because that's not the case. But the Commercial trait does offset the additional corruption you get from tight city spacing. In other words, a commercial civilization gets all the benefits of tight city spacing, without the only disadvantage. Given how powerful tight city spacing is in Civ3, I'll take Commercial any day.

Let me illustrate this point with an example.
Standard size, Monarchy, Emperor level, 75 total citizens

Case 1: Loose build pattern
15 cities, each of size 5, spaced 4 tiles apart, and arranged as follows:

Code:

OOOOO
OOXOO
OOOOO

(X=capital, O=city)

Case 2: Tight build pattern
25 cities, each of size 3, spaced 3 tiles apart, and arranged as follows:

Code:

OOOOO
OOOOO
OOXOO
OOOOO
OOOOO

Let's examine the total income after corruption, normalized by non-commercial, loose build:

Code:

                   Loose    Tight
Non-Commercial    100.0%    94.6%
Commercial        106.8%   103.3%

Look! Not only does the Commercial trait give you 9.1% more income over your entire empire in a tight build (6.8% in a loose build), but it actually is better than the non-commercial trait in a loose build! The corruption disadvantage of a tight build has disappeared, and you get to keep all the advantages.

Now who will play borg-style without the commercial trait?

Brizey · February 6, 2003, 12:31

MH:

I have been a defender of the French as well. Commerical civs have a larger "right size" in the early industrial era. This larger "right size" is perfect after two or three major military campaigns. I find that with a non-commercial civ, I have to hold back the last offensive so that I don't out-expand my productiveness do to corruption.

I like the French better than Carthage because its UU is a better (I claim the best) timed one.

Brundlefly · February 6, 2003, 12:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

Try a huge pangea with 8 civs. Build 20+ scouts and set research to 0%. You'll get all ancient techs out of huts or buy them from the AIs you meet very soon. Chances are good, that you get 1-2 settlers. Scouts are nice cheap and fast units to watch potential enemy activities. Building an early granary (you start with Pottery) works a charm on undercrowded maps. You will most likely get out of the ancient age first on any difficulty level, what mostly means, you won the game. Given these circumstances, expansionist is worth all other traits together.

I agree with you on a tiny archipelago with 80% water, though.

Scout is a nice unit, but with Industrial I can pump out many warriors to discover just as many enemies and goody huts.

Cheap granaries are nice but they wont help you offset the AI advantage in tech and production at higher levels like commercial/industrial will.

I'll bet there are very few people who have won at Emperor or Diety with an Expansionist civ...

alexman · February 6, 2003, 12:45

Feephi, I suggest you spend some more time reading these forums before making strong statements like that...

FYI, Expansionist doesn't give cheap granaries, they are great because they don't get barbs from huts (so they get more good things), and Aeson has a score of over 60,000 on Deity, playing the Iroquois.