ECOnomy or Army

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • That depends on what country you are playing.
      If small than obviously to expand as quickly as possible. 3 or 4 cities per day in early game.
      If large than maybe better to invest in arms industry, scout your small neighbors and build bunkers near aggressive ones.
      If medium country than mix between economy and expansion (unit production).

      I like to expand if possible.
    • you only really need to max out arms industries on rare and electronics early on; the rest can easily be done over time cuz there's simply more of them
      building a shitton of arms industries doesnt get you anything when it makes you unable to research anything because of the rare material spend
      and especially the first few days units are way more important than an economy
      I am The Baseline for opinions
    • Noobforever wrote:

      Hello,

      IS it a good return on investement to build Arms industry and updrade it or just better invest in troops and take over enemy city.

      what give you a better production ? to upgrade the arms industry or to invate a city?

      where can i get the values

      thanks
      Hello there, always try to max your industries as early as possible because they will help you resources wise. Of course conquering more cities will get you more resources after time. But more important than that is your cities producing a high rate amount of resources. Hope this answers your question. Good luck mate. :thumbup:
    • Cryowolf wrote:

      Noobforever wrote:

      Hello,

      IS it a good return on investement to build Arms industry and updrade it or just better invest in troops and take over enemy city.

      what give you a better production ? to upgrade the arms industry or to invate a city?

      where can i get the values

      thanks
      Hello there, always try to max your industries as early as possible because they will help you resources wise. Of course conquering more cities will get you more resources after time. But more important than that is your cities producing a high rate amount of resources. Hope this answers your question. Good luck mate. :thumbup:
      Yes, the SOONER you upgrade your Homeland cites Arms Industries, the more total resources you will have produced over the entire game.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • The right time is now when the price is low. I am thinking about starting trading cryptos because I am sure that the price will go up again. BTC is 34K right now, and I see that as an ample opportunity because there must be a price rise soon. Starting with crypto doesn't mean I will stop forex store. I still have a lot of success with that because I have a good broker in forexstore.com/best-forex-robots. So I think I can do both things pretty well, and there is no reason not to. I hope I am right, and that the price will go up. Unfortunately, cryptocurrencies are super unpredictable, and that's why you can never be sure about them.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by lashawnver ().

    • Noobforever wrote:

      to upgrade the arms industry or to invade a city?
      This is not a simple either/or question, and there are no "values" for the answer.
      Obviously, the ArmInd upgrade has its cost. Invading a city has a less well defined, but still real cost: generating the invading troops (some of which may turn into losses). Plus there are limits: you may not have enough cities in reach for the capacity you'd want, and the production would be suppressed until your morale and population grows.

      And ideally, you'd want both, in any event. Which one is better at what point is very situation-dependent.
      Commander Zozo001 :thumbsup:
      humble player
    • Only build AI in cities that need it for producing troops. Never level it up beyond level 1. Build troops and expand. Your economy will improve WAY faster through conquest.

      You win the game with victory points. You get victory points through conquest. Why would you waste time and resources playing Sim City? If someone captures your cities because they invested in units, all those resources on AI are wasted. If someone nukes your city the resources are wasted and your economy will be destroyed. If you've captured enough enemy cities you're economy will be just fine if someone nukes you.
    • Noobforever wrote:


      where can i get the values
      I forgot to mention, but there is a rule-of-thumb value often stated for the economic value of conquest: an occupied city counts about 1/6 the production of a homeland one (by and large, although this is heavily affected by morale as well as population).

      On the other hand, the cost of building an ArmInd is roughly 10 times the daily production increment to be gained. So, on a time horizon longer than this, it is worth building them (for resources you need, that is). If you do not, you'd give up the extra 40-50% homeland production available for the rest of the game.
      Commander Zozo001 :thumbsup:
      humble player
    • Zozo001 wrote:

      Noobforever wrote:

      where can i get the values
      I forgot to mention, but there is a rule-of-thumb value often stated for the economic value of conquest: an occupied city counts about 1/6 the production of a homeland one (by and large, although this is heavily affected by morale as well as population).
      On the other hand, the cost of building an ArmInd is roughly 10 times the daily production increment to be gained. So, on a time horizon longer than this, it is worth building them (for resources you need, that is). If you do not, you'd give up the extra 40-50% homeland production available for the rest of the game.
      I think those guidelines understate the value of captured cities and oversimplifies the ROI from Arms Industries.
      • A captured city is 20-25% (not 1/6th = 17%) of a home city, after morale stabilizes at 50(ish).
      • Elec AIs have an break-even period ranging from 6.7 to 93 days, but Comp break-even ranges from 9.3 to 14 days.
      • Building an AI slows your expansion (forever) because you invested resources in the AI, instead of building units to conquer with.
      • Units built to help you expand, also help you defend. AI don't contribute much if anything to defenses.
    • KFGauss wrote:

      I think those guidelines understate the value of captured cities and oversimplifies the ROI from Arms Industries.
      • Building an AI slows your expansion (forever) because you invested resources in the AI, instead of building units to conquer with.

      You've got that backwards: the resources invested might slow down expansion a tiny bit, for the few days it takes to pay them back. But after that they produce more resources, which then can be used to mobilize units. The player not building ArmInd would be disadvantaged from that time onward (i.e. "forever").
      Commander Zozo001 :thumbsup:
      humble player
    • let put this into meth's perspective. (We will not talk about population because it's not that much of a deal.)

      So for EZ following, Base production will be assigned value of "1"

      Homeland have base morale at 90%, that's x1.2
      Each arms is x1.1, x1.2, x1.3, x1.4, x1.5 respectively
      so here the production you have in normal condition.

      Arms012345
      Homeland1.21.321.441.561.681.8



      Occupied city have base morale at 75%, that's x1.05
      Occupied city have base production at 1/4, that's x0.25
      combined = 0.2625

      So if we turn that into "How much Occupied city will have same production as homeland"

      Homeland with lv X Arms012345
      Occupied city needed4.575.035.495.946.406.86



      Now factor in How many homeland you have, At least 5. (not count stupid Korea for obvious reason)
      so if you want to "Doble" your production but you only build lv 1 arms in all homeland. You need to capture 25 city.
      How fast and cheap you can do that? I'll bet against. And now factor in that newly captured city have morale go 25% and need a week or so to go above 60% morale.
      you will end up with absolute trash economy without upgrading Arm industry
      This post was made by Leader of the Church of ROAD
    • playbabe wrote:

      You need to capture 25 city.
      Excellent analysis, thanks!
      I'd also add another factor here, regarding the expansion argument: there's usually a couple of resources that you do not need to crank up. So one can selectively upgrade only those ArmInd necessary; but you would want to occupy whole countries, once going into war, rather than just pick the handful of cities that produce useful resources.
      Commander Zozo001 :thumbsup:
      humble player
    • Zozo001 wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      I think those guidelines understate the value of captured cities and oversimplifies the ROI from Arms Industries.
      • Building an AI slows your expansion (forever) because you invested resources in the AI, instead of building units to conquer with.

      You've got that backwards: the resources invested might slow down expansion a tiny bit, for the few days it takes to pay them back. But after that they produce more resources, which then can be used to mobilize units. The player not building ArmInd would be disadvantaged from that time onward (i.e. "forever").
      No I don't have it backwards. When I wrote "slows your expansion forever" I should have written "affects your expansion forever", but the trade-off I'm describing isn't "backwards".

      The things the possible units would do throughout the rest of a game are lost if you use a pile of resources to build AI instead of using those same resources to build units.

      By helping speed up expansion, resources invested into units increase your future resource income.

      The expected value of that increase depends on many slippery influences, but the increase definitely isn't zero and it's definitely lost (exchanged for an alternative) when you choose to use those same resources to instead increase future resource production by building AI.

      The question is which method creates more resource income. The comparison isn't zero vs AI-effects. The resource income ROI of building units is greater than zero. That's one reason why units get built and used.

      I was pretty sleepy during most of my early-morning summer-semester Economics 101 classes, but some of what the professor taught did manage to seep into my head.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by KFGauss ().

    • KFGauss wrote:

      use a pile of resources to build AI instead of using those same resources to build units
      Your assumption here is that the pile gets lost forever. Actually it is being re-generated (with substantial payoff gained later), when the ROI time passes after getting invested. So the ArmInd builder can build more units afterwards.

      Note also another, hidden but crucial assumption in your argument: that the amount of extra units mobilizable from the resources saved by not building ArmInd would enable substantially faster expansion, yielding additional cities within a few days. That, ofc, is not guaranteed at all.
      Commander Zozo001 :thumbsup:
      humble player
    • I nly upgrade homeland industr priduction for reaources that are limited in late game. which is electronics and supply for me.

      but these cities get everything from bunker to airport and port.

      an arm industrie investment pay if after some 20 days. but if you need electronucs urgently then investing some supply and componenta to increase electronic production is a fair trade
      @Dorado If you Close the Forum and move everything to Discord you will lose my Feedback for sure.