Enterprise Zones 6231
Residences 6297

Business 139,836 158.6%
Residential 187,085 166.3%

Tax Revenues $5,589,278 - food consumption costs 17,639*36 (food @36) (635004) which is roughly 4.9 mil a turn and 4.7 mil a turn w/ food @46.


Seems a lot less than what a farmer would make.

6231+6297 = 12528 farms

12528*5.3*2.24 = 148732 food a turn

Food @ 36 & 46
6841672 * 36 = $5354352
148732 * 46 = $6841672

Both of these assuming govt is non-Republic. So wouldn't dictator farmer be more profitable vs dictator casher?

i sepecially like the part where you almost max the farmers agri, but dont have the cashers tech maxed


solid unbiased figures!

you also have to understand that you are stocking food, and will probably be selling your stock at $35 or less unless you get some good timing, so while selling for a day or 2 at $46 is nice, once you start stocking, current sell price means little.

your figures are a bit skewed, and idealistic instead of pratical, but most of your analysis are so meh. who nets as a dict anyways?

yeah try 176% for both biz/res techs and recompute income :)

Look at the numbers closely Mrford.

I used the same # of tech.

Business 139,836 158.6%
Residential 187,085 166.3%

139,000 + 187,000 = 326085 tech

Then I used Tech Calculator on same amount of land and that's how I got 224%.

http://www.eestats.com/techcalc

Enter in 326085 tech onto 15k land and you will get 224%.

wow

so, you dont feel that investing an extra 200-300 mill cash, to see an extra bill+ in stock is worth considering?


i try really hard to answer your posts seriously, but i dont think you have nearly the deductive logic skills you seem to think you have.


regardless, unless you are an extremely active grabber and can outrun most retallers, a dict isnt an optimal netting strat.

It is worth it.


But I'm comparing two countries with same amount of resources.

The point isn't to compare a casher with $1 billion resources vs a farmer with $750 million resources; but 1:1 ratio.

i dont even know where to start with that line of logic. someone with more patience and less beers in their system need to explain it to you. i feel like im just going to start calling you stupid again.

Side note:

To achieve 176% in both- would require more than 800 million cash not 200-300 million as quoted above. (tech @2800) and nearly 600 million cash (tech @2000).

ok, ill take a crack at it for the fluff of it.

lets say we have 2 pretards, jonny and billy. they both have $100, and they both invest it in some fluff that gives them 5% interest.

after 1 cycle they have $105 each right? we can agree on that right?

ok, that crafty pretard billy decided to reinvest his interest, but the tardeder pretard jonny keeps his interest and only keeps the $100 invested

another cycle passes, but what is this?
billy made more money? they have the same amount of interest. what happened here?


you are thinking short term. if you invest more into the casher earlier, you will have more stock on the other side.


every one of these threads you make, you take a snapshot of a situation, and only focus on one factor. that isnt the way this game works. it is complex, there are factors that effect factors that effect factors. there are lingterm goals and shorterm goals. you cant look at it like you do. you just come off as an idiot. dont come off as an idiot. look at the bigger picture.

200 million more @ $2500 bus/res tech is 40k tech for both.



=================================================================================================
Your example doesn't apply here.

I gave an example of two countries:

Country A using 326085 tech in Agri. Country A is a monarchy farmer.
Country B using 326085 split into BUS and RES. Country B is a monarchy casher.

You stated above that I should increase Country B by an additional 300000 tech before comparing. That's not evenly comparing the two....

Mrford quoted "i sepecially like the part where you almost max the farmers agri, but dont have the cashers tech maxed"

I didn't almost max one an not the other. I used same amount of tech points for both countries.

that's the problem... you're only seeing the 'now'.

do they have the same military? what will they do on their next turns? how will they spend their money? have they spent the same amount of turns?

you cannot really make a comparison based on a 'snapshot' (as mrford is saying).

cashers will generally spend more on tech (I say generally because a farmer will also buy cash techs most of the time)

Tone it down a bit please, ford.

Celphi, as they have said, you're ignoring the bigger picture. Nobody goes Dict to try and win on this server, and you're hamstringing both strats by thinking this way. Sure, at that single snapshot, farmer looks like it's the clear winner, but that doesn't include the entire set...

That being said, casher is of course more market dependent than Farmer.

Oh ffs ford, can you be right AND be nice? Or does asshole come with the territory?

Hi Celphi, the game is fine. Any respectable casher will tell you that a good casher will eventually get res/bus to 176%-178% before stocking starts.

And any respectable farmer will get their Agri to 238%, AND res/bus to 170-172%, meaning the farmer will eventually buy more tech points.

Likewise, a Commie will get to 156% Indy, and also bus/res to 170-172%. Of course the Indy tech has a higher priority as it is the main production tech, but that bus/res techs are really important, as well, at 170-172%, the indy typically has positive income until the last 300-400 turns of the reset. If the indy is making +$2m per turn, compared to another one making -$4 a turn, that is a $6m difference over 400 turns, or 2.4b, which is easily about 10m NW difference. (Numbers here closer to those found on Primary, instead of Express).

But the game isn't about who buys more tech points, it's about maximizing the output of your own country, buying the tech costs money, but the result is that over the remainder turns of the reset, the returns are larger than the cost of buying said tech. The tech itself gives 2 NW per tech point, which is another factor that some players ignore, and this needs to be accounted for.

For example, let's say I calculate that to buy 300k more tech points, I need to spend 600m dollars. In return, the extra tech only yields me 500m extra cash back over the rest of the reset. You can claim it is a loss and the tech isn't worth buying. I'll tell you right away that tech is worth buying, because the net effect is "you used 100m dollars to buy 600k NW, that is $166/NW, far cheaper than any unit that you will ever buy from any market, public or private. And it is 600k NW that doesn't cost any food or cash upkeep. And it is 600m dollars less stockpile you need to stock in cash or food form, so it is 600m dollars that doesn't decay or depreciate with market prices.

You cannot logically compare a farmer against a casher, in the manner you did, and assume that both countries should logically have only the same amount of tech points, because their production parameters are different. If you limit both to the same amount of tech points, the farmer will outproduce the casher because they have to invest into 2 production techs. But if you increase the tech point limit for both countries until the casher has both his bus/res techs maxed, the casher will outproduce the farmer because the farmer doesn't have enough to max his bus/res yet, and only has his Agri maxed. If you allow both countries to max their techs with no limit, then based on ideal production values, a casher and a farmer will have equal production if food is ~$45 on the market (meaning if food > ~$45, the farmer is outproducing the casher, otherwise the inverse is true).

Thanks for the post Xin. You mentioned several things that I'll implement into my next game.