I haven"t tried it, but why do some players hate it so much, just curious?

cause specialization is key to victory and ranbow is far from specialized and grabbing ranbow gives more useless buildings than specialized country.

For most building types, having a higher percentage of your land as one building type will yield more income per building.

As an example, I'm just going to make numbers up here to illustrate the idea, although these numbers are from experience and should be pretty close to reality.

Let's say country A is 10k acres and is a specialized casher, so it has 5k EZ, 4.5k Res, 220 CS and 280 ICs. This country has 100k bus/res tech, so it produces $4.5M per turn, $5.5M per turn when cashing.

Then you have country B, also 10k acres. This country is a casher/techer, so it has 4.5k Labs, 2.75k EZ, 2.25k Res, 220 CS, 280 IC. It can tech 1k points per turn, and produce $2M cash per turn, or it can cash $2.5M per turn. Let's say you can sell tech for $2k, so this can produce $4M per turn.

Then country C, 10k acres, full techer, 9.5k labs, 220 CS, 280 IC. This country can produce 3k tech per turn. At $2k, this means it's producing $6M.

So, the country that is specialized produces more on the same land.

Got it thanks! Is there anytime RB would be viable? Say like warring?

I believe farms are either not affected or less affected than other strats by this effect. So, going half or mostly farms, with the rest ICs is certainly something I've done in wartime to maintain income and a high SPAL.

Oil rigs are definitely not affected by this, each one just produces two barrels per turn, or three barrels per turn if you're fascist. I believe this is why farms are similar, to enable farmer/oiler combos being viable. So a farmer/oiler/indy during war is also viable.

yea during wartime you need alot indies producing spies and farms giving income and rigs to make breaking of big targets possible.

netting wise its not that useful to have alot buildings which aren't needed to get main income.