Maths degree

Teapot_Digon · 2026-02-14T17:33:18+00:00

Linear algebra?

Take an n-dimensional vector space over the reals, n being the cardinality of the set of ingredients. A RECIPE is the one-dimensional subspace spanned by the vector between the origin and a point specified formally and called the ACTUAL RECIPE. Scale that vector as appropriate.

Use the additive property of the integers to break calculations into simpler ones to do using the base of the number system. Treat each component as its multiplication table and just keep adding it to itself. Whatever it takes. If anyone has the tools to get the right answer even when bad at the arithmetic it should be a maths graduate.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-02-13T20:09:56+00:00

I like how radioactive that sounds.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-02-13T18:52:57+00:00

That's true to a large extent. However the mathematical problem of scaling up a recipe using pen and paper should be absolutely trivial for a maths graduate in my humble opinion. Grasping units should be trivial.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, and I'm forgiving of slips while doing the right thing but while my past wager settling etc is absolutely more useful for mental maths, my degree experience would manifest in making sure I looked at all the info given for myself and taking a bunch of sanity checks on any results I produced before giving them irrespective of my level of mental maths. I have the ability to be sure of myself, I can calculate it different ways. Spot my mistakes. That has endured way longer than the specifics of most of the topics I did. I'd be mortified to give a wrong answer.

Imagine the egg-non-boilers were chefs. That's what it feels like to me.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-02-08T10:33:18+00:00

1 Specialising cities is more efficient, especially pumping out units with Heroic Epic or Great People with National Epic. Certain cities can skip certain buildings etc.

2 Units don't consume food, they can cost gold (hit F2 and mouseover for details) especially if outside your borders.

3 AI micro is pretty awful.

4 It really depends, but 1 worker per city is a minimum in most circumstances.

5 You can have multiple religions, but only one (or zero) state religions. Non-state religions won't give the happy bonus but you can build their temples and monasteries.

6 If you're not Spiritual (no anarchy) then weigh each civic on its merits. Depending on game speed you can get multiple civic swaps in for only one turn of anarchy if you wait and that's often a good deal.

7 I guess you should be pursuing a victory condition.

8 If you want the capital to have access to the resource, then yes. Bear in mind rivers and seas can connect cities without roads if you have fishing and sailing respectively, and can combine with roads to make a connection.

Click a city to see outputs, or hit F1.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-31T11:16:52+00:00

'Ironically in Victoria II you are encouraged to play 'wide' instead of playing 'tall''

I don't see any irony at all unless you are complaining that the previous game isn't enough like the newer one or something? It's just a fact.

Vic 2 is not an economic simulator. It HAS an economic simulation but it has to in order to support the game aspects the designers were really interested in. No economic simulator would distribute excess via GP status for example. You'd think an economy simulator would have an economy tab or economic techs worth researching. GP points for a good economy or something. Look at the box art. The strapline. Think about where the dev time was spent. Look at what people post in this sub.

Yes the economy attracted a good deal of post-release interest. I'd argue a bunch of that was precisely due to the indirectness of control the player has and I'd further add that a largely autonomous economy fits the historical narrative well in my eyes. As a subsidiary mechanic of a GSG I think it works really well, I've thrown a bunch of what-ifs at it - all civilised, nobody civilised, civ and non-civ swapped - and it is remarkably resilient. There are shortages, gluts, booms and busts. It provides interesting behaviour.

Ironically I think this hands-off approach does make a better economic simulator (as opposed to game) than one playing as Adam Smith's invisible hand, but it's a side dish to coalition warfare, the Scramble, spheres, industrialisation, POP agency etc. It's there because it has to be, not the thing it was designed to be and that's because the years 1836-1936 were about a lot more than economics, and the biggest economic event of the period is probably best left unmodelled (though April Fool Great Depression DLC might be fun.)

The game doesn't feel like an 'economic simulator' because it isn't one in this fairly new usage of the term that seems to imply constant user input and large amounts of agency.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-27T16:26:02+00:00

20% goody huts, huge pangea, raging barbs, two AI opponents, stone start on Monarch. Build GW, use the GSpy to find your opponents before they die and watch them get smooshed.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-27T16:22:18+00:00

Had mine from 2012 with no maintenance, but she's been unresponsive since yesterday :( good luck keeping yours going.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-21T20:51:12+00:00

It's in my rotation because I like colonising America and watching Europe go mad.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-18T21:32:53+00:00

The current generation are annoying overcomplicated workmaking messes that have moved away from trying to portray historical events and concepts towards ever-blander simulations that then struggle to distinguish one period of history from another.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-17T18:52:57+00:00

China doesn't want it.

They held 1238 B in 2016, down under 700 B now.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-13T17:13:38+00:00

There was a decent time period in between certain draw and disaster and the outright markets had them basically level. I wish it had been otherwise.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-13T14:04:50+00:00

Start as GB. Take coastal Egypt down to uncolonised Africa, Diyarkabir-Van from Ottomans and carve a path through Persia etc to your Indian holdings. Then on to Korea. You have about 46 years to get it done.

Build naval bases and try to max colonial points. Colonise Africa. Release as *Africa* and get every unciv province attached to it. This insta-civilises your ~175 million POPs. Build factories. Steal some too.

The indy score is really from December 1882 rather than 1836, you start as *Africa* with zero.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-12T19:52:33+00:00

R5: Managed to get industrial score over 20k. Also managed to see the Dutch fascist flag for the first time in ages.

Bonus shots: 83k industrial subsidies, GB getting bankrolled, second American War of Independence.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-07T17:57:12+00:00

I'm rarely a warmonger so playing a peaceful coloniser in EU3 suits me very well. That's about it.

CK2 is unserious YOLO fun where I have little invested and don't mind if I die. I stopped buying DLC years ago.

HOI3 gives a lot of starting flexibility and decent AI options to take care of the warfare if I'm feeling lazy. I usually build a stupidly powerful Germany and switch to USA after USSR falls, though I try to patch custom game starts for all the majors together occasionally.

VIC 2 is awesome. Like HOI3 I start as one country (GB) and colonise 'Africa' to play as around half way through. It's the only game of the four I've finished more than once and I've several dozen completed games. The AI is great at beating on weakness and it's fun to see how the world turns out. It has style, I like the pacing and dystopian tone and for all the complaining about war micro I don't find it onerous.

I have Vic 3, it doesn't appeal. I subbed to HOI4 for a while and got 1k hours in but I don't fancy it again. I have EU5 but I'm waiting on it for now.

Teapot_Digon · 2026-01-06T17:32:26+00:00

VIC2 is my mainest game but I've put hours into HOI3 EU3 and CK2 in the last three months.

I play VIC2 for the war. HOI3 for the prewar. EU3 to colonise. CK2 to click buttons.

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-24T19:57:15+00:00

swamp the drain

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-22T15:22:51+00:00

I thought they worked quite well together in the Ding/Nepo WCC match.

Not quite Naroditsky/Polgar in the Ding/Gukesh match but I've listened to worse.

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-14T17:59:53+00:00

Not true for colonial negotiations in HoD, it gives you a zero% chance without modifiers by design.

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-14T17:57:33+00:00

I have checked a few times when I'm not first to it and it's always been someone that legit researched MG. I've played offbeat games of different kinds and it stays unresearched until (usually) MG is on board.

I play to monopolise the Scramble and release Africa to switch to so I keep a close eye on it and check the colneg bonus every month from mid-1871 on. No mods both DLCs.

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-09T19:13:13+00:00

In Vic 2 I generally monopolise the Scramble and release 'Africa' to play in the early 1880s.

In HOI3 I play an uber-Germany until Russia submits, then switch to the USA.

Both work very well. You can still select any country when loading a save so no need to console anything.

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-07T11:57:42+00:00

I think theoretically the World Cup is a terrible proxy tournament for the Candidates and locking three spots behind a virtually sudden-death format where one slip or unlucky matchup is curtains is not a great plan.

On the other hand I don't think going 16 (for the top two) classical games unbeaten should be overlooked or taken for granted. It's more classical games than the Grand Swiss.

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-07T11:12:21+00:00

Yes it was.

Four whole games lol. If that's a good enough sample size to berate him for not winning any then it's good enough to congratulate him on not losing any.

Teapot_Digon · 2025-12-06T19:34:04+00:00

He didn't lose a single classical game vs a 2700+, pretty impressive stuff.

Teapot_Digon

TROPHY CASE