Medicine

[Imperial Noob]

The deal is simple @IGNDontay
You behave or mods get you banned

[IGNDontay]

another rando @‘ing me probably friends w one of the dudes disrespecting me. @Imperial Noob irrelevant

[XeeleeFlower]

Okay, this is ridiculous. Knock it off with this shit. I would lock this thread, but I would rather leave it open in the hopes that an actual and respectful discussion can take place regarding the card and potential strategies. Consider this an informal warning.

[duckzilla]

Good vibes around here, splendid opportunity to talk about that awesome medicine card!

Actually, some years ago I also used medicine card as portuguese quite frequently. Until that moment where I realized how little and partially negative its impact actually is. Firstly, you obviously have high opportunity costs since you could just as well send units/resources/villagers directly. Secondly, the card takes quite some time (see calculation below: 10min 58sec) to actually benefit you. Thirdly, constructing villagers faster also means that you need to invest more food into it than usual which you will not have available for unit production. Fourthly, you have a trade-off between sending the card very early to maximize its effect and sending it later to be more flexible in colonial.

Sending the medicine team card of course makes it slightly more viable. But still you will have a shipment which 1) pays off slowly and 2) pays off only until you reached 99 villagers and is worthless in the aftermath. From an optimality perspective, it is, unfortunately, never worth to be sent since its short-run performance is as bad as that of any eco-card (food silos), but its long-run performance is significantly worse as it stops to pay off entirely.

But! As you already indicated, fun is an important part of the game. If you think that the card improves your game experience, then keep using it!


[spoiler=Calculation (correct me if I'm wrong!):]Assuming that you have one TC and one medicine card (-15% train time) sent, all newly produced villagers will add their productive capacities earlier to your economy than beforehand. This can be calculated and the added production time for each single villager is simply the time reduction (3.75 seconds) multiplied by the number of villagers which have been produced since the card was sent. Further assuming that you send you villager to gather gold, we can easily calculate the time you need to make your investment (sending the card) pay off. The following inequation needs to hold:
(3.75 + 7.5 + 11.25 + 15 + 18.75 + ... ) * 0.6g > 700g |divide by 0.6g
=> 3.75 * (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... ) > 1,166.66 |divide by 3.75
=> 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... > 311.11
Using the Gaussian sum formula yields 25, indicating that your card starts to pay of after the 25th villagers has been constructed.
But we also need to address the fact that each villagers costs 100food which need to be invested into your economy earlier than usual. With 25 villagers, you will have produced a total of (25 * 3.75s) / 25s = 3.75 more villagers than usual. That costs you 375f or, for simplicity, 350c and needs to be calculated into the above!
(3.75 + 7.5 + 11.25 + 15 + 18.75 + ... ) * 0.6g > 700g + 350c |divide by 0.6g
=> 3.75 * (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... ) > 1.750 |divide by 3.75
=> 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... > 466.66
Gaussian again yields 31, this time indicating that you card starts to pay of after the 31st villagers has been constructed. [Yeah, I know we would need to iterate the calculation again due to the 6 new villagers which have to be produced... Let's skip that]
That means that your card starts to pay off when the 31th villager was built in your single TC, which happens after 658 seconds or 10 minutes and 58 seconds.[/spoiler]

edit: corrected some silly German/English differences in math punctuation

[IGNDontay]

Good vibes around here, splendid opportunity to talk about that awesome medicine card!

Actually, some years ago I also used medicine card as portuguese quite frequently. Until that moment where I realized how little and partially negative its impact actually is. Firstly, you obviously have high opportunity costs since you could just as well send units/resources/villagers directly. Secondly, the card takes quite some time (see calculation below: 10min 58sec) to actually benefit you. Thirdly, constructing villagers faster also means that you need to invest more food into it than usual which you will not have available for unit production. Fourthly, you have a trade-off between sending the card very early to maximize its effect and sending it later to be more flexible in colonial.

Sending the medicine team card of course makes it slightly more viable. But still you will have a shipment which 1) pays off slowly and 2) pays off only until you reached 99 villagers and is worthless in the aftermath. From an optimality perspective, it is, unfortunately, never worth to be sent since its short-run performance is as bad as that of any eco-card (food silos), but its long-run performance is significantly worse as it stops to pay off entirely.

But! As you already indicated, fun is an important part of the game. If you think that the card improves your game experience, then keep using it!


[spoiler=Calculation (correct me if I'm wrong!):]Assuming that you have one TC and one medicine card (-15% train time) sent, all newly produced villagers will add their productive capacities earlier to your economy than beforehand. This can be calculated and the added production time for each single villager is simply the time reduction (3.75 seconds) multiplied by the number of villagers which have been produced since the card was sent. Further assuming that you send you villager to gather gold, we can easily calculate the time you need to make your investment (sending the card) pay off. The following inequation needs to hold:
(3.75 + 7.5 + 11.25 + 15 + 18.75 + ... ) * 0.6g > 700g |divide by 0.6g
=> 3.75 * (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... ) > 1.166,66 |divide by 3.75
=> 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... > 311,11
Using the Gaussian sum formula yields 25, indicating that your card starts to pay of after the 25th villagers has been constructed.
But we also need to address the fact that each villagers costs 100food which need to be invested into your economy earlier than usual. With 25 villagers, you will have produced a total of (25 * 3.75s) / 25s = 3.75 more villagers than usual. That costs you 375f or, for simplicity, 350c and needs to be calculated into the above!
(3.75 + 7.5 + 11.25 + 15 + 18.75 + ... ) * 0.6g > 700g + 350c |divide by 0.6g
=> 3.75 * (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... ) > 1.750 |divide by 3.75
=> 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... > 466.66
Gaussian again yields 31, this time indicating that you card starts to pay of after the 31st villagers has been constructed. [Yeah, I know we would need to iterate the calculation again due to the 6 new villagers which have to be produced... Let's skip that]
That means that your card starts to pay off when the 31th villager was built in your single TC, which happens after 658 seconds or 10 minutes and 58 seconds.[/spoiler]

so you could trade the math for 30% since it’s only a noticeable difference if both team medicine and singular medicine are sent. for 8.5 x (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 ...) ? can you assume you have 1 tc and the -30% to train time not 15% is what I mean, which i guess you could just take 31/2 and get the benefit at around ~15 settler or could you re do the math for that i’m bad at math and having just singular medicine is definitely not worth it as I mentioned in the initial post but i’m not understanding how a 8.5 second decrease in villager train time only pays off after you already have 99 settler could you explain please, in my mind it pays off as soon as both cards are sent since you’ll immediately start producing settler quicker than the opposing team. I do understand they once you’re at 99 villagers it’s essentially null but you rarely reach 99 villager am I right? and you lose a lot normally so it makes losing them less painful as they’ll be reproduced quicker and start gathering again more soon than if the opponent loses settler. I also do understand that because you’re producing more quickly you need more food to maintain constant production but that also means a little idle time in tc won’t effect you for 8.5 seconds versus the opposing team.

[duckzilla]

so you could trade the math for 30% since it’s only a noticeable difference if both team medicine and singular medicine are sent. for 8.5 x (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 ...) ? can you assume you have 1 tc and the -30% to train time not 15% is what I mean, or could you re do the math for that i’m bad at math and having just singular medicine is definitely not worth it as I mentioned in the initial post but i’m not understanding how a 8.5 second decrease in villager train time only pays off after you already have 99 settler could you explain please, in my mind it pays off as soon as both cards are sent since you’ll immediately start producing settler quicker than the opposing team. I do understand they once you’re at 99 villagers it’s essentially null but you rarely reach 99 villager am I right? and you lose a lot normally so it makes losing them less painful as they’ll be reproduced quicker and start gathering again more soon than if the opponent loses settler. I also do understand that because you’re producing more quickly you need more food to maintain constant production but that also means a little idle time in tc won’t effect you for 8.5 seconds versus the opposing team.

Well, one can do that, but it does not change the reasoning. You can think of it like this: if the first medicine card was not worth sending it, why should a second wasted shipment make it better? You just double the investment but you cannot double the results (team medicine can only be sent once).

In the end, you will have a shipment (or two!) which 1) pays off slowly and 2) pays off only until you reached 99 villagers and is worthless in the aftermath.

[onfiregun17]

@duckzilla thanks for the math, I think that just about ends the discussion of it paying off. Although I'd disagree with to keep using it, as your team mates will probably be mad that you keep losing

[IGNDontay]

@duckzilla thanks for the math, I think that just about ends the discussion of it paying off. Although I'd disagree with to keep using it, as your team mates will probably be mad that you keep losing

The math was a nice input and I can’t tell you if it’s wrong or not since i’m not great at math but I feel as if you’re being dismissive/closed minded to the idea surrounding the synergy of these cards in a team game. No disrespect by that, and here’s what I mean. They most likely added Medicine & Team Medicine to be synergised and not sent alone since sending one alone is not a distinguishable or even viable difference. It pretty much makes no difference at all honestly. For instance though, If a strong eco civ were able to send two settler train time cards themself for this boost it would be a bit broken. For example if you were to be able to train cdb 30% faster if you wanted. But there are some civs that struggle to have a strong eco like Sioux, for example (i’m guessing since some civs have multiple train time cards themself like Sioux, who can struggle to have a strong eco) this is why they have the option and others don’t. But in reality strong eco civs don’t have two settler train time cards they have to settle for team play to get this option. Anyway, when both Medicine cards are sent it’s a noticeable or distinguishable difference, and sending both literally does double the result 15%x2 of 25 or 3.75x2 of 25? .. Maybe you meant the end result of 99 villager but I may have misunderstood that. There are also civs like Dutch/Jap for instance who have a lower max villager pop limit which would mean reaching max villager much quicker for these civs which would then mean reaching the intended benefit where it pays off at max villager as you said, which I still don’t understand. As you yourself, and the math you presented said, you’d need more food income with both cards sent to maintain a non-idle TC if it was sent early to maximize its potential but with only one card sent you wouldn’t and don’t, as i’ve play tested so the difference is concrete. Nearly 10 second quicker training villagers (17.5 vs 25 seconds) than the opponent team is kind of a wide margin in the position that your team will be training about three settler (52.5 seconds) in the same amount of time it takes the opposing team to train two (50 seconds). Sure each player would have to send one card at some point to get the benefit as a team but one card sometimes is sent simply because there’s nothing better to send or nothing else depending on what age you’re in and although this wouldn’t be best case scenario it could easily be coordinated to be sent around a certain card number if discussed before hand as a team. It seems this build would require a bit of finesse and coordination to be maximized but the potential is there!
It’s clear now that sending it very early to maximize its potential benefit though would actually hurt you in the early stages of the match in most cases not only because you’d be a more beneficial card behind but also because you’d be needing more food than average so India/Iro sending Team medicine and the team sending their singular Medicine mid-game would be the best play.
Since you would still be producing settler 7.5 seconds or 30% faster than the opposing team, regardless if you have the cards sent after 15 villagers have been trained or 50 you would still have the boost as a team that they don’t and then therefor be training three vills for every two they train. Imagine havin this boost vs another team without needing to send cards? It would be considered OP. Anyways back to the point, by the time the medicine synergy would be sent you’d have an economy well enough to support the extra food requirements. When I’ve played in clan matches where we attempted this build I’d play as india and send Team Medicine after the initial “meta” build and let my team know it’s coming but there will always be variables seeing as it’s an rts and the flow of games can’t necessarily be predicted and there are varying playstyles, so the card doesn’t need to be able to fit in to a precise BO anyway, it’s not a big commitment. India does not have a lot of economic card options either, i’m not sure but I’m guessing Iro doesn’t either based on the fact they both have the card so I don’t see how sending it after the regular cards that would normally be sent would cause a penalty. There are also plenty of cards that are slow to pay off but are still sent in the current meta so that argument isn’t that well-founded, bro. For example, a wood card is an immediate pay out for british and is one of the best cards to send early in general for all civs since wood is the slowest gathering resource but it takes time pay off by being spent on manors a settler has to build the manor, and then the settlers have to start to gather although that’s not a prime example since medicine lasts indefinitely and a wood shipment is only a temporary boost just a quick example. What are you trying to say by “worthless in the aftermath”? I don’t get it and you also didn’t explain how it’s only paying off after 99 villagers. I’m aware i’ve left out a lot of great points like not all civs get actual villagers to ship/30% faster training time as port would be really strong on a high food map/it being bad in the same sense as spice trade since hunts only last so long but villager are normally lost and remade all game so it’s use is kind of indefinite/ -quoted a negative post by accident instead of yours @duckzilla if you care to extrapolate. edit: i misread the 99 settler part. it is true it only pays off until max settler population but max settler pop is the goal anyways the sooner you reach it the better and settler are constantly being killed in-game so it would still be beneficial to have a settler be back on the board 7.5 seconds quicker than the opponent from a raid versus them being raided and and waiting the standard time for it to be back on the board.

[deleted_user]

ITT: team cards are good if team

[HUMMAN]

The thing i dont get is, if sending 1 medicine card is bad, how sending 2 medicine cards can be good? LULZ

[IGNDontay]

The thing i dont get is, if sending 1 medicine card is bad, how sending 2 medicine cards can be good? LULZ

clearly explained in the last post go ahead and read, man. and you’re not sending two cards technically each player only sends One card but they stack though. cards like brits team house building faster don’t stack etc. but i don’t understand how a 30% increase vs 0% isn’t good lulz

[Kaiserklein]

okay then you just said you’re ignorant and proceeded to comment. and it was an unr game you know you lost and we both know you remember so let’s not play dumb. we both know you wouldn’t forget losing to me. you lost. period. so you lost to a lieut, yikes. the only person called dumb is tedere and you for commenting bs had nothing to do with the post. wow you’re so ignorant it’s wild and you attempt to act logical, so insane! sure we can play a game where i get handicap lets make it 50 since you’re so good shouldn’t be an issue.

You're not even answering half my points here.
And no I really don't remember losing to you. Maybe I did lose an unrated game where I was trolling hard, idk.
50% handicap would probably be a fair game if you were around sergeant/master sergeant. Do you consider yourself to be that level? I think you're a bit higher than that, so let's play a game with 25% first.

[duckzilla]

It is a bit difficult to discuss with you, when you are not able to follow the arguments. Also you actually do not seem to be interested in a discussion about the medicine card, but rather everyone else to believe in your revelation. This is not going to happen, since the medicine card, no matter if stacked or not, is just not a good shipment, as was proven in the mathematical part above.

Your large block of text boils down to 1) unconvincing assumptions on why some countries have multiple medicine cards and others do not, 2) personal experience of a game where you used the cards and did not lose, 3) erroneous calculations and 4) wrong comparisons. Nothing of these is a solid argument in favor of the medicine card.

To make this clear: you can send the cards and still win a game. But if you want to maximize your chances to win the game, then the card is worse than many alternatives.

Of course the card has an impact on the game. But that does not yet make it a strong card. Compare it with team villagers from Germany/Aztec (4+3). In a 3v3 this is a total of 21 villagers sent by just two cards in colonial. At early colonial this is equivalent to having a fourth player's economy available!

[IGNDontay]

It is a bit difficult to discuss with you, when you are not able to follow the arguments. Also you actually do not seem to be interested in a discussion about the medicine card, but rather everyone else to believe in your revelation. This is not going to happen, since the medicine card, no matter if stacked or not, is just not a good shipment, as was proven in the mathematical part above.

Your large block of text boils down to 1) unconvincing assumptions on why some countries have multiple medicine cards and others do not, 2) personal experience of a game where you used the cards and did not lose, 3) erroneous calculations and 4) wrong comparisons. Nothing of these is a solid argument in favor of the medicine card.

To make this clear: you can send the cards and still win a game. But if you want to maximize your chances to win the game, then the card is worse than many alternatives.

Of course the card has an impact on the game. But that does not yet make it a strong card. Compare it with team villagers from Germany/Aztec (4+3). In a 3v3 this is a total of 21 villagers sent by just two cards in colonial. At early colonial this is equivalent to having a fourth player's economy available!

I follow just fine actually. A simple misread leading to a misunderstanding doesn’t mean I don’t comprehend and I rectified myself. It’s more clear you have a superiority complex and don’t want to have a discussion. A discussion is one side giving their opinion and the other giving theirs, not a shutting down of ideas or complete disregard to another’s. I mentioned yours and asked for clarification respectfully and you disregarded mine, rudely. I never said I won the game I played, there will always be better options but that’s clearly not the point you seem to be missing the point. Not once did I imply that this build is the best build or is one of the best options. You obviously didn’t comment to have a discussion but to discredit the potential of the synergy of this build with “mathematical part above” lol. And you clearly commented in sarcasm from the first text but I assumed that was out of spite of the whole toxicity of the post not an aversion toward me which is clearly the case since you’re coming at me personally insinuating i’m slow lol. You’re opinion is discredited in my eyes. If you have anything actually constructive other than “math proofs it’s bad” like personal experience to share about synergisng this build in a team game, Im all ears or even another SYNERGY not simple Team Settler Wagon lol but when the math wasn’t even calculated for both cards lmao? nor was the agenda correct about it being sent early when I clearly exaplained my view on it you made your own and called it solid. feel free to continue to attempt to have a respectful conversation, guy. otherwise keep it pushing.

[Garja]

The card is not viable even in combination with the team one, at a high level of play. The reason is that the bonus provided is too little to justify the cost of 2 cards which realistically are worth 1k each when they could be sent.

[Guigs]

okay then you just said you’re ignorant and proceeded to comment. and it was an unr game you know you lost and we both know you remember so let’s not play dumb. we both know you wouldn’t forget losing to me. you lost. period. so you lost to a lieut, yikes. the only person called dumb is tedere and you for commenting bs had nothing to do with the post. wow you’re so ignorant it’s wild and you attempt to act logical, so insane! sure we can play a game where i get handicap lets make it 50 since you’re so good shouldn’t be an issue.

You're not even answering half my points here.
And no I really don't remember losing to you. Maybe I did lose an unrated game where I was trolling hard, idk.
50% handicap would probably be a fair game if you were around sergeant/master sergeant. Do you consider yourself to be that level? I think you're a bit higher than that, so let's play a game with 25% first.

I remember you lost to dontay doing french grenadier FI on cascade range

[IGNDontay]

honestly you people that are so quick to call it bad when you clearly have not put much thought into it are just stuck in a one-track-mind which is odd for an rts game player and with hundreds of unexplored synergies and builds you’re so quick to discredit any of them that aren’t instilled into the meta by a “top-player”. None of you have personally tried this in an actual game and still call it bad; how? If you had it would be somewhere online already. It’s literally never been forummed or discussed online before. I searched and searched. The potential is there. If 3 good players in a team game had close cooperation and strong teamwork this strategy would be totally viable for high-level play because it could be incorporated without being punished. But i’m not forcing anyone to agree or disagree but just to open your eyes and stop being so closed minded smh. If you have fun doing the same builds every game that’s cool too.

[duckzilla]

I follow just fine actually. A simple misread leading to a misunderstanding doesn’t mean I don’t comprehend and I rectified myself. It’s more clear you have a superiority complex and don’t want to have a discussion.

And here we are with you insulting me. Why? I did not insult you, so why don't you stay polite?

A discussion is one side giving their opinion and the other giving theirs, not a shutting down of ideas or complete disregard to another’s.

To me a discussion is not so much about opinions, but rather about arguments. The difference is that opinions do not need to be grounded on anything (its basically beliefs), while arguments need to be reasonable. Further, a discussion usually has the goal of reaching a conclusion.

In this thread, I identified the question "Is stacking the Medicine (team) card worth it?" as the topic and the goal to answer this question.

I gave arguments and was not able to find many reasonable arguments in your posts - mostly opinions. Hence, I reached a conclusion.

I mentioned yours and asked for clarification respectfully and you disregarded mine, rudely. clearly you didn’t comment to have a discussion but to discredit the potential of the synergy of this build. You clearly commented in sarcasm from the first text but I assumed that was out of spite of the whole toxicity of the post not in aversion toward me which is clearly the case since you’re coming at me personally insinuating i’m slow lol.

I was not sarcastic. I also did not mean to insinuate that you are slow or stupid or anything. I also do not need to post anything in aversion towards you. Where should that aversion come from, since I barely know you? Anyway, I apologize if you got a wrong impression, I tried to be objective and surely did some communication mistakes.

You’re opinion is discredited in my eyes. If you have anything actually constructive other than “math proofs it’s bad” when the math wasn’t even calculated for. it’s cards being sent nor was the agenda correct about it being sent early. feel free to continue to attempt to have a respectful conversation, guy. otherwise keep it pushing.

It is sad that your low regard for me discredits my arguments (not opinions!) in your eyes. My arguments are entirely detached from myself and still keep being true if I am not here.

The math was a nice input and I can’t tell you if it’s wrong or not since i’m not great at math

This is what I was refering to. If you can't tell whether it is right or wrong, then you clearly did not understand it. Which does not necessarily make you stupid, but it makes a discussion less fruitful.


edit: please don't use "guy" or "bro" when addressing me. This is actually something that I perceive as rudeness.

[Garja]

honestly you people that are so quick to call it bad when you clearly have not put much thought into it are just stuck in a one-track-mind which is odd for an rts game player and with hundreds of unexplored synergies and builds you’re so quick to discredit any of them that aren’t instilled into the meta by a “top-player”. None of you have personally tried this in an actual game and still call it bad; how? If you had it would be somewhere online already. It’s literally never been forummed or discussed online before. I searched and searched. The potential is there. If 3 good players in a team game had close cooperation and strong teamwork this strategy would be totally viable for high-level play because it could be incorporated without being punished. But i’m not forcing anyone to agree or disagree but just to open your eyes and stop being so closed minded smh. If you have fun doing the same builds every game that’s cool too.

No, it's just you stuck on one track mind to defend it.
My experience tells me the card is not good, even for a possible team strat. It's easy to make a quick comparison with for example fertility dance which is 5-6 times stronger than the combination of the 2 medicine cards.
Again, I'm talking of serious games, where wasting a card matters.

The potential is there. If 3 good players in a team game had close cooperation and strong teamwork this strategy would be totally viable for high-level play because it could be incorporated without being punished.

The point is not whether it can work (especially with "close cooperation"). The point is: is it a winning strategy? Because if it is not, then it is automatically a bad strategy (no tie in this game) and it isdiscarded by default. As I said, about 70% of other cards are more useful than this one at pretty much any point in the game. This makes the card not viable. If at any stage of the game I have 2 options and "medicine" is constantly the 2nd best, it simply isn't viable.

[IGNDontay]

I follow just fine actually. A simple misread leading to a misunderstanding doesn’t mean I don’t comprehend and I rectified myself. It’s more clear you have a superiority complex and don’t want to have a discussion.

And here we are with you insulting me. Why? I did not insult you, so why don't you stay polite?

A discussion is one side giving their opinion and the other giving theirs, not a shutting down of ideas or complete disregard to another’s.

To me a discussion is not so much about opinions, but rather about arguments. The difference is that opinions do not need to be grounded on anything (its basically beliefs), while arguments need to be reasonable. Further, a discussion usually has the goal of reaching a conclusion.

In this thread, I identified the question "Is stacking the Medicine (team) card worth it?" as the topic and the goal to answer this question.

I gave arguments and was not able to find many reasonable arguments in your posts - mostly opinions. Hence, I reached a conclusion.

I mentioned yours and asked for clarification respectfully and you disregarded mine, rudely. clearly you didn’t comment to have a discussion but to discredit the potential of the synergy of this build. You clearly commented in sarcasm from the first text but I assumed that was out of spite of the whole toxicity of the post not in aversion toward me which is clearly the case since you’re coming at me personally insinuating i’m slow lol.

I was not sarcastic. I also did not mean to insinuate that you are slow or stupid or anything. I also do not need to post anything in aversion towards you. Where should that aversion come from, since I barely know you? Anyway, I apologize if you got a wrong impression, I tried to be objective and surely did some communication mistakes.

You’re opinion is discredited in my eyes. If you have anything actually constructive other than “math proofs it’s bad” when the math wasn’t even calculated for. it’s cards being sent nor was the agenda correct about it being sent early. feel free to continue to attempt to have a respectful conversation, guy. otherwise keep it pushing.

It is sad that your low regard for me discredits my arguments (not opinions!) in your eyes. My arguments are entirely detached from myself and still keep being true if I am not here.

The math was a nice input and I can’t tell you if it’s wrong or not since i’m not great at math

This is what I was refering to. If you can't tell whether it is right or wrong, then you clearly did not understand it. Which does not necessarily make you stupid, but it makes a discussion less fruitful.


edit: please don't use "guy" or "bro" when addressing me. This is actually something that I perceive as rudeness.

it’s completely subjective so they are opinions. if it wasn’t an opinion it would be a fact which it’s not. you can think it’s not “good” or you can think it’s “not bad but also not good” and that is your opinion based on your “mathematical parts” or your beliefs. Others will think differently. Like myself and my opinion is that the synergy is unexplored and even more so subjective in your case because youre basing your opinion or (argument) completely on numbers you asked to be corrected in if you were wrong, and not in game tests/attempts with this exact synergy and shutting down anymore discussion therefor after because you make it seem as if your right, case closed. My comparisons were quick but not inaccurate. and the “countries” comment may not have convinced you but go ahead and let me know why you think these civs have multiple train time cards and others don’t? The “good vibe let’s talk about the splendid card medicine” comment seemed very sarcastic considering you mention the toxicicity before mentioning the aforementioned context of the original thread. If I mistook you or misunderstood you then I apologize but just because I’m not good at math does not mean a discussion can’t be fruitful. That is plain ignorant and insulting. I showed an understanding of the math in my own text clearly I have an understanding of how it works and you still decided to shrug off my strong points as if you weren’t expecting to have to rebuttal with anything else but your mathematics that weren’t what we were even talking about exactly to begin with. “one could do that but..” all seems dismissive and in turn insulting. if you don’t have anything actually constructive to say than why comment. I already said the math was a nice input. From there nothing has been accomplished. Your aversion me towards me could come from the same place a majority of the people in this community’s aversion towards me comes from. One person not liking me telling their friend not to and so on but hopefully you’re brighter than that. You Seem to be. this is not the direction of the post i’d hoped for and i would appreciate if you could steer away from making it personal as this isn’t about me or you it’s about talking around a synergy and understanding the potential which has still yet to be scratch the surface imo.

[IGNDontay]

honestly you people that are so quick to call it bad when you clearly have not put much thought into it are just stuck in a one-track-mind which is odd for an rts game player and with hundreds of unexplored synergies and builds you’re so quick to discredit any of them that aren’t instilled into the meta by a “top-player”. None of you have personally tried this in an actual game and still call it bad; how? If you had it would be somewhere online already. It’s literally never been forummed or discussed online before. I searched and searched. The potential is there. If 3 good players in a team game had close cooperation and strong teamwork this strategy would be totally viable for high-level play because it could be incorporated without being punished. But i’m not forcing anyone to agree or disagree but just to open your eyes and stop being so closed minded smh. If you have fun doing the same builds every game that’s cool too.

No, it's just you stuck on one track mind to defend it.
My experience tells me the card is not good, even for a possible team strat. It's easy to make a quick comparison with for example fertility dance which is 5-6 times stronger than the combination of the 2 medicine cards.
Again, I'm talking of serious games, where wasting a card matters.

i’m clearly not stuck in a one track mind if i’m defending a synergy that you’ve clearly never put thought into, Garja. For clearly opening my mind to something that hadn’t been discussed before and not letting people write it off so easily without even putting anything constructive behind their bias. Sorry you felt this comment personal but it wasn’t. Putting settler on fertility dance is less efficient than sending 1 card and india/iro sending a card. How many settler would have to dance for a 30%+ increase in settler production with fertility dance do you have the exact number or are you just being needlessly biased? how much % does 1 settler equal while dancing? For settler will be gathering instead of dancing which makes sending one card better. And again i’m going to mention that this synergy would have to be done with players who are in strong coordination and cooperation with each other almost mlg style. There will always be a better card to send than whatever card it is you have in your mind. it’s not a losing strategy it’s not a winning strategy. once again open your mind. this isn’t a “okay team, team medicine stacked is going to win us the game” and considering a majority of cards don’t even get sent in a game having them in a team game is a no brainer actually. why wouldn’t you have the option available. under the logic that it always being the 2nd choice card makes it not viable then all cards after your 1st choice cards wouldn’t be good? so why’s have them at all?there comes a point when you have nothing to send except upgrades or crates.. I don’t see where you’re going with this please explain.

[Garja]

No, fertility dance is in fact way better than medicine, with both Aztecs (who use warrior priests) and even Sioux which use vills on the firepit. This is telling of how much you know about what you're talking here.
Anyway, you seem to be in conflict with logic and love confirmation bias. You're again defending "the synergy" of the strat when it is still a losing strats. The same thing can be done about lot of other card combinations which still don't cut it. It's legit to ask yourself if a strat could be viable but it's not legit to defend it over evidence.
A last quick example, hoping you realize the point:
2 mirror teams, same civs, same players. One team can freely decide their cards to send. The other team is forced to include "medicine" cards at some point in their build. They play 1000 games against each other, which team is going to win? Normally the win rates should be 50-50, but with one team forced to use a sub-optimal card choice win rates would be skewed and the team which doesn't include "medicine" card would probably go up to 70% or even more.
This makes one build strictly inferior and thus not viable.
A quick side note on the above example. If civs were not mirror one could still make a point about choosing the medicine strat. The point is that the (combination of the) card is so bad that it doesn't even grant enough of a strategic advantage to justify it.
The bottom line is in fact that the card doesn't provide anything to win a game. Ports (arguably the civ that benefit from it the most) already outscales other civs if it is free to produce vills non-stop. And it does it in a satisfactory way without medicine card. This is why other cards are sent, with the purpose of compensating for other possible weaknesses of the civ.
So really, it is not even about efficiency, which is already strong argument in itself, it is that even the supposed synergy of piling up the medicine cards isn't that great of a strategic idea.

[IGNDontay]

No, fertility dance is in fact way better than medicine, with both Aztecs (who use warrior priests) and even Sioux which use vills on the firepit. This is telling of how much you know about what you're talking here.
Anyway, you seem to be in conflict with logic and love confirmation bias. You're again defending "the synergy" of the strat when it is still a losing strats. The same thing can be done about lot of other card combinations which still don't cut it. It's legit to ask yourself if a strat could be viable but it's not legit to defend it over evidence.
A last quick example, hoping you realize the point:
2 mirror teams, same civs, same players. One team can freely decide their cards to send. The other team is forced to include "medicine" cards at some point in their build. They play 1000 games against each other, which team is going to win? Normally the win rates should be 50-50, but with one team forced to use a sub-optimal card choice win rates would be skewed and the team which doesn't include "medicine" card would probably go up to 70% or even more.
This makes one build strictly inferior and thus not viable.
A quick side note on the above example. If civs were not mirror one could still make a point about choosing the medicine strat. The point is that the (combination of the) card is so bad that it doesn't even grant enough of a strategic advantage to justify it.
The bottom line is in fact that the card doesn't provide anything to win a game. Ports (arguably the civ that benefit from it the most) already outscales other civs if it is free to produce vills non-stop. And it does it in a satisfactory way without medicine card. This is why other cards are sent, with the purpose of compensating for other possible weaknesses of the civ.
So really, it is not even about efficiency, which is already strong argument in itself, it is that even the supposed synergy of piling up the medicine cards isn't that great of a strategic idea.

Im not in conflict with anything. Still defending a synergy you haven’t put thought into or done any calculations yourself. You said fertility dance and I thought to Sioux not Aztec, Sioux dont have WP so they’re not really comparable other than they have Pits. You didn’t answer the question of how many villager would need to dance in order to achieve 30% faster train time or greater? And that’s the main point you’re using to discredit medicine synergy being bad because you can just dance. WP are efficient dancers, settler are not. You’re also basing your opinion on medicine being a game breaking card to send, as if it is. It’s not. Games are too random to be decided this way. If that was the case sending bank cards as dutch would be bad and it’s not. If you think sending 1 greedy card is game losing especially in a team format then you’re truely are being closed minded my friend. This is an RTS and every game provides new opportunities the last game may not have. You send a military shipment for example and it accomplishes nothing say it was a misread of the game going on and now it’s just part of your idle military. Card wasted. Medicine sent. Team Medicine sent. Lasts all game. And the longer the game is drawn out the more beneficial the card will become as you reach max settler population quicker incrementally than the opposing team. You’re literally acting as if a player sending a team card and players sending s card to stack will win or lose you the game in every almost circumstance sounds closed minded when you can not predict the outcome of games. Players could wall to fully abuse the settler advantage and turn the game into treaty etc etc there are endless possibilities is the thing you’re not getting.

[vardar]

Dudeeeee

The strat can be used, just like any other sub-par build, but what is being said is that many do not recommend using it because it is clearly not a quality build and there are plenty of other options for a competitive game. If you post something on here about strategy expect differing opinions and stop getting so offended and take it with a grain of salt. And youll prolly reply with "im not getting offended etc etc" but yesh you clearly are my guy

I remember when I went through a port phase on Nilla where id always send medicine a while back (inspired by Gryphoon) just for the pure fun of it. But obviously I knew it wasnt a great card but I did it anyways just for difference's and boredom's sake. On tad it is better with the team medicine i guess but its still not a good option but next time I get on with some friends ill definitely try it out, it seems kinda fun especially vs lower ranks xD

[IGNDontay]

Dudeeeee

The strat can be used, just like any other sub-par build, but what is being said is that many do not recommend using it because it is clearly not a quality build and there are plenty of other options for a competitive game. If you post something on here about strategy expect differing opinions and stop getting so offended and take it with a grain of salt. And youll prolly reply with "im not getting offended etc etc" but yesh you clearly are my guy

I remember when I went through a port phase on Nilla where id always send medicine a while back (inspired by Gryphoon) just for the pure fun of it. But obviously I knew it wasnt a great card but I did it anyways just for difference's and boredom's sake. On tad it is better with the team medicine i guess but its still not a good option but next time I get on with some friends ill definitely try it out, it seems kinda fun especially vs lower ranks xD

lol offended for what? the only way to get a discussion is to go back and forth and they’re not making very valid points considering it’s all it’s bad bc this bad bc that without any substance behind it. still waiting for the % a settler makes on a fire pit. and go into a game. allow cheats. and bring a friend. use the synergy and you’ll see how much quicker villager train it’s crazy. nova & orion cheat or whatever. cheats just to speed up the process to notice the difference. But i never posted this to insinuate this is a top tier build or anything. posted simply bc i searched it myself and found no results so no one else made the post figured i may as well. and for those who do end up looking in the future they don’t need to see only negative feedback and no actual substance to what it Could be if that makes sense. But for sure man I already know.