The system of advances in Civ2

[Paul]

kcbob, Ken was right about #3. I think it is even in the manual. I have never seen white advances turn blue on my F6 screen. You may be confused with the F3 screen where white advances of other civs will become blue when you get them.

[SlowThinker]

New version of civ2plan.exe was added to http://home-1.worldonline.cz/~cz0456...n.htm#civ2plan

[Sequoya]

Problem 2

This was discussed in an old thread. I believe it is archived under CivII Strategy and is called "A List of Data."

That thread had three important bits of information.

First, the number of beakers required for each tech is an integer multiplied by the number of the tech to be researched. First tech is A1*1, 2nd is A2*2, 3rd is A3*3, 4th is A4*4 ... 90th is A90*90. Starting techs are not included in this calculation. (The starting value for the integer is dependant upon map size and difficulty level.)

Second, the integer can be increased each research event and is increased even more if you are ahead in techs. This is the theory behind the crumby tech trading strategy and the gifting of techs in OCC. (The integer is increased every third tech after the 20th.)

Third, the integer ALWAYS takes a massive jump after the 19th tech. The 20th tech costs significantly more that the 19th. This hasn't been discussed in a while but is important (along with oedo's Law) for streamlining research paths. It is nice to get your critical research done by the 19th tech (Gunpowder, Democracy, Theory of Gravity or whatever you prefer.)

Sequoya

[This message has been edited by Sequoya (edited December 29, 2000).]

[La Fayette]

ST,
5 problems in one post! How can we have a life outside civ?
Problem 1: It seems that oedo or you or both are close to the truth. I cross my fingers.
Problem 2: Sequoya's answer is OK for me. Perhaps a clever OCCer like Paul would be able to give more precise ideas about the lag between your research and the AI's.
Problem 3: Ken answered
Problem 4: SG answered
Problem 5: I havn't got MGE. In the version I play (copyright 1996, is it 2-42? I must check) I know which tech the AI wants and, if I have an embassy or MPE, which techs it is willing to offer. Otherwise I know one tech offered immediately, but I must say yes before discovering the other techs available, if any. Then the AI gets the tech it asked for and I get the one I choose.

------------------
aux bords mystérieux du monde occidental

[SlowThinker]

quote: Originally posted by La Fayette on 12-29-2000 11:38 AM Problem 5: I havn't got MGE. In the version I play (copyright 1996, is it 2-42? I must check) I know which tech the AI wants and, if I have an embassy or MPE, which techs it is willing to offer. Otherwise I know one tech offered immediately, but I must say yes before discovering the other techs available, if any. Then the AI gets the tech it asked for and I get the one I choose.

La Fayette,
I works the same way as my MGE. I dont understand it: I have heard that AI often cheats, and then it gives me that advantage. And why computer offers a concrete advance, and then let me choose any? Its not reasoned.
[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited December 30, 2000).]

[SlowThinker]

quote: Originally posted by Sequoya on 12-28-2000 05:45 PM This was discussed in an old thread. I believe it is archived under CivII Strategy and is called "A List of Data." First tech is A1*1, 2nd is A2*2, 3rd is A3*3, 4th is A4*4 ... 90th is A90*90.

Sequoya,
Unfortunately, "A list of data" is lost. I found only
archive/Civ2-Strategy/The beaker formula
with following reference:
There are some information on this topic in the thread "A list of data" by Caesar the Great with the latest update on May 13 in this forum.

But, hopefully , it wasn't lost out of your memory.

Do you want to say that A1, A2, A3 are not found out in general situation/game?

[SlowThinker]

Sorry, there was a freezing bug in Research planner version 0.2. New repaired version was added
to my page (link) now.

[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited December 30, 2000).]

[Sequoya]

SlowThinker,

I searched for that old thread too, but I couldn't find it. It must of got lost in the archive disaster. (Just like the burning of the Great Library of Alexandria.)

Fortunately, I had pasted the actual "list of data" into a Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheet for my own analysis. This data is listed below with my comments.

This data was based upon a cheat mode test. A game was started (I believe 2.42, large map, diety, raging hordes.) Cheat mode was enabled and techs were gifted one at a time and the beaker cost of each tech was recorded. Doing it this way caused a massive lead in techs that the game penalized Caesar for. These would not be the real costs in an actual game. Different game settings would give different starting values for A (as well as increment values.)

I have verified the behavior of beaker cost at emperor, king and chieftain levels. This was to confirm the beaker cost jump at the 20th tech.

To test the beaker cost in an actual game, set your research rate to 0% and check the number of turns required to research the present tech. Don't forget to reset your research rate.

"A List of Data " with notes

1. 12 = 1 * 12, A increment = 0
2. 26 = 2 * 13, A increment = 1
3. 45 = 3 * 15, A increment = 2
4. 60 = 4 * 15, A increment = 0
5. 75 = 5 * 15, A increment = 0
6. 102 = 6 * 17, A increment = 2
7. 126 = 7 * 18, A increment = 1
8. 144 = 8 * 18, A increment = 0
9. 180 = 9 * 20, A increment = 2
10. 210 = 10 * 21, A increment = 1
11. 231 = 11 * 21, A increment = 0
12. 264 = 12 * 22, A increment = 1
13. 299 = 13 * 23, A increment = 1
14. 350 = 14 * 25, A increment = 2
15. 390 = 15 * 26, A increment = 1
16. 432 = 16 * 27, A increment = 1
17. 459 = 17 * 27, A increment = 0
18. 540 = 18 * 30, A increment = 3
19. 589 = 19 * 31, A increment = 1
20. 820 = 20 * 41, A increment = 10

Note big increase in research cost.

21. 903 = 21 * 43, A increment = 2
22. 946 = 22 * 43, A increment = 0
23. 989 = 23 * 43, A increment = 0
24. 1080 = 24 * 45, A increment = 2
25. 1125 = 25 * 45, A increment = 0
26. 1170 = 26 * 45, A increment = 0
27. 1242 = 27 * 46, A increment = 1
28. 1288 = 28 * 46, A increment = 0
29. 1334 = 29 * 46, A increment = 0
30. 1440 = 30 * 48, A increment = 2
31. 1488 = 31 * 48, A increment = 0
32. 1536 = 32 * 48, A increment = 0
33. 1680 = 33 * 50, A increment = 2
34. 1700 = 34 * 50, A increment = 0
35. 1760* = 35 * 50, A increment = 0

I believe Caesar the Great confessed a possible error in the 35th data point. It was decided that the correct beaker value was probably 1750.

36. 1872 = 36 * 52, A increment = 2
37. 1942 = 37 * 52, A increment = 0
38. 1976 = 38 * 52, A increment = 0
39. 2028 = 39 * 52, A increment = 0
40. 2080 = 40 * 52, A increment = 0
41. 2132 = 41 * 52, A increment = 0
42. 2310 = 42 * 55, A increment = 3
43. 2365 = 43 * 55, A increment = 0
44. 2420 = 44 * 55, A increment = 0
45. 2520 = 45 * 56, A increment = 1
46. 2576 = 46 * 56, A increment = 0
47. 2632 = 47 * 56, A increment = 0
48. 2784 = 48 * 58, A increment = 2
49. 2842 = 49 * 58, A increment = 0
50. 2900 = 50 * 58, A increment = 0
51. 3060 = 51 * 60, A increment = 2
52. 3120 = 52 * 60, A increment = 0
53. 3180 = 53 * 60, A increment = 0
54. 3294 = 54 * 61, A increment = 1
55. 3355 = 55 * 61, A increment = 0
56. 3416 = 56 * 61, A increment = 0
57. 3591 = 57 * 63, A increment = 2
58. 3654 = 58 * 63, A increment = 0
59. 3717 = 59 * 63, A increment = 0
60. 3900 = 60 * 65, A increment = 2
61. 3965 = 61 * 65, A increment = 0
62. 4030 = 62 * 65, A increment = 0
63. 4158 = 63 * 66, A increment = 1
64. 4224 = 64 * 66, A increment = 0
65. 4290 = 65 * 66, A increment = 0
66. 4422 = 66 * 67, A increment = 1
67. 4489 = 67 * 67, A increment = 0
68. 4556 = 68 * 67, A increment = 0
69. 4830 = 69 * 70, A increment = 3
70. 4900 = 70 * 70, A increment = 0
71. 4970 = 71 * 70, A increment = 0
72. 5112 = 72 * 71, A increment = 1
73. 5183 = 73 * 71, A increment = 0
74. 5254 = 74 * 71, A increment = 0
75. 5400 = 75 * 72, A increment = 1
76. 5472 = 76 * 72, A increment = 0
77. 5544 = 77 * 72, A increment = 0
78. 5850 = 78 * 75, A increment = 3
79. 5925 = 79 * 75, A increment = 0
80. 6000 = 80 * 75, A increment = 0
81. 6156 = 81 * 76, A increment = 1
82. 6232 = 82 * 76, A increment = 0
83. 6308 = 83 * 76, A increment = 0
84. 6552 = 84 * 78, A increment = 2
85. 6630 = 85 * 78, A increment = 0
86. 6708 = 86 * 78, A increment = 0
87. 6786 = 87 * 78, A increment = 0
88. 6864 = 88 * 78, A increment = 0
89. 6942 = 89 * 78, A increment = 0
90. 7290 = 90 * 81, A increment = 3

Thanks to Caesar the Great, and others, for their original research.

As some may be able to guess, I have been lurking around Apolyton for a long time. I registered for an account only a couple of months ago and don't post often, which is why I am just a settler.

Sequoya
[This message has been edited by Sequoya (edited December 30, 2000).]

[SlowThinker]

sequoya,
did they do the same test (starting position saved and then loaded ) twice?
You know, different results may be caused
a) by different conditions (size of map, tribe...)
b) or increment (0,1,2...) is always random.

[SlowThinker]

I have found "A list of data" thread: http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum3/HTML/000329.html

[Sten Sture]

I can't recall if it is recorded in the first List of Data thread, but someone noticed that the current number of AI civs also impacts the research cost in addition to the map size, diff level and relative advance level.

[East Street Trader]

There is another point which emerged from CtG work on beaker count. The progression is slightly different for large maps and for small maps. Thanks to Carolus RexThe numbers and the discussion is available from two of the threads he has added to page 3 of the Great Library.

What remains unquantified is the precise effect of the tech lead modifier. It may be that testing that aspect will prove a challenge even for the extraordinarily dedicated band of scientific investigators whom we now boast (and for whom lazy fellows like me give heartfelt thanks). OCC experience, though, pursuades me that the modifier has a very substantial effect, not just a trivial one. And, suspicion only, I think it is a balance between the human player and all the A1 civs which is relevant, not just the difference between the human player and the next most advanced. I feel reasonably confident that all of my (numerous) tech gifts have some effect, not just the gifts made to one particular A1 civ.

[SlowThinker]

Beakers count:

I tested with 2 civs and cheat menu:

1. Results are not correct using Ctrl-shift-F6 (for example first advantage was ignored (like a free advance)).
2. There is a sparsely applied random factor (i.e. there is no explicit formula ).
3. shift-F6 combined with shift-F3 gives other results than pure shift-F6 (i.e. remote shift F6 for the opponent)
or point 2. applies
4. It depends on attack, civilize, expand factors (from rules.txt) of both civs or point 2. applies

[SlowThinker]

BTW, I changed a line

10 ; Tech paradigm (higher # slows research)

to 20 and to 50 and nothing happened within first 10 advances.
[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited February 09, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited February 09, 2001).]

[debeest]

Slow, in my 2.42, nothing happens when I press Ctrl or Shift along with an F-key. Can't tell what you're talking about in your next-to-last post.

Here's a small tip to enhance your fine English: I think you're using "yet" in places where most English speakers would use "already." Take a look in your Czech-English dictionary (which, for political reasons, didn't exist when I visited your lovely country and your lovely city in 1986.)


[This message has been edited by debeest (edited February 14, 2001).]