science beakers catastrophy

[shade]

this is a nightmare...my sciencecost almost doubled over 1 turn.
I know there are some threads about sciencecosts and how to calculate them,and some lists with numbers(wich don't look that correct to what I experience)

ok here is the case:
I'm playing on a big map(max coord I find are 159 and 124)
Diety,hordes,7civs. civ2.42
I'm supreme,most advanced and the purple civ is still alive.
I techgifted them every tech possible to gift.
Now I'm researching future tech 21 and the cost are about 10.000
beakers(yep that are 4 zero's)
last turn was 1963 and then my techcosts went up from 52beakers/tech to 55/tech(1962->1963) this change of turn(1963->1964) my tech costs went up from 55b/tech->90b/tech(almost double=> I missed my 1tech/turn but that's the least of my worries)

Is there anyone who has an idea of what the hell is happening?
If there is a max beakercost?
How techcosts evolve in the future tech section...

If you don't believe this just look at the screenshot
--> the beakers I produce are now produced by only 6 cities at 0%sciencerate,the reason for this was I wanted to boost my taxes to a max for a few turns so I could totaly switch to science in the year 1970 and get 5 or 6 tech/turn...but if things keep going on like this my tech costs will be so high by then even with all my resources it would only give me 1 tech/2 or 3 turns.
(estimated amount of resources/turn by then 35.000)

I think this is the thing that will make me stop my record attempt and start all over again(instead of going on for another month or 2 and getting nada)

Shade

[Scouse Gits]

Sorry - I don't think I have ever researched a Future Tech - so you have my sympathy, but not much else ...

[shade]

damn...I already put in the record-attempt thread my idea to finish up and start all over...I think that when I do I'll add a list of beakercosts for each tech invented.
(and start with the mongols or so just to get rid of the penalty)

Shade

[La Fayette]

AFAIK no one has yet studied the beaker counts for future techs thoroughly.
But IMO future techs are much less important than happy people when calculating high scores (and Ming and Rah and other high scorers have probably not optimised future techs in their own attempts).
So, if I were you, I would just go on (think how many hours you have already spent on this attempt!).

(anyway, it's up to you, I won't compete ).

[shade]

Yesterday in a little furie I almost bought the entire spaceship...then I quited just to calm down.
Now that I've regained some of my calm I desided to continue
even with less science bonus .

In the mean time I would like to collect all the knowledge there is about those beakercosts in this thread and get them sorted out into a few categories:

1°ABSOLUTELY SURE
( This stuff is absolutely certain,checked,double checked,tripple checked and checked it even a forth and fifth time to be sure.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*beakercost depend on #techs you have
*beakercost getpenalised vs Keyciv


2° PRETTY SURE

( We know this but it's still possible to have some minor flaws(somewhere around the 3th digit after the comma) )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



3°EDUCATED GUESS
( We think it is like this and there have been some tests that show it might be correct)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*beakercost depend on mapsize


4°GUESS
(we think this is true although it's just an idea and not tested yet.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

those are some of the ones I could think of...
(I know there is something about it in the Great library but it seems not everything is correct)
Anyone anything that should be researched,that is known for a fact or whatever about those beakercost just put it underneath.this post will be updated each time we get some new info that is certain.(afterwards I might even compilled it to something usefull and put it in html to put it in the GL instead of the thread)

Shade

[La Fayette]

key civ

shade
I just reread the thread that samson started after his discovery.
The thread is named 'the key to tech gifting'. None of those who posted had anything to say against the basic formula (key civ is purple if you are supreme, and so on).
According to that, the best explanation for your 'beaker catastrophy' would be that your key civ got destroyed (or that the AI considered it destroyed). Did the catastrophy occur after a round number of future techs or some special event concerning your key civ?

Now, I just reread your post: you mention that the catastrophy occured while you were researching future tech #21. There is a very high threshold in beaker costs when one is researching tech #21 (mind you! not future tech!). This might be the explanation: threshold at tech #21 and same threshold at future tech #21.

[shade]

Re: key civ

Originally posted by La Fayette
According to that, the best explanation for your 'beaker catastrophy' would be that your key civ got destroyed (or that the AI considered it destroyed). Did the catastrophy occur after a round number of future techs or some special event concerning your key civ?

they are quite alive at this moment(they are the only civ left and I take good care of them ,nothing special happened.

Now, I just reread your post: you mention that the catastrophy occured while you were researching future tech #21. There is a very high threshold in beaker costs when one is researching tech #21 (mind you! not future tech!). This might be the explanation: threshold at tech #21 and same threshold at future tech #21.

Ok I'll take a look...so if the above is correct the costs should deminish after the invention of this tech?right?

Shade

[La Fayette]

Re: Re: key civ

Originally posted by shade
so if the above is correct the costs should deminish after the invention of this tech?right?
Shade

sorry, the answer is no.
The costs should remain high and even growing slightly tech after tech if the formula is somewhat the same for future techs as it is for 'ancient' techs (namely: # of tech researched * multiplier; the multiplier being equal to 24 for standard map IIRC)

[DaveV]

I think future techs can't be gifted, so this behavior makes sense in the the context of La Fayette's analysis (you have a 20-tech lead now, so the cost goes way up). The costs will only increase as time goes by; once again paraphrasing La Fayette, your best bet for pumping up your score lies in making lots more happy people.

[Vlad Antlerkov]

Of course, those happy people can't fit into a small number of cities. So we build more cities. And the best way to do that is... ICS!

Seriously, Dave is right. You get fewer points per individual happy person, but the number of happy people is limited only by food production and the number of cities, whereas future techs restart at 256, going to zero and taking those Future Tech points with them.

[shade]

Re: Re: Re: key civ

Originally posted by La Fayette

sorry, the answer is no.
The costs should remain high and even growing slightly tech after tech if the formula is somewhat the same for future techs as it is for 'ancient' techs (namely: # of tech researched * multiplier; the multiplier being equal to 24 for standard map IIRC)

ok I understand it now...

I think future techs can't be gifted,

I know this for sure,tried it and except the foreing emmisary laughing("We don't need your pathetic science"or something like that) at me like I'm a complete moron,nothing happens.

whereas future techs restart at 256, going to zero and taking those Future Tech points with them.

I didn't have that risk,for me to get the 255 techs I need to get like 5techs/turn for the rest of the game(<50 turns)

Shade