Maxed out science research.

[exeter0]

I have set my minimum required research rate to 18... to slow the game down...

Am I right in assuming that there is no point having your science allocation set to anything greater than what is required to research the tech in the minum time...

Like if I set my research rate to 40% and the tech will be research in 4 turns... and if I set the research rate to 100% and it will still be completed in 4 turns... then I might as well leave the research rate at 40%???

Is this correct... or have I been playing it all wrong all this time?

[Jaybe]

Re: Maxed out science research.

Originally posted by exeter0
...
Am I right in assuming that there is no point having your science allocation set to anything greater than what is required to research the tech in the minimum time...

Like if I set my research rate to 40% and the tech will be research in 4 turns... and if I set the research rate to 100% and it will still be completed in 4 turns... then I might as well leave the research rate at 40%???

Is this correct... or have I been playing it all wrong all this time?

Well, I HOPE you are correct, because that's the way I also do it. And when it gets down to 2 and 1 turns before finishing (or even before), I will optimize it to optimize the research and the cash flow.

JB

[Harovan]

Research rate has a low cap of 4 turns, meaning you have no chance to discover a tech in less than 4 turns. So it's often a waste of money if you max your science slider. Put it at a value, where it barely reaches 4 turns, and finetune the setting again, when 1 turn is left. Saves you a lot of money you could use to rush improvements etc.

There's also a high cap of 40 turns, meaning you are guaranteed to discover a tech in 40 turns if you do some research at all (1 scientist in 1 city is enough for that).

Keep a permanent eye at the discovery time, because when other civs discover the tech, it gets cheaper for you. This also saves you money.

[exeter0]

Thanks for confirming that Sir R... As I said I have set the minimum cap (floor!?!?) to 18 turns... to try and slow the tech rushing down. It seems to work quite well.

[Harovan]

I'm not sure if that's good. The game has somewhat about 80 techs (lazy to look it up now). Multiplied with the minimum of 18 turns that makes a minimum of about 1400 turns for researching the whole tree. But the game has only 540 turns.

[exeter0]

errrr... ... I don;t think it works out to be that long because you get other Civs trading techs etc... so in the end I would say any individual CIV would be lucky to have to individually resource 25-40 civs (sorry about the wide range estimate!).

Or am I wrong there.. what do you think?!

Also, using the Gramphos's Civ3MultiTool I have extended the end game date to 4000 A.D.

Again... not sure you (or many others) would approve but I like a long game!

[Harovan]

You have a point here, tech trading could indeed make it possible, if the different AI's have a different research schedule (I think they have, but am not sure).

Let's assume, all civs (including you) at a certain moment have absolutely the same tech level. Now, if at least a few civs differ in their further research, your assumption will work. If not and all AI civs research the same, it won't work.

I would not appreciate a longer game. For me they are long enough. 540 turns are fine for me. But that's a matter of taste and if one likes longer games, well, let him play longer.

[exeter0]

Agree... I am am assuming that the CIV's research different tech tree branches in order to developunique techs.

It my experience other I would have traded for 15-30% of my techs... but this would have more than doubled with the more rational AI tech trading in 1.21F.

[Harovan]

It would be interesting to read your experiences with your changes, especially the years when the ages begin and end, and especially when the modern technologies (let's say tanks and above) are discovered. I'm sure tired to roll around with tanks in 1600AD. Would be interesting when you with your setting discover motorized transportation.

[exeter0]

I'm at 1100AD and I recently got Chivalry.. and I've been on Monarch since 400AD... so I'm pretty happy with tech progress in comparison to actual history.

The best part is that you get to enjoy the different eras... a lot of empite building and clashing was done with Swordsman/ Legionaires and Hoplites/Spearmen/Archers... now It's all knights, pikeman etc.

The good thing is that the AI Civs get a chance to build up and catch up with technology. (I also increased the attack value of the Knight to 5 so the AI sees the advantage & value of building them over Longman all the time - I obviously adjusted Riders/Cavalry etc accordingly).

I think humans win a lot becasue we plan a war/strategy for a tech research that will give us the edge whe it comes around.

Because the AI has more chance to build up and prepare.. the AI seems to be making a much more creditable adversary.

But this is so far... I will post more updates if people are interested.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Exeter0, that does sound like an interesting idea. I used to do the same (slow tech rate, increast end date) for Civ 2 scenarios and it resulted in much more land being covered, more actual history being made (conquests, colonies etc.) and overall made parts of the game far more than just a constant race for winning. You had time to appreciate things. But there were turns where very little happened. Is this true for your game?

[exeter0]

Well MrWhereItsAt,
It depends on what you refer to 'a lot of things happening'... I mean your not getting a new tech every 4 turns and a new unit to play with every 10... but I am finding it very interesting... you can be a little more rexed about empire building...


the AI's competitiveness comes from the discount they get in shields & research (I am playing at Emporer level)

but you also know that the AI are keeping up in the unit stakes (although I think Faraxis needs to improve the AI's ability to update units when the opportunity arises). But at least in my game you can't whack a civ by waiting for a new tech unit and then rush building and blitzing.

There were some changes I made in the .BIC scenario file I regret (set corruption too low and some things which I have to admit are just downright cheats - I gave spearmen, legionaires & hoplits the ability to make roads for example... i have leaned that the AI does not use the added function... so in effect then it is a CHEAT!).. but when Gramphos releases his new version of C3MT in a few days I will be able to change the rules in the save game and fine tune as I play.

Given the nature of the game I am really confused about why the AI's never have any gold.. but again with Gramphos's C2MT I will be able to monitor their expenditure and sometimes switch CIV's


The goal is that by the end of this game I will have a feel for a scenario that will have the best game balance and strategy feel for me.

I expect that there is going to be some titanic struggle when the CIV's start to run out of room... I am playing on a 220 * 220 map with the only victory being dominion!

[MrWhereItsAt]

As long as you have something to do most turns that isn't just worker functions then that counts as active enough for a long thoughtful game, exeter0.

And I don't know about regretting "cheats" - I used to use a mod that made it so every unit could become an army. As I had in my three (mostly unfinished) games until then not seen a single leader, it was nice to use them for a change. I soon found out, however, that disbanding armies gets you 100 shields, so I caught myself building tonnes of swordsmen in the Industrial Age and building Wonders in one turn! Perhaps slightly more unbalancing than your advantage.

And IMO you can never set corruption too low.

[exeter0]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
As long as you have something to do most turns that isn't just worker functions then that counts as active enough for a long thoughtful game, exeter0.

A lot of your time is spent trying to block other CIV's from encroaching on your borders... certainly worker functions is sometimes tedious.. but that is really a part of CIV3 until they introduce some way of queuing tasks for your workers (I just don;t trust worker automation for all but the simplest tasks like ctrl-R.

And I don't know about regretting "cheats" - I used to use a mod that made it so every unit could become an army. As I had in my three (mostly unfinished) games until then not seen a single leader, it was nice to use them for a change. I soon found out, however, that disbanding armies gets you 100 shields, so I caught myself building tonnes of swordsmen in the Industrial Age and building Wonders in one turn! Perhaps slightly more unbalancing than your advantage.

And IMO you can never set corruption too low.

I have also done some other cheats which have made things a little too easy like increasing the happy faces you get from temples & colloseums.

In my view a cheat is anything rule change you make that the AI cannot take full advantage of!

[MrWhereItsAt]

Hmm. It all doesn't sound too bad, exeter0. Well thought out, and you say you enjoy it. Maybe worth a try. OK Patch 1.21, I guess it's time to download you and try Civ3 again!

Thanks for your posts, exeter0 - you may just have got me reinterested in the game!