Remove the 4 turn/tech barrier!!!

[Provost Harrison]

Dammit this is so irritating. Now when I reach a point later on in the game, I find I cannot research at optimal speed because I have this artificial constraint placed upon me. Not only do I find it bad for gameplay and it makes the industrial and modern ages go on longer than is necessary (I have very little to do for most of this time, and my cities do nothing but accumulate wealth, while I sit on the computer and click enter, enter, enter to get the turns to go by). By all means up the costs of later techs but this constraint is ridiculous. Not only for you, but the AI as well...it means that when all the major civs hit this barrier, there is no chance of catch-up for anyone short of espionage methods. And ultimately frustrating.

This is my only gripe with the game, and an option to switch it iff should be put in the game.

[Steve Clark]

Note to Firaxis: Please make it an option of giving PH all of the techs at the beginning of a game.

So why is it when many folks complain about how easy Civ2 was (like in racing up the tree, etc.), they modified that by putting brakes on the human player...folks still complain?!?!

[Grumbold]

If they apply these brakes perhaps they need to be proportional. So if super civ X can only discover a tech in 4 turns with their 375 science, the civ with 300 science output will take 5, irrespective of the base cost of the tech.

[Provost Harrison]

No, this is the wrong way to do it. They should make the techs harder to acquire but no ridiculous ceiling like this...there comes a stage quite early where every decent sized civ, including AI, hits that ceiling, and no one can catch up because they are fixed at that rate. It also makes any tech improvements (SETI Program, Research Labs, Newtons University, etc, etc) totally useless because the only real effect it has is giving you more money because I lower the science rate to compensate so I am not wasting money. I think it is a ridiculous thing to have to balance. Later techs should be expensive to acquire. That does not mean cap the turns to acquire a tech, which just seems like an artificial constraint in the game to me...

[Steve Clark]

All kidding aside, this is probably the ONLY thing I like better in Civ2 than Civ3. I had always been a devotee of the SSC because I like the rewards it give when you work at it properly. I had written a couple of posts just before the game came out wondering if forcing the user into the "Ages" was a good idea. The problem is that they listened to all of those wrong-minded folks who thought the ancient/middle/modern ages went by too fast, thus the artificial constraints on the pace of research. Another reason I must wait patiently for the scenarios.

[regoarrarr]

There is no 4 turn / tech barrier. I've gotten techs in 3 turns (though no sooner). It's just a matter of how much science you have. Now, I realize it's definitely harder to research tech than in Civ2, but there's definitely no artificial barrier ( though there is a cap at 32 turns / tech)

Check out these threads

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=33053

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=33056

[Stuie]

I actually agree. I think a different method of limiting rapid tech advancement should have been employed. That said, I also think the Middle and Industrial Ages go way too fast. The Ancient Age seems about right, and then there's the usual late game bog-down in the Modern Age - too bad they couldn't alleviate that somehow.

I'm thinking of doubling the cost for all the Middle and Industrial Age techs. That should make things interesting.

Guess that makes me "wrong minded" in Steve's book.

[Sixty_four]

Same here: I recall having gotten techs in 3 turns before a couple times late in games when I was playing in Regent level (okay, a first run to learn the new rules). If that's the limit, I'm fine with 3 turns.

Also, you don't have to hit Enter all day to get your turns to pass. That round button on the upper left of the Info Box (lower right corner of the screen) works VERY well for simulating turns when all you're doing is checking production levels and monitoring the movement of other civs.

[Trifna]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Note to Firaxis: Please make it an option of giving PH all of the techs at the beginning of a game.

So why is it when many folks complain about how easy Civ2 was (like in racing up the tree, etc.), they modified that by putting brakes on the human player...folks still complain?!?!

I hate that almost-argument... There are many way of countering something, there's not only puting artificial limits not making computer cheat. Making computers produce 2x more would make them harder, but it's not what we want.

[Steve Clark]

Stuie: But there's no way all of us can reach a concensus on what to speed up or slow down, or to not have any "brakes". No matter what was designed or will be fixed, there will be a vocal group saying that it was absolutely the wrong solution. Even though I still like the Civ2 way of researching, I can recognize the tradeoffs that had to be made in Civ3.

[Navyman]

I am a noob to the forum but not a noob to the Civ series. I will start off with the disclaimer that I do not have the game yet. But have been reading this forum regularly to understand some of finer details of Civ3.

I think one of the best ways to counter the run-away gigantic civ and to let smaller nations play catch up in the late game is to make is so that larger civs actually get penalty in research.

It doesn't have anything to do with corruption. Let's say that a civ has 10 cities producing 20 science each and another civ has 20 cities producing 10 science each. As the game is structured both the civs will be getting 200 research and new techs at the same turn interval.

My suggestion is to make is so that the civ with the 20 cities gets a penalty in science for being more spread out. If you have a larger civ then research is being done at different locations and it should take longer to integrate all that research into discoveries. This seems acceptable to me because it seems realistic because the more spread out your R&D and academic institutions the more beaureacracy (and ultimately time) that has to be waddled through to make all the different research congeal into one path breaking technological advancement.

This method has many pros, like it will encourage having a closer knit set of really developed cities and will ameliorate people who do not appreciate the high corruption but doesn't like the ICS either. Also, this method can be a substitute for the high levels of corruption. Also, people, like me, who like to have a dozen of really developed cities can compete with a civ that has 50 smallish underdeveloped cities.

Any thoughts from you guys?

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Stuie: But there's no way all of us can reach a concensus on what to speed up or slow down, or to not have any "brakes".

Add that to the list of "Things for which we cannot reach a concensus." I'm starting to believe that Firaxis took a pretty decent middle-ground with most things in Civ3. Sure there's some who say it's too peaceful or too warlike or too much like Civ2 or not enough like Civ2, but in the end I think it's just a matter of adapting to the new game to suit your strategy.

Anyway, I'll have a crack at the editor to see if my gaming needs can be met. I want more Middle Ages! Heck, knights have been an after-thought in my games so far. I didn't even see a knight until my third game, because the techs flew by too fast. In game 3, the Aztecs suddenly invaded with about twelve knights, and I thought "Cool! What are those!"

[Steve Clark]

Stuie: Vet Knights have always been my favorite conquering unit. With my game as the Iroquois, I managed to build 10 Mounted Warriors (which acted just like Knights) which then completely annihilated 3 civs over a period of 1500 years. But you said it best, use the editor to modify the game to suit your needs. That's why it's there. Besides, I guess we'll look forward to a custom Middle Ages scenario where someone can create 7 different variations of the Knights.

[Zurai001]

Actually, I've found Knights to be the first truely effective attackers (unless you're playing as Persians ... Immortals rock). They're the first unit that actually has a decent chance of winning against a fortified spearman, and theycome soon after pikeman so you won't see too many of those defending (especially if you take out their iron first).

As for the topic at hand, I actually like it. If you find that you 'can't catch up', try *trading* for techs. The computer is actually very easy to get knowledge from, and if you find someone else who doesn't have that tech you can sell it to them and get your money back. There's no reason you should be too far behind the opponents in the tech race.

[David Weldon]

There is no 4 turn / tech barrier. I've gotten techs in 3 turns (though no sooner). It's just a matter of how much science you have. Now, I realize it's definitely harder to research tech than in Civ2, but there's definitely no artificial barrier ( though there is a cap at 32 turns / tech)

Yes, there is a 4 turn limit, and the other threads are wrong. The thing is that the limit is a "soft" limit, not a hard limit. What this means:

Tech Cost = 1000 (example)
Science Rate 100 = 10 turns
Science Rate 200 = 5 turns
Science Rate 250 = 4 turns
Science Rate 500 = 4 turns
Science Rate 700 = 4 turns
Science Rate 900 = 3 turns
etc...

I haven't had the ability to calculate when it finally lets you get to 3 (and some have even reported 2) turns, becuase I've never been able to do it. But I have been able to prove that more than doubling the science rate from the 4 turn rate still won't decrease the time to 3 turns.

I think this sucks. If they want future tech to be tough, make them more expensive for everyone. The way they implemented this penalizes those who have improved their cities, and basically forces them to go to war because there's nothing else to do with the extra gold and production they have while they're waiting for new tech. If future techs are more expensive, then those who really emphasize science still get an advantage, even if it is a reduction of 10 turns to 8 turns instead of 4 to 3.

It is possible to slow down the advancement this way without artificially limiting progress for those who obviously feel it's important to get tech fast. What ever happend to "multiple ways to enjoy the game"!?

[Stuie]

Originally posted by civ-n00b
3 turns, here you go. i couldn't get the whole screen, its not doctored or faked though. this is in regent, and everytime i've played i've been able to have it in the 3 - 6 turn range WITHOUT modifying corruption values.

No offense, but your pic proves absolutely nothing.

[TechWins]

That screenshot could very well be taken in the middle of researching a tech.

[David Weldon]

No offense, but I think you might have missed the point of my post. I explicitly mentioned that it is possible (though I've never had the opportunity), and thanks for the screen shot.

What would be even better, though, is a breakdown of your beakers/turn vs. # of turns required for each %science setting so that we can calculate how bad the 4 turn soft limit is.

[TechWins]

Something is wrong the site, all the posts are being scattered around. Is anybody else noticing this?

[Sevorak]

David Weldon,

I think what we're looking at is a VERY severe diminishing-returns formula. It seems to go one-for-one early on, but the the curve, as it is, flattens out dramatically at the 4-turn mark, and it appears to require quite a bit of science to push past it. I wouldn't call it a cap, then - that term is misleading, although it is quite a strategic barrier.

I agree with your sentiments. The problem is they can't linearize the curve without dropping the 32-turn cap at the bottom. I think they should at least improve the curve at the end, though, and allow faster tech at 100% spending levels.

-Sev

[Sevorak]

civ-n00b,

All that picture proves is that you had 3 turns left until you got Iron Working. I could have set Science to 10% to get it in 32 turns and took a screenshot on the 29th turn.

More convincing would be a Science Advisor shot that said "We've researched this: let us now research "something"(3 turns)".

-Sev

[civ-n00b]

maybe i'll clear this up a bit:

yes, i'm starting on a new tech in regent, its not mid-research. it can be done, its just not the easiest thing. i entered a golden age about 20 turns after the SS and was getting my techs at 3 & 4 turns each once again (in medieval age).


yes, the posts do seem to be "scattered" ... i found my pic at the very end of this thread

Sev, i agree, but i thought of this a bit too late (and read this too late), as in after pressing enter on the "we've finished researching" screen. i browse this forum while playing, makes it less monotonous for me

[civ-n00b]

3 turns, here you go. i couldn't get the whole screen, its not doctored or faked though. this is in regent, and everytime i've played i've been able to have it in the 3 - 6 turn range WITHOUT modifying corruption values.


hope the pic works this time......

[civ-n00b]

Sev, i agree, but i thought of this a bit too late (and read this too late), as in after pressing enter on the "we've finished researching" screen. i browse this forum while playing, makes it less monotonous for me

"There seems to have been a slight problem with the database. Please try again by pressing the refresh button in your browser."
bah

[David Weldon]

Sev:

OK, "cap" is a poor term, but you'll notice I use "soft limit" instead . Anyway, testing has shown that the progression is exactly linear (i.e. build up enough beakers and you get the tech) anywhere between 32 and 4 turns. Exactly at 4 turns you hit some sort of exorbitant penalty.

In all my games this penalty has effectlively limited the progression to 4 turns (monarch and deity levels). I have never been able to get any tech, even super-old tech that I skipped because I didn't care, for less than 4 turns. I don't doubt that it is technically possible, and I don't doubt others who say they can do it (especially on easier levels), but do you see how I (and many others) perceive the penalty as equivalent to a cap?

I accept that it is a "brake" on science, but when you couple the fact that mid-industrial era is when it is easiest to finally get some surplus science to push beyond 4 turns with the fact that mid-industrial has absolutely no useful improvements or wonders to build, this really seams to push you into a "make war or waste your production" phase.

I'm sure the designers expected wars in this era to secure vital resources (oil and rubber), but I don't like being put in a position where it simply makes no sense to do anything except what the designers wanted or expected you to do. That qualifies in my mind as poor design.

[Sevorak]

Yes, it does sort of seem like many factors (not just the tech "cap") are forcing Civ players into a kind of game script that Firaxis appears to have dreamed up. Especially the mid-industrial war. Disappointing, but altogether not unexpected. All of these factors detract from replayability, which is something gamers love but is rarely a concern of corporations, since replayability does nothing for sales.

-Sev