Science City - worth it?

[SanPellegrino]

When I started with civ3, I was happy that at least the science city was still there, but it seemed not as strong than in Civ1/2.

(If someone has still missed the concept: build possibly colossus, copernicus, isaac etc. in a city with potential good commerce, usually your capital, develop this city, library university etc. and you get plenty of tech)

- In civ1/2 the science wonders worked exponential, now cumulative. In Civ2 I normally made more than half of my tech of my SC.

- The SC was excellent for caravans, you could make all your cities rich, by trading with SC. Also you got much cash from caravans from the SC itself to other civs.

- The SC was the only city you really needed to develop, other cities just building caravans, settlers and wonders - nearly zero maintenance

- science specialists in SC gave about 20 tech beakers in late game, growing beyond 20 was useful.

- highway is gone, you can't substitute colossus

That were my thoughts after first games, but I couldn't kick the habit. I tried, but next game on monarch I couldn't get a single early wonder - but colossus! (No AI cap on coast - lucky me). And SC was really useful that game, because I couldn't spread like in regent game before. Advantages in Civ 3:

- Colossus on higher levels more likely to get than other early wonders

- SC usually your capital or near - little corruption makes the wonders more powerful, the smaller the map, the more important

- chance for good starting position, there is usually a luxury nearby (hopefully near coast)

- if you head for single cultural victory, you gotta build your capital, why not make the SC

When I look at this points, it seems pretty obvious that the SC was more powerful in the predecessors, but still okay, not that overwhelming advantage anymore.

Am I the only one still using it or is it still common?

[DrSpike]

I try and get cope's and isaac's most games, but usually forgo early wonders. The first one I go for is mikes. The science city is still useful, but due to the 4 turn research cap less so than before. Still, you can make sure you're getting each tech in 4 turns and have the slider turned down so that you get more cash.

[vmxa1]

At Monarch and above it is very hard to get early wonders, you must make a beeline for one very soon and it is still ify. I have the AI beat me by 1 turn often. But you don't need them anyway. In the middle ages you should be beating the AI to wonders. I get lots of leaders as I war the whole time, so rush em. Colosus is the one ealry that they do not always get after right away, maybe they do not have a coastal city yet. I do not worry about research for sometime as it takes so long, I set to 40 turns until I am able to catch up to the AI.

[Quasar1011]

I think the science city concept in Civ 3 is weaker than it was in Civ 2. Yes, building the Observatory and Newton's College are still useful, but I find that having the literacy rating of your Civ being #1 to be most effective. The cultural effect of libraries and universities not only expands your borders, but helps you out in the tech race. Early exploration for goody huts is also essential.
Civ 3 certainly requires you to develop new strategies than used in Civ 2.
-Daryl

[planetfall]

As quasar mentioned, goodie huts are extremely important in early game and AI will try to out race you when you approach a good hut.

If available, try horsemen. Although in one game horseman did not trigger goodie hut response. By time warrior got there, the hut was gone.

bug? feature? your call

I have not heard of the SC concept. I will have to test it out. Interesting, may still be effective. I don't know about earlier versions of civ as civ3 is my first civ game.

[barefootbadass]

SC is better in civ 3 than civ 2. In civ 2 you only needed colossus to make more from your caravans and with caravans you could get 1 tech a turn even in fundamentalism with minimal science and WLTKD(to boost trade to the level of democracy). In civ 3 you don't have caravans so it is actually useful, for the tech, and for the culture.

Colossus is the only wonder I build myself in early ancient without a leader(which means the second leader), I start others, but usually to switch to later ones or to switch to my FP or heroic epic if I run out of wonders. This is on emperor, haven't played deity yet. Colossus is very easy to get, and the science wonders make it even sweeter.

[planetfall]

Huh, have to check civ3 help again.

I have for colussus features:
cost == 200
culture == +3 in city
effect == +1 each gold producing tile in city

I don't see anything about science.

My list of science increasers is:
library 100%
research lab 100%
university 100%
copernicus 100%
newtons U 100%
SETI 100%

Is my reference sheet incorrect, or am I missing something???

thanks

[KithrupFugitive]

I think the Colossus does have a positive impact on science because commerce is divided between research spending and taxes. So if you have more money coming in due to the effect of the Colossus, then you are more likely to be able to set the research slider higher without causing your treasury to go into a deficit situation and/or more money going toward research for any given research spending slider level (as compared to what your research spending would be without calculating extra commerce generated by Colossus).

[mengo76]

The Science City strategy has definitley been "balanced" (or "nerfed", if you're one of those whiny ppl... ). Mainly because the science wonders are additive and not mulitplicative (i.e. 2 of them triple science output, not quadruple), and because beakers from scientist specialists are not affected by wonders or even libraries.

It still does make sense to put all the science wonders in one city, if that city is the one with the most commerce (after corruption). But sometimes you may build Copernicus in your capital because it's the best place, but then another city becomes better (e.g. if it builds the Forbidden Palace), so that would become a better location for Newton.

And as for the scientist specialists, useless of course. And so are the taxmen for that matter. So if you're not looking for the population to drive up your score, it makes a lot of sense to mine all your terrain, just irrigate enough to keep your city at size 20.

Because of the lesser power of a Science City, you need to develop your research throughout your empire. And the culture you'll get is an added bonus. Use a scientific civ if you think it's too expensive to build uni's in all your cities, it helps (although not with maintenance )

[planetfall]

Interesting, the only effect I had noticed from sci specialists is a slight increase in "score". This means it doesn't make any sense to have sci specialists in SC.

Guess I need to play 2 saved games and in one make 2 specialists in 10 cities and run for 10 turns, recording resources and costs at each turn and doing the same with no specialists. I would think with 20 specialists it would be clear if there is any positive effect in civ3.

Unless you know of some note or thread which already discusses this idea.

[solo]

All science is based on your total commerce, so since the Colossus adds commerce, it also boosts science.

Many things in CivIII make its version of a SSC quite weaker than the CivII counterpart. In CivIII, with all science improvements and wonders, total beakers at 100% science peaks out at around the 300 level, even with a favorable city site. A comparable city in CivII would put out 4 to 5 times as many beakers.

Why are CivIII SSC's so much weaker? Lack of superhighways is a factor, as is the lack of extra commerce from trade routes and the roads and railroads based upon them. The science improvements and wonders are weaker, too. For example, a city producing 100 beakers in CivII will add another 100 after Copernicus is built, effectively doubling the effect of libraries and universities. Not so in CivIII, since the doubling effect of the wonder is only used on total commerce (which is the base beaker rate from which extra beakers from improvements and wonders are calculated) instead of total beakers.

As mentioned above, other CivIII design features weaken the effect of a SSC even more, such as the 4 turn cap on research rates and a more competitive AI.

[planetfall]

I have not heard about the 4 turn cap. I know the AI is stronger, but doesn't mean much to me as I have no civII habits to unlearn.

Does this mean the 100% improvement only lasts for 4 turns? If so, what a handicap.

[KithrupFugitive]

Originally posted by planetfall
I have not heard about the 4 turn cap. I know the AI is stronger, but doesn't mean much to me as I have no civII habits to unlearn.

Does this mean the 100% improvement only lasts for 4 turns? If so, what a handicap.

This is actually a reference to the fact that no matter how many scientific buildings and wonders you have and where your research slider is positioned no tech can be researched in under 4 turns.

Rather than a cap, I think of it as a floor

[SanPellegrino]

"I think the science city concept in Civ 3 is weaker than it was in Civ 2. " Quasar 1011

"SC is better in civ 3 than civ 2. " barefootbadass

That's very interesting, how opinions vary and everybody seems to use a different style.

To planetfall: kithrup is right, colossus is not "+1 gold" but +1 Commerce which is divided in tax, lux and science. In Civ3 a SC has the tech output like 3-4 normal "good" cities.

I think it varys on map and empire size a lot, the fewer cities, the more the SC pays off. Last game on large map, I had only 20% beakers in average from my SC, less than 10% in modern age, because I had a lot of well-developed cities. During that game I had to decide to build either magellan or Isaac's in my SC and built Isaac's which proved a big mistake later. I was in tech lead anyway, but had to do a lot of naval warfare.

Also your playing style plays an important role, if you like tech-buying/-brokering, the SC may be useless, but I like achieve a huge lead in tech.

Next game I chose a smaller map, because late game is just too tedious. Emperor, and again, only wonder I was able to get is Colossus, so I will stick to it...

[SanPellegrino]

Originally posted by planetfall
Interesting, the only effect I had noticed from sci specialists is a slight increase in "score". This means it doesn't make any sense to have sci specialists in SC

every specialist adds +1 to either tax, science or lux (look at editor)

[Unregistered]

It's still worth it to try to max out science in general, but I'd say that the ability to build a SSC has been severely curtailed in civIII. Not to say that you shouldn't try, just that there seems to be less incentive to try to build all the science wonders in one high-commerce city.

I also of the opinion that the science & tax specialists are pretty much crap. Just having the citizen working a tile will usually generate at least two gold, that's double what either of these two specialists will do. I mean, really, what's the point of them? Is it mean to be a general comment on the worthiness of these types in general? I can see it for the taxman, but for the scientist? The entertainers are well worth it though.

Anyway, my 2 cents.

[planetfall]

Now I am really confused. What do beaker do,i.e., how do they help you win?

The formula I have for how to get a tech is:



($CostOfTech x $%CivsWithoutTech x $WorldSize) == gold needed to buy tech

With standard constraints:
min: 4 turns
max: 32|40 turns

Numbers I have for some techs:
28 feudalism
32 monotheism
chivalry
36 theology
engineering
music theory

etc


Are beakers mostly for modern era, I haven't finished a game thru the modern era yet. They usually end in early modern era.

I don't see any screen with a count of science, only the beakers for each city on F1, domestic advisor, screen.


thanks

[SanPellegrino]

planetfall, sorry, when it was a bit misleading for you.

commerce = total gold, science, lux.

e. g.: feudalism costs 28. That's a number modified by the things you wrote. let's say feudalism costs 300 "beakers". Yes, these beakers are shown in F1 screen. Your civ produces 50 beakers/turn = you need 6 turns. The more beakers, the better, that's why SC gives you an advantage.

4-turn cap: You don't produce 50 but 150 beakers per turn = 2 turns, but that's not possible, every advance needs at least 4 turns to complete, so you can make your tax rate higher (= less beakers), and discover still in 4 turns.

SC is so good, because a city with already high commerce (Colossus, hopefully river or something) is maxed out for beakers with Science wonders like copernicus- that gives an enormous boost.

English is not my native language and maybe I explained it bad, so feel free to ask again.

[barefootbadass]

One thing to add to the note about the science wonders and improvements being additive on the base beaker count it that the only thing that makes it better than placing them in separate cities is having them all in the city with the most commerce(after corruption). Since colossus can only be in one city that is the ideal place to put the science wonders and the only reason to put them all in that city. Seti program can and should go in a different city if another one has more commerce by then, which is very possible since colossus has expired.

[Thrawn05]

I don't find "science cities" worth it. I set my governers to work on moods and commerence (this helps when pollution strikes at a city, since the computer will put the worker back in place).

I aim for a larger income everyturn, to help fund science in the domestic advisory screen.

[solo]

planetfall,

Beakers are based on commerce, and after being totaled for all cities, they are used in the formula to determine how many turns it takes to learn a tech. Here is an example of how beakers are calculated for one city:

Suppose a city is producing a total of 50 commerce. Without any science improvements and wonders, this translatres into a potential of 50 beakers to be used for research, depending on the science percentage selected on the Domestic Adivisor screen. If science were set to 50% in this city, the total beakers would be 25, half of the 50 beaker potential. Now suppose this city also has a library. Libraries increase science by 50%, so for this city a library could produce up to 25 more beakers. With science set at 100%, this city would put out 75 beakers with a library. Suppose Copernicus were built, too. It would add another 50 beakers to the total, giving 125 beakers for the city with 100% science, 50 coming from commerce, 25 coming from the library and the last 50 coming from the wonder. Of course the beaker contribution for lower science settings would be 12.5 beakers less for each 10% drop.

In CivII, the beaker calculations were cumulative. The city described above would be putting out 150 beakers at 100% science with a library and Copernicus, and adding just a university would boost this total to 200, whereas adding one in CivIII would have given a total of only 150 beakers.

(Edited to correct the comment added at the end about universities, which in either game are just additive)

[planetfall]

Solo: thank you for the explanation with example numbers. Now it is starting to make sense.

Definitely a greater entertainment value than something like simcity. For a new player this game seems more like chess. There are so many different balls being juggled at one time, it takes a bit to learn the necessary play skills to play well. Already figured it will take about a year to learn how to get out of cheiftain level. Definitely beats the boob tube with its current level of smelly garbage programming.

My play style is first fix production and growth modeling and then worry about conquest. I think the key to consistent winning is similar to the simple game Axis and Allies: not winning battles but winning the war production capability race.

Again, thanks for the clearer explanation.

[solo]

I got a message noting one part of my previous post may contain an error, so will insert the jist of it here:

In the last CivII example where a university was added it was suggested that with a base of 50 beakers, a library and university added 50% each to contribute 50 beakers, and that the new total of 100 was doubled by Copernicus for a total of 200, rather than 225.

If true, this would make the library and university beaker contributions additive, with only Copernicus being cumulative, in that example. It's been awhile since playing CivII, so my apologies to any misled by the possible error above.

You are welcome, planetfall, and Axis & Allies used to be my favorite until discovering the Civ series. Have fun learning!

[Platypus]

Planetfall: Absolutely no insult is intended here, but I would recommend against spending too much time perfecting your play on the chieftan level. I fear that you may develop playing habits that make it very difficult to move up to higher levels, since the AI has some serious handicaps at chieftan.

Here's a chart showing how many citizens start out content in each city, what the AI build/advance rate is relative to you, and the bonus you get in barbian combat.

Chieftan: 4 citizens, 200% build/advance rate, 400% barbarian combat bonus
Warlord: 3 citizens, 120% build/advance rate, 200% barbarian combat bonus
Regent: 2 citizens, 100% build/advance rate, 100% barbarian combat bonus
Monarch: 2 citizens, 90% build/advance rate, 50% barbarian combat bonus
Emperor: 1 citizen, 80% build/advance rate, 25% barbarian combat bonus
Deity: 1 citizen, 60% build/advance rate, 0% barbarian combat bonus

This means that it takes AI twice at much effort to build or research anything (compared to you) at the chieftan level. At warload, the AI has to put in 20% more effort than you.

(Some other things change with difficulty, too: Corruption increases with difficulty. The lower the difficulty the more likely you'll get a reward from a goodie hut. Opponents are more leient during negotiations at lower levels. Opponents are less aggressive and less likely to break agreements at lower levels.)

I'd recommend getting one solid win at chieftan, and then moving up to the warlord level. I think that playing at a level where your production abilities are at least moderately close to that of the AI, and thus forcing you to use your human intelligence to beat the AI, will result in more enjoyment for you with the game.

If you have difficulty when moving up a level, take a look at what the AI players are doing differently from you (e.g. founding new cities at a much faster rate during the expansion phase of the game, or creating effective alliances during times of war) and then review the appropriate thread in the strategy forum (or start a new one ), and you should quickly be able to solve the problem and enjoy the new level.

It's true that there are a *lot* of things to learn in Civ, but I think that by reading and using the advice in this forum, you should be able to both play and excel at higher levels, and probably have more fun.

[planetfall]

Good advice, but to have more fun would like the ability to automate workers with the dummies only working on my cities and influence areas and not wandering over to another civ to improve their status.

My plan was to finish game 2 and then apply the patch and start each new game with 2 civs I haven't played with yet. I am limiting games to 3 civs in order to learn more about
each civ's personality before adding more civs to the pile. It might be interesting to add the patch and try the warlord level for game 3.

Yes I have been reading and posting and even started a few posts. Have not finished second game but two AI characterictics bother me:

1. AI initially spits out settlers much faster than would expect. It seems like it does not suffer from hurry production like despots do. {I know "bug" or "cheating", have to learn to live with it as a "balance human intelligence" ploy by firaxis, but still annoying}

2. AI city influence with pop 1-2 extends further than my neighboring city with pop of 6-12 and all culture I could add. This does not make sense. Culture bombs are fun, but starting with a culture border handicap is annoying.

[vmxa1]

I do not think he AI can spit out settlers faster than you (all things equal such as food). At the lowest level you can expand faster than the AI to be first to get 6 cities or more. As you move up they start off with extra units. The editors shows +off + def units and then at highest levels they get type 1 and type 2 units to start (settlers). So if you are playing chief rex like crazy and at the end look at the history and see how fast things go. They seem to get the first 2 cities fast, but after that.....

[SanPellegrino]

Thx Solo for explaining the basic mechanics so well, I know that's not easy.

And thx, platypus, very helpful, a little bit off-topic, but very helpful...

Maybe someone should start a thread about basic game mechanics, would be helpful for newbs and vets.

[planetfall]

SanPellegrino: see thread I started, looking for a basic help sheet.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=41234

Re topic: SC

Since techs are from beakers {yes finally got that, beakers not gold, beakers not gold..},
where is the advantange in have science concentrated in one city rather than spread through out the empire? Isn't there a big danger of having another civ take away all your science by taking the SC?

Also what about the 4 turn floor for tech advances? Is the game changed too much if change floor to 3 or 2 turns? It seems it might be nice to have 100 years to see the effect of longevity, at least once?

thanks

[planetfall]

Platypus-- re chart comment: "This means that it takes AI twice at much effort to build or research anything (compared to you) at the chieftian level. At warload, the AI has to put in 20% more effort than you."


The chart seems to be not the AI rate versus you but your bulld rate vs the AI. It seems like the AI build rate would be:


Citizen Content/city -- AI build|adv vs human -- Human Barbarian Combat bonus


Content AI rates Barb Bonus
Chieftan 4 50% 400%
Warlord 3 80% 200%
Regent 2 100% 100%
Monarch 2 110% 50%
Emperor 1 120% 25%
Deity 1 140% 0%


The chart was more confusing seeing it with the reverse numbers.

[planetfall]

Opps, forgot browsers strip spaces AND php script adds many blank returns. Scroll down.

Difficulty level	Content each city	AI build and tech advance rates	Combat bonus to human vs Barbarian
Chieftan	4	50 %	400 %
Warlord	3	80 %	200 %
Regent	2	100 %	100 %
Monarch	2	110 %	50 %
Emperor	1	120 %	25 %
Deity	1	140 %	0 %