24-03-2000 07:28									#1
	Money Management vs. Scientific Progress Remove this text

Usually I find myself adjusting my Tax/Science levels frequently. One thing I've taken to doing is putting the taxes up high for a while until I build up a nice little sum of money, then hauling way back and letting science pretty well take over.

I'm wondering, though, whether it's best to do this, or to set things so you have a little bit more money coming in every year than you spend?

Or is this just one of those things where you do what feels better to you?

Jim W

	24-03-2000 07:59									#2
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I usually set science to the max out level.
There are a few times I might increase taxes if I know a couple of extra bucks might buy me that "special wonder" before somebody else... but science is the key to winning.

Money can be generated through trade routes, barbarian kings, tribute (if playing against an ai) Those marketplaces and other improvements really help. If you focus on trade arrows vs shields or food, money and science won't be a problem

	24-03-2000 08:27									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

science comes along too fast. it's kinda ok in SP but people know how to play so well much of the game is passed up. I've *never* been attacked by a large army, heck, I've never really been attacked beyond the one or two unit chance meetings. I've played Rah, Xin, Ming, Matt, Toad... many others. I've been done in for sure - always with diplos.

I play with a small group now (not anyone from here). There is a setting in the rules.txt which slows down the rate at which sciences are discovered. It slows the pace of techs a bit (the game is as slow as every anyway), but it also forces you to spend a little on units and defense instead of just going all out %110 on science. It gives the person with good production sqaures a chance to build an army to counter the person with good trade sqaures. I think it levels the playing field.