 |
|  |
 |
|
Sixty_four
|
|
Chicago
Nov 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
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.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
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
|
|
Laguna Hills, CA
Nov 2001 time: 21:16
|
|
quote: 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"!?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
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......
Attachment: 3turns.jpg
This has been downloaded 247 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Weldon
|
|
Laguna Hills, CA
Nov 2001 time: 21:16
|
|
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.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
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
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Weldon
|
|
Laguna Hills, CA
Nov 2001 time: 21:16
|
|
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
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16. Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|