Free-Research Balance Mod

A mod exclusively created for use with Thalassicus' Balance - Combined Modpack (specifically the Balance - Research mod component) limiting Great Scientists and Research Agreements.

Great Scientists yield a limited number of beakers, in general enough to complete a tech until mid-Renaissance but not after. Beakers are determined by number of techs, so deep beelines may not allow complete bulbs even before that; one goal is to help promote wide teching as well as to nerf GSs. Research Agreement are overpowered in my opinion, especially if micromanaged, so their costs have been significantly raised. I wanted a Research Agreement to feel like a rare and special thing - maybe one or two at a time.

Details:

Great Scientists' :c5science: scales with map size, difficulty and game speed, but not advanced starts.
Ten turn cooldown between GS bulbs.
Excess beakers do not overflow.
Formula: ((.35x)^2.55)+450 where x is number of technologies researched.
RA costs: Ancient=200, Classical=300, Medieval=450, Renaissance=600, Industrial=800, Modern=1000, Future=1250.
Great Scientist change is player only. The AI's GSs are unaffected.


Notes:
***Please note the Great Scientist bulb mechanic is changed: Pressing the bulb button will result in beaker investment into the tech being currently researched! Tooltip reflects this, but be warned.;)***

With Alpaca's blessing (and assistance;)), I've taken his Great Scientist modifications from PlayWithMe for general use. Alpaca is responsible for the creation of all GS-related content and Gazebo (creator of the fantastic City-State Diplomacy Mod) for the RA ideas so all praises should be directed to them.:king:
Compatibility: Free-Research is incompatible with Liberation Boost. I haven't yet found issues with anything else. If you have PWM installed (but not enabled) there *might* be some funny business that prevents the capture of workers and settlers - I suggest you move PWM out of the mods folder when using Free-Research. I would assume that any mods which affect GSs' bulbing mechanic would be incompatible. Reports welcome.
There are some small benign unit action changes brought with it from PWM that aren't necessary for this mod, but otherwise have no significant effect. I'm hesitant to delete stuff from the lua files because my understanding of lua is very limited.
If you want to play without the RA changes, delete the CostIncreases.xml file. If you only want to play with the RA changes, delete everything else.


Version History
Version 3 uploaded. Adjusted GS formula slightly to give more beakers in the late game and thus be more worthwhile at that point. Modern and Future era RAs have a greater cost to more closely match tech costs.
Version 2.1 available and seems stable. Now included as a part of Balance - Combined!:D
Version 2 Uploaded, version one was bugged.

Feedback welcome!
Specifically:


How do the beaker amounts feel? Too much, too little or just right? Same with RAs: are the costs appropriate, punitive, inconsequential?
Is there interest in a version that is more applicable for vanilla tech costs? This would require two separate mods, as Balance - Research increases tech costs dramatically, thus use of this mod with vanilla would be much less effective. Though I'd rather not do this, if there's enthusiasm for it I will.



Special thanks to Alpaca, Gazebo and Thalassicus.

I'd like to try this out. How do I install it?

Thanks

Just unzip it and put the file into MyDocuments/My Games/Civilization5/MODS then activate it ingame like you would normally.

Enjoy!

The GS half of this mod becomes an either-or choice with Perkus' Harder Free Tech mod, right?

The GS half of this mod becomes an either-or choice with Perkus' Harder Free Tech mod, right?

I don't think there is any compatibility reason why you couldn't use both together. Early game, Perkus' mod would limit you more, but later when GSs can't complete a tech anyway the effect would be lessened. I haven't tried them together so I'm not sure if the change to GSs' ability would exonerate them from the median tech limitations, let me know.

Keep in mind that both mods affect only the player, so you'd be handicapping yourself pretty severely!

I don't think there is any compatibility reason why you couldn't use both together. Early game, Perkus' mod would limit you more, but later when GSs can't complete a tech anyway the effect would be lessened. I haven't tried them together so I'm not sure if the change to GSs' ability would exonerate them from the median tech limitations, let me know.

Keep in mind that both mods affect only the player, so you'd be handicapping yourself pretty severely!

Yeah, I'm not that good! Perkus' mod works very well, I think - but I like the beaker concept better. My only complaint about HFT was that you had to keep checking until the hard" label" became "free."

Yes, it's simpler here, you just keep the GS fortified until you complete another tech to get more beakers. But in the meantime, you could simply invest the GS right off the bat and hard-tech the rest - it depends on whether you have a bunch of one-offs you can take to make it worthwhile.

I'm thinking that maybe a better way to balance RA's, rather than just increasing cost per era is by either:
1) Limiting the amount of RA's you can have at one time so you can't just have simultaneous agreements with everyone but have to choose.
2)Increasing waiting time of subsequent agreements to mature (i.e first one gives a tech after 30 turns, 2nd takes 35 etc...)
3) Increasing waiting time between signing RA's. (i.e have to wait 5 turns after signing the first RA to sign the second, 10 turns before the third etc...)

Or some combination of the three.
Not sure how feasible any of these are froma modding perspective but I think there needs to be some mechanism to create a trade-off between mass Research agreements as opposed to only having a few.

I'm thinking that maybe a better way to balance RA's, rather than just increasing cost per era is by either:
1) Limiting the amount of RA's you can have at one time so you can't just have simultaneous agreements with everyone but have to choose.
2)Increasing waiting time of subsequent agreements to mature (i.e first one gives a tech after 30 turns, 2nd takes 35 etc...)
3) Increasing waiting time between signing RA's. (i.e have to wait 5 turns after signing the first RA to sign the second, 10 turns before the third etc...)

Or some combination of the three.
Not sure how feasible any of these are froma modding perspective but I think there needs to be some mechanism to create a trade-off between mass Research agreements as opposed to only having a few.

All of these suggestions make some sense if the goal is balance. At this point Seek is basically trying to limit RA's to being rare occurrences. This is obviously subjective, and we'll see how people respond to the current version. I never liked the idea of giving gold even more importance, or the randomness of the system, or the fact that enemies still engaged in it, or how it had a "rich get richer" aspect to it. So for now I'm enjoying experimenting with a major nerf.

In my first game I've noticed that the AI's tech pace has slowed down, so that I have basically stayed even on Immortal using a NC start, all the way to 500 AD or so. In this sense it's been a net benefit to me, although I expect that to change as the game moves into the later stages and I have more gold that could have been spent on multiple RA's.

The problem is research agreements are almost unmoddable. You can't even change their duration without changing the overall deal duration, only their cost. I would remove them but right now they're almost the only reason why it makes sense to stay on good terms with the AI so I'm not sure that would be beneficial, all things considered.

The problem is research agreements are almost unmoddable. You can't even change their duration without changing the overall deal duration, only their cost. I would remove them but right now they're almost the only reason why it makes sense to stay on good terms with the AI so I'm not sure that would be beneficial, all things considered.

There's certainly no net benefit to Friendship. Good terms with the AI means better exchanges trading luxuries, the ability to sign RA's, and to steer them against each other. It really is a shame.

I'm later in my first game with this mod, and have more gold than usual - enough that I just made 2 or 3 RA's around turn 200. I could have done more, but the AI was lower in gold than usual, or at least compared to what the going rate for an RA was.

BobbyBoy: Good ideas for sure, but unfortunately there's not much else that can be done, as Alpaca pointed out. Right now (as far as I can tell) there are three things that are moddable for RAs:

Duration of wait time: Thal has RAs last 30 turns instead of 20 in Balance - Research.
Cost by era: What this mod does. AFAIK there are no other options that are available to modify cost; a dynamic one like what you suggested would be great.
RESEARCH_AGREEMENTS_MOD in GlobalDefines: I haven't been able to find out what this does and messing around with it hasn't yielded anything noticeable whatsoever.


*Alpaca, do you know anything about #3?*

The method used here is hardly ideal, but in conjunction with Bal - Research it does solve some of the issues with RAs that Txurce mentioned. (The costincrease.xml is really easy to modify, so if the costs feel too harsh feel free to lower them.)
____________

@Txurce - Playing with this mod, I've found myself gifting a lot more gold to the AI so as to get RAs with them - so it can be more of a nerf to the player than would be immediately apparent. It makes RAs cost more, obviously, but it's a risk since you don't know if the AI will further demand even more gold on top of that. Do the costs seem fair so far?

@Txurce - Playing with this mod, I've found myself gifting a lot more gold to the AI so as to get RAs with them - so it can be more of a nerf to the player than would be immediately apparent. It makes RAs cost more, obviously, but it's a risk since you don't know if the AI will further demand even more gold on top of that. Do the costs seem fair so far?

I just mentioned over on another thread that my assumption that RA's had been all but eliminated turned out wrong. I built more TP's than usual, had more gold than usual, and could afford to have multiple RA's from about the 1/3 mark on. However, the AI often didn't have the gold, so in reality I only made 2 or 3 RA's by 1600. How did that seem? Amazingly, just right. It was something I had to weigh, and then find a partner for, as opposed to just spamming them.

I'll let you know how the next game goes. The GS mod also felt right, and I subjectively prefer a beaker approach to the turn-based HFT approach. They're pretty similar, though.

So... thanks for this, Seek - and of course, Alpaca.

That's great to hear, thanks for the feedback, Txurce!:)

After messing around with it all evening, I finally set the RESEARCH_AGREEMENT_MOD value crazy high, and I figured out that it gives :c5science: per turn! Exciting indeed, however entries in GlobalDefines only have one value and giving a value here *doesn't* negate the free tech at the end of the RA, so I'm not sure how useful it is. Maybe one of the supermodders around here could do something with lua? The amount of :c5science: scaled by 5 in the early eras, I'll have to test it more to see if it increases at a greater rate later.
If it doesn't, one possibility could be to:

Move the RA unlock back to Education or Astronomy or maybe even Scientific Theory.
Increase RA prices still more, especially the earliest. Hmm, if it were unlocked at SciTheo, with a high starting RA cost it may not even have to scale by era since it would be so late.
Possibly increase the later techs' costs a bit more.

Thoughts?

Yes I think the RA mod is the old implementation when it still yielded a science bonus instead of a free tech.

Can you change the duration of an RA without changing the duration of other deals?

I finally set the RESEARCH_AGREEMENT_MOD value crazy high, and I figured out that it gives :c5science: per turn! The amount of :c5science: scaled by 5 in the early eras, I'll have to test it more to see if it increases at a greater rate later.
If it doesn't, one possibility could be to:

Move the RA unlock back to Education or Astronomy or maybe even Scientific Theory.
Increase RA prices still more, especially the earliest. Hmm, if it were unlocked at SciTheo, with a high starting RA cost it may not even have to scale by era since it would be so late.
Possibly increase the later techs' costs a bit more.

Thoughts?

Again, in my opinion the mod seems balanced right now, in that it made RA's about half as likely to occur. But is the RA still OP? Not in the early game for the human player, since he usually doesn't have that much gold. Later in the game the RA still has the potential to be a dominant strategy, and the goal should be to make it less so.

I really like the idea of making an RA more credible by unlocking it later in the game, and raising those costs somewhat would reduce it to a late-game bonus, rather than prime strategy. If this is the goal, it seems worth trying.

Yes I think the RA mod is the old implementation when it still yielded a science bonus instead of a free tech.

Can you change the duration of an RA without changing the duration of other deals?

Your statement got me curious, and apparently the RESEARCH_AGREEMENT_TIMER has no effect!:confused: That's a shame.

Again, in my opinion the mod seems balanced right now, in that it made RA's about half as likely to occur. But is the RA still OP? Not in the early game for the human player, since he usually doesn't have that much gold. Later in the game the RA still has the potential to be a dominant strategy, and the goal should be to make it less so.

I really like the idea of making an RA more credible by unlocking it later in the game, and raising those costs somewhat would reduce it to a late-game bonus, rather than prime strategy. If this is the goal, it seems worth trying.

I'll experiment with it and if I can get something that feels right, I'll put up a dev version. I do want to live with the regular version for a while. I like the idea of pushing back the unlock too, so I'll give that a shot without the RA_Mod added in as well.

Your statement got me curious, and apparently the RESEARCH_AGREEMENT_TIMER has no effect!:confused: That's a shame.



I'll experiment with it and if I can get something that feels right, I'll put up a dev version. I do want to live with the regular version for a while. I like the idea of pushing back the unlock too, so I'll give that a shot without the RA_Mod added in as well.

I thought so, hence I asked.

The unlock sounds like a good fit for Scientific Theory or even a modern tech. You don't want it at education, that's already good enough imo

I cannot find anywhere outside the .dll the location of where the game actually rewards the free tech. I have played with the RA mod in the past, given that the original RA for Civ V was supposed to be a 15% science boost.

I thought so, hence I asked.

The unlock sounds like a good fit for Scientific Theory or even a modern tech. You don't want it at education, that's already good enough imo

Agreed. Plus I think it'll give a neat "scientific revolution" feeling. I was able to mod the move in just fine, but I can't figure out how to get the bonus-ability star off of Philosophy. Is there an easy way to do this?

@Sneaks
Please let me know if you find out how to get rid of the free tech.

I cannot find anywhere outside the .dll the location of where the game actually rewards the free tech. I have played with the RA mod in the past, given that the original RA for Civ V was supposed to be a 15% science boost.

I don't think you can change that behaviour. Lua is unfortunately unable to remove items from existing deals or cancel deals, so it's not possible to end the RA before time, either. Maybe there is another way but I haven't been able to cook one up, which is why I wrote RAs are almost unmoddable at the moment.

The star should automatically move once you change where ResearchAgreementTradingAllowed sits.

I don't think you can change that behaviour. Lua is unfortunately unable to remove items from existing deals or cancel deals, so it's not possible to end the RA before time, either. Maybe there is another way but I haven't been able to cook one up, which is why I wrote RAs are almost unmoddable at the moment.

Pretty much. My only thought process would be unfollowable by the AI which would be to active Trade Agreements, hide RAs, and run a background script that removed the gold the TA was granting and adding research. I suppose if the TA is given RA flavors, it might follow.

Does the TA deal work? I've seen some traces but never played around with it. Might be worth giving it a try. Scripting it would be possible using the Team:IsHasTradeAgreement(team2) function

The star should automatically move once you change where ResearchAgreementTradingAllowed sits.

That's what I was expecting, but now it shows at both techs. The tooltip says Philosophy also, but that's no surprise.

My thought about RAs is like a targeted form of Afforess's Tech Diffusion... split a % of combined research 50/50 between both RA partners. It'd roll that concept into RAs and prevent the RA switch-tech exploit.

If anyone can figure out a way to get rid of the free tech, I'd be eager to help to code the rest to at least give it a try. :beer:

Free tech removal appears to be impossible at the moment. You would probably need to make a network call to the dll after the turn timer hits 1 and cancel it.

I just finished another game with FR and the dev Balance mods. I had more gold than usual as a result, and maintained a steady stream of RA's from the mid-game on (although less than pre-FR). The GS nerf seems stronger than Harder Free Tech late in the game. Is it too much? I would say so not from a GP balancing perspective, but from a "fun" one. To have a late-game 7-turn tech reduced by 3, for example, feels underwhelming... sorta like "That's all I get for a GP being born?"

I just finished another game with FR and the dev Balance mods. I had more gold than usual as a result, and maintained a steady stream of RA's from the mid-game on (although less than pre-FR). The GS nerf seems stronger than Harder Free Tech late in the game. Is it too much? I would say so not from a GP balancing perspective, but from a "fun" one. To have a late-game 7-turn tech reduced by 3, for example, feels underwhelming... sorta like "That's all I get for a GP being born?"

It was very difficult to adjust the curve so that:


Early tech costs were always lower than available beakers.
Beakers for mid to late-mid techs did not follow the curve of cost increase too closely. Ie, I didn't want bulbing results to be just below fully teching for an extended period of the game.
Late game GSs don't seem useless.

Given that the early game is much more important, my priorities were eventually to get 1 and 2 right and disregard 3. Additional rational would be that A) if it's a close game those three turns you saved could make a difference, B) if it's not who cares;) and C) Other GP could be more useful at that point regardless (GA or GM for Golden Age, GE for wonder).

But if you want to be a guinea pig, open the GreatPeople.xml and change the FreeBeakersBase to "475", the FreeBeakersCoefficient to ".25" and the FreeBeakersExponent to "2.95"; it'll result in a steeper curve during lategame. See (and please let me know) how it plays, especially in the middle game because that's where small changes to the curves will be most felt.

Since Great Engineers complete about half a wonder in the late game, I think GSs completing half a tech has precedent.

On a side note, to help maintain the value of GP in the late game I have something on my todo list: adding a second tier of GP improvement enhancements in the modern era, increasing their values by 50% on top of the 50% boost at the start of the Industrial Revolution (cumulative 100%). I'm holding off on experimenting with that until after the next public release.

It was very difficult to adjust the curve so that:


Early tech costs were always lower than available beakers.
Beakers for mid to late-mid techs did not follow the curve of cost increase too closely. Ie, I didn't want bulbing results to be just below fully teching for an extended period of the game.
Late game GSs don't seem useless.

Given that the early game is much more important, my priorities were eventually to get 1 and 2 right and disregard 3. Additional rational would be that A) if it's a close game those three turns you saved could make a difference, B) if it's not who cares;) and C) Other GP could be more useful at that point regardless (GA or GM for Golden Age, GE for wonder).

But if you want to be a guinea pig, open the GreatPeople.xml and change the FreeBeakersBase to "475", the FreeBeakersCoefficient to ".25" and the FreeBeakersExponent to "2.95"; it'll result in a steeper curve during lategame. See (and please let me know) how it plays, especially in the middle game because that's where small changes to the curves will be most felt.

Thanks for the comprehensive explanation. I agree that it's not a problem. But for the sake of experimentation, I just adjusted the numbers as per your suggestion, will play with them along with TBM dev v22, and report back.

in CivV 1.0.1.167 and Mod version 2.1 unit panel disappears.

Thanks for letting me know - I haven't gotten the update yet.

in CivV 1.0.1.167 and Mod version 2.1 unit panel disappears.

Seems like the order of files listed in <Files> section of .modinfo is important: i simply moved <File md5="155E43834C7767803378678E974CD312" import="1">lib.lua</File> to the first place, and anything seems to be ok now.

<Files>
<File md5="155E43834C7767803378678E974CD312" import="1">lib.lua</File>
<File md5="F0997CE527AAFA5203233D68BF892C99" import="1">ActionIcons.lua</File>
<File md5="BE7F281C7006ACFBC79AF1F083E5CFB8" import="0">CostIncreases.xml</File>
<File md5="12D0D9DE021FDCDFEE267E87E3B31B89" import="1">CustomMissionHandler.lua</File>
<File md5="8D7DD525FEB13E8AA855F98CB6A57C08" import="1">DiscoverMission.lua</File>
<File md5="51A27E2F8DEDE2BD55E0C67DAA3B8D7F" import="0">GP_Texts.xml</File>
<File md5="5C60B4638EA78E44A3EFE7A0D34B67E8" import="0">GreatPeople.xml</File>
<File md5="F8A572ABCCC0B4BFBD022B8F4301D23B" import="0">Missions.xml</File>
<File md5="0AAD33E5847E715469D845A0052C94F2" import="1">SaveUtils.lua</File>
<File md5="7C3F55B5E6B4AF7C8075C6BEB10B4D22" import="1">UnitPanel.lua</File>
<File md5="36167195FE9B2AA584FCDC9587BA0C74" import="1">XMLTableUpdate.sql</File>
</Files>

Seems like the order of files listed in <Files> section of .modinfo is important: i simply moved <File md5="155E43834C7767803378678E974CD312" import="1">lib.lua</File> to the first place, and anything seems to be ok now.

<Files>
<File md5="155E43834C7767803378678E974CD312" import="1">lib.lua</File>
<File md5="F0997CE527AAFA5203233D68BF892C99" import="1">ActionIcons.lua</File>
<File md5="BE7F281C7006ACFBC79AF1F083E5CFB8" import="0">CostIncreases.xml</File>
<File md5="12D0D9DE021FDCDFEE267E87E3B31B89" import="1">CustomMissionHandler.lua</File>
<File md5="8D7DD525FEB13E8AA855F98CB6A57C08" import="1">DiscoverMission.lua</File>
<File md5="51A27E2F8DEDE2BD55E0C67DAA3B8D7F" import="0">GP_Texts.xml</File>
<File md5="5C60B4638EA78E44A3EFE7A0D34B67E8" import="0">GreatPeople.xml</File>
<File md5="F8A572ABCCC0B4BFBD022B8F4301D23B" import="0">Missions.xml</File>
<File md5="0AAD33E5847E715469D845A0052C94F2" import="1">SaveUtils.lua</File>
<File md5="7C3F55B5E6B4AF7C8075C6BEB10B4D22" import="1">UnitPanel.lua</File>
<File md5="36167195FE9B2AA584FCDC9587BA0C74" import="1">XMLTableUpdate.sql</File>
</Files>

What file is .modinfo in? I can't find it.

I just tested it and didn't have any problems with the unit panel with the .167 patch. If the problem extends to a lot of you I will update the mod so people let me know!

Txurce: The ModInfo file has the same name as the mod - "Free-Research Balance Mod (v2.1)"

Ah,ok, i was wrong with my solve suggestion: i didn't knew i need to enable every mod again after i modified any file in it.

So, the problem is still there:

Runtime Error: [string "C:\Users\MYUSERNAME\Documents\My Games\Sid Meier..."]:36: attempt to call global 'class' (a nil value)
Runtime Error: Error loading C:\Users\MYUSERNAME\Documents\My Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 5\MODS\Free-Research Balance Mod (v 2.1)\CustomMissionHandler.lua.

Runtime Error: [string "Assets/UI/InGame/WorldView/UnitPanel.lua"]:157: attempt to index field 'CustomMission' (a nil value)
Runtime Error: [string "Assets/UI/InGame/WorldView/UnitPanel.lua"]:157: attempt to index field 'CustomMission' (a nil value)
Runtime Error: [string "Assets/UI/InGame/WorldView/UnitPanel.lua"]:157: attempt to index field 'CustomMission' (a nil value)

- i'm getting this in Lua Console@Firaxis Live Tuner. For some reason these errors don't appear in Lua.log


[ADDED]
I've done some more tests and located one of the bugs:
If both of Liberation boost (v 1.11) and Free-Research Balance Mod (v 2.1) are installed, i'm getting
Runtime Error: [string "C:\Users\MYUSERNAME\Documents\My Games\Sid Meier..."]:37: attempt to call global 'class' (a nil value)
Runtime Error: Error loading C:\Users\MYUSERNAME\Documents\My Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 5\MODS\Free-Research Balance Mod (v 2.1)\CustomMissionHandler.lua.
Runtime Error: [string "Assets/UI/InGame/WorldView/UnitPanel.lua"]:157: attempt to index field 'CustomMission' (a nil value)

in console.

Ok, yeah that's a known incompatibility - the only one I've come across in fact. It's mentioned in the first post. I had actually just come on to ask what other mods you're using!:lol:

Ok, yeah that's a known incompatibility - the only one I've come across in fact. It's mentioned in the first post. I had actually just come on to ask what other mods you're using!:lol:

And I just came here to report the mentioned incompatibility.

Is there any way to reconcile both mods and prevent the incompatibility? I think both are must haves.

Ok, yeah that's a known incompatibility - the only one I've come across in fact. It's mentioned in the first post. I had actually just come on to ask what other mods you're using!:lol:

:) i just looked at the log, and saw some errors loding this mod files, and thought i've found the problem.... And the incompatibility with liberationboost looks more like a CivV bug: the whole mod is just 1 lua-file, with just one event-registration, so there's no reason, why should it break anything...

:) i just looked at the log, and saw some errors loding this mod files, and thought i've found the problem.... And the incompatibility with liberationboost looks more like a CivV bug: the whole mod is just 1 lua-file, with just one event-registration, so there's no reason, why should it break anything...

I expect it has something to do with the custom missions? But lua is not my string suit so I'm not sure how to resolve the issue.. If anyone has a suggestion please let me know.

I also updated the first post to make the incompatibility with Lib Boost more prominent.

If you ask the creator of that mod and get permission, I could do the work of merging the two files for you and we could include both in the modpack. :)

The creator might prefer to keep their mod independent, which would be completely understandable too, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

If you ask the creator of that mod and get permission, I could do the work of merging the two files for you and we could include both in the modpack. :)

The creator might prefer to keep their mod independent, which would be completely understandable too, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

That would be great - I missed this mod, as well as Tech Diffusion.

That would be great - I missed this mod, as well as Tech Diffusion.

Is there a conflict with Tech Diffusion as well?

Is there a conflict with Tech Diffusion as well?

I think TD was never updated to work with the patch. Sneaks asked Afforess about it on the thread. Afforess seemed to imply that people were welcome to use it without further permission.

I could sit down and look through tech diffusion after I'm done with the building tooltips. :)

I could sit down and look through tech diffusion after I'm done with the building tooltips. :)

Excellent!

having just found this mod i just want to say at 180% science cost for modern age 1k gold modern techs is still a pretty big bargain imo. Industrial to modern jump is 40% more science on already costly techs, but is only a 200 gold jump, while Renaissance to Industrial is the same, but tech cost isn't.

Also i read beaker overflow is removed, reason behind that change? micromanaging techs was painful pre december patch & i had to do it to be efficient, beaker overflow is necessary & good change with december patch. :)

having just found this mod i just want to say at 180% science cost for modern age 1k gold modern techs is still a pretty big bargain imo. Industrial to modern jump is 40% more science on already costly techs, but is only a 200 gold jump, while Renaissance to Industrial is the same, but tech cost isn't.

Also i read beaker overflow is removed, reason behind that change? micromanaging techs was painful pre december patch & i had to do it to be efficient, beaker overflow is necessary & good change with december patch. :)

I'll try out more expensive RAs for the modern era and see how it feels - 1000G has seemed like a fair amount so far. If you want to test a larger number also, open the CostIncrease.xml and adjust the entry for modern era. It's really easy, and I'd love to hear your feedback.:)

Beakers from Great Scientists' "discover technology" ability do not overflow, the overflow from hard-teching works as normal.

******
@Thal- I sent smellymummy a pm a couple days ago but haven't heard back yet in re Liberation Boost. Will let you know if/when he does.

@spfun
The reason alpaca/seek didn't include overflow is the beakers from 1 great scientist could potentially give 3-5 free techs if it overflowed.

@Seek
You can send him another message that it's simply a matter of changing from InGame.xml to modbuddy "Content" tab method of including lua files, that alone should solve the problem without any need to merge. I included this fix in the latest combined download:

I finally sat down and looked at the Liberation Boost mod, and realized why it doesn't work. It uses the InGame.xml method for activating Lua files, from the days before we learned how to include lua with the 'content' section of ModBuddy. I still had that InGame.xml file in my utilities mod, which is unnecessary now, so I removed it and Liberation Boost will probably work now.It looks like Tech Diffusion is the exact same thing, simply uses the old ingame.xml method.

I corrected these two mods, also fixed the erroneous worker-turns bug in HoverInfo, and included all these in the download for .11 beta. They should work though I haven't tested them yet.

@spfun
The reason alpaca/seek didn't include overflow is the beakers from 1 great scientist could potentially give 3-5 free techs if it overflowed.

Indeed. As to why I consider that a problem, it's not so great when you pop out a beeline with a single great scientist in the early game. That problem could be solved by adjusting the beaker values more directly but capping the scientist to "finish this tech at the max" is the way I chose to go (it has precedent from Civ4 so it's not new for a lot of people). I might reconsider that stance in the future, though, as adjusting the beaker value feels more natural somehow.

Elsewhere, Frozensky proposed that RA's should give you the tech with the lowest amount of beakers still needed. If this could be implemented, it would not only get rid of the one-turn exploit, but also solve the basic issue by lowering the value of RA's to a level where they wouldn't serve as slingshots, and wouldn't need to be overpriced. Have you considered this?

I think that solution is too far in the other direction.

Elsewhere, Frozensky proposed that RA's should give you the tech with the lowest amount of beakers still needed. If this could be implemented, it would not only get rid of the one-turn exploit, but also solve the basic issue by lowering the value of RA's to a level where they wouldn't serve as slingshots, and wouldn't need to be overpriced. Have you considered this?

If someone has figured out another method of dealing with RAs, I will happily consider it. At the moment there doesn't seem to be any way with the current tools to deal with it other than how it's done here - I freely admit it's not ideal by any means.

On another note, I'm considering using the alternate formula for GS beakers that we were discussing a while back* - if there's any reason not to implement it, let me know! I've done a few tests with it and the beaker amount has still met all my criteria. Also under consideration is making RAs in the modern and future eras more expensive - opinions welcome.

*Post 29 on the previous page.

If someone has figured out another method of dealing with RAs, I will happily consider it. At the moment there doesn't seem to be any way with the current tools to deal with it other than how it's done here - I freely admit it's not ideal by any means.

On another note, I'm considering using the alternate formula for GS beakers that we were discussing a while back* - if there's any reason not to implement it, let me know! I've done a few tests with it and the beaker amount has still met all my criteria. Also under consideration is making RAs in the modern and future eras more expensive - opinions welcome.

*Post 29 on the previous page.

Unfortunately no one else has figured anything out - they just have interesting ideas they hope someone like you might implement!

I like the approach of that earlier GS discussion.

Version 3 uploaded.

Adjusted GS formula slightly to give more beakers in the late game and thus be more worthwhile at that point.

Modern and Future era RAs greater cost to more closely match tech costs.

Version 3 uploaded.

Adjusted GS formula slightly to give more beakers in the late game and thus be more worthwhile at that point.

Modern and Future era RAs greater cost to more closely match tech costs.

Great. I just started a game with BC v20, so I'll upgrade yours right away.

EDIT: I immediately got a runtime error. Is this because I switched mid-game, or for some other reason?

EDIT: Regardless the game wouldn't run again with either version. I just started a game with v3, and it's running fine.

The game's really weird about that... even if only a few variables are adjusted, sometimes it's possible continue, other times it errors out.