Science, a very common resource

K

Kouvb593kdnuewnd

Left Forever
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
4,146
Well first thing first, I don't know if a tread like this have ever been strated Before however if one has been its probably old and it can be good to here this:)

So now on to this thread:cool:

Now I say this, each tile you work and each specialist you work, even unemployed give you one science however you can't se that on the map.

Building a libery and a public school increase this yield.

Each population Point you got don't give science:confused:

What do this really mean you may wonder.

Well it basicly says science is probably the most or second most gathered resource, however you can't se that because science is a so called invisble resource.

Well what is the difference between getting science from population and getting science like I said.

Their is non however I find it far easier to Think in the way I described above becuse that ties science gathering toghter to other Resources, its just Another way on looking on the same thing.

By thinking like this you will instantly se how common science really are, it may be far harder not to if you Think it that way the game describes it:)
 
You're double counting. Tiles worked has nothing to do with science. It's pop. You can't count it twice.

Food is certainly the most common resource. You get 3 of it in the beginning, most your worked tiles are food, and aqueducts give you 40 percent retention, so each food is actually ~1.6 food when you work out the compounded math. Less bonus than science only by .5. Each pop costs a flat 1 food. So, most cities will have effective food surplus significantly above their science production.

That's just a fact.
 
adwcta said:
You're double counting. Tiles worked has nothing to do with science. It's pop. You can't count it twice.

Food is certainly the most common resource. You get 3 of it in the beginning, most your worked tiles are food, and aqueducts give you 40 percent retention, so each food is actually ~1.6 food when you work out the compounded math. Less bonus than science only by .5. Each pop costs a flat 1 food. So, most cities will have effective food surplus significantly above their science production.

That's just a fact.
Click to expand...

I did not Count it twice, did you read the line:
Each population Point you got don't give science
 
Teproc said:
I'm not sure what the point is. Science is a resource, ok... so ?
Click to expand...

It's a perceptual approach. Like thinking of all your specialists as having one extra :c5food: in their yield after Civil Society. The game trains you to chase these dots so it's helpful to visualize the "extra dots" it does not always show.
 
I like the visualisation concept personally, if you had a farm on a river hill with a Hydro plant that would be 2 food 3 production, but without the visualisation you might view it as 2 food 2 production or something like that. Add the Order tenant that gives more production and you might again be mistaken as to how much it is producing if you don't recall all the bonuses offhand. Why should science be any different?
 
The thing with science is that it is harder to obtain and keep up with the AIs in the later eras without rationalism. One could steal a technology or two one way or the other but sometimes stealing a technology is risky, awkward and causes people to die. If there's another way to keep up with science in the later eras without rationalism, I'd like to hear it because rationalism seems like it has to be a must but it isn't. There must be another way to get more science without the use of rationalism.
 
reddishrecue said:
The thing with science is that it is harder to obtain and keep up with the AIs in the later eras without rationalism. One could steal a technology or two one way or the other but sometimes stealing a technology is risky, awkward and causes people to die. If there's another way to keep up with science in the later eras without rationalism, I'd like to hear it because rationalism seems like it has to be a must but it isn't. There must be another way to get more science without the use of rationalism.
Click to expand...

You can try to get more cities to be able to get cheap population which in turn give you more science:)
 
So that's a possible, rather convoluted way of looking at science. Why?
 
Well, you don't really have to visualize it as a resource yield on the map. I simply look at science as "a resource whose base yield is equal to my empire's population." Which is essentially what it is, so that approach works for me.
 
Denkt said:
You can try to get more cities to be able to get cheap population which in turn give you more science:)
Click to expand...
Unfortunately each city adds 5% to the cost of techs, so later on the cities need to be creating quite a bit of science just to justify you building them
 
elniallo said:
Unfortunately each city adds 5% to the cost of techs, so later on the cities need to be creating quite a bit of science just to justify you building them
Click to expand...

Well I would worry alot more about population then about that penalaty, if you stay with few cities you will nearly allways have less population then having lots of cities.

Also you will probably get more GS if you get more cities because you can not have more then 4 scientists in one city.
 
Hard for me for tiles and number of cities.

To grow, you need food. But you need food to reach next pop number. Grow is a little bit exponential, not linear. So if I can evaluate a food tile, I wonder about hammers. Hammers ensure you fastest building. Also cash. So, it's more questions.

Also, more GS is less GS. Each time a GSappear it delays next one (don't now the math) in other cities. I saw 4 tall cities tend to pop more GS. It's just a feeling. I hadn't play 3 cities a while ago (is it since or for instead ago ?). I wonder maths of GSpop between 3 or 4 cities.

Ok, I'm a beginner. You're point of view is interesting. I just need some arguments to evaluate science per tile. Because you can choose worked tiles, you can choose your science income.

Thanks for this thread. Interesting.
 
Can anyone summarize any sort of point here? I've read over this thread three times and I'm beginning to think I'm in the twilight zone.
 
Abraxis said:
Can anyone summarize any sort of point here? I've read over this thread three times and I'm beginning to think I'm in the twilight zone.
Click to expand...

To tell you all that you can think about science as a resource like food or production that is gained by working tiles and specialist instead of gained just from having population.
 
Denkt said:
To tell you all that you can think about science as a resource like food or production that is gained by working tiles and specialist instead of gained just from having population.
Click to expand...

Do you gain science from unemployed citizens?

The answer is yes, you do.

So no, you can't think about science as a resource from working tiles. It IS just from having population.
 
Chum said:
Do you gain science from unemployed citizens?

The answer is yes, you do.

So no, you can't think about science as a resource from working tiles. It IS just from having population.
Click to expand...

I Count unemployed Citizens as specialist in that chase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
<150 turn science victory on original version of civ 6
Replies
2
Views
1K
ValleTomate
V
C
Struggling to keep up in science
Replies
4
Views
864
Bryan317
Bryan317
KayAU
Which are your favourite civs (in Vox Populi or vanilla)?
Replies
6
Views
3K
Darth Tribble
Darth Tribble
R
Population Based Science
Replies
10
Views
884
justanick
J
MyNameWontFi
Civilization without science
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Kotofei
Kotofei
Top Bottom