Micromanagement is alive and well in Civ 4!

Mutineer, granted, in CIV, beakers from specialists are used in the research process BUT my point is that binary science has no (or minimal) impact on their usage. Thus, the beakers from specialists can be ignored if you are comparing difference research sliders and / or different binary science options.
 
Mutineer said:
Sorry Ruff I just checked my previous post and found it is contain a gross Erro, I corrected it.

But no, breakers from commerce do not treated independently from specialists.

(Beaker due % + beakers from specialists) * (all other effects) *(burocracy effect)

They were independed in previous civ, but no any longer.

Actually, Bureaucracy does NOT affect beakers, Gold, culture from specialists (or buildings like Shrines) it ONLY affects commerce (and so it affects how many Beakers , Gold, etc. you get from the %. (all other effects DO apply to Specialists, Buildings, and Commerce)

The Fact is that for any One city, there are 'ideal levels' of Research, to alternate between. (not necessarily 0, 100, but wherever gives minimal rounding error from bonuses)

However when dealing with one city, there are also roundings from empirewide bonuses (prerequisites+others knowing the tech) So it becomes yet more complicated, and depends on the tech you are researching.

When dealing with multiple cities, the idea is that 0% is always 'ideal' for the research and 100% is always 'ideal' for the gold because there are no rounding errors. That way the rounding errors Only take place when You have that at 100%.

Note: this is ONLY true if you have NO specialists, if you have a city with 1 Scientist and a Library, at 0% science you will be losing ~0.75 research per turn from that city.... so actually it does matter, the more of a specialist economy you are running, the less 0/100% is a safe bet, and its back to calculating each individual city.

So it is Not better in All circumstances, but it is statistically better unless you want to count the commerce in each individual city and figue out the losses at each individual level. (which is the true way MM is alive and well in Civ 4).

Which is why the rounding system causes innumerable problems, that could be solved if they stored even 1 more decimal place... but that's programming efficiency v. game design.
 
Krikkitone said:
The Fact is that for any One city, there are 'ideal levels' of Research, to alternate between. (not necessarily 0, 100, but wherever gives minimal rounding error from bonuses)

So it is Not better in All circumstances, but it is statistically better unless you want to count the commerce in each individual city and figue out the losses at each individual level. (which is the true way MM is alive and well in Civ 4).

Exactly what i was about to say.

Of course at 15 base commerce (any integer that is 4n + 3 is the worst case scenario both for 25% bonus and for 75% bonus), you've got yourself the best example of binary science not working all that well. Add one more commerce to that city by switching just one tile for another (or drop it by 3), and you go from the worst to the best example.

The fact is that over your entire empire, and not just one city, binary science at 0% and 100% is what will work best because this is what will generate the fewest losses at all bonus % and all base commerce, on average.
 
Zombie69 said:
Of course at 15 base commerce (any integer that is 4n + 3 is the worst case scenario both for 25% bonus and for 75% bonus), you've got yourself the best example of binary science not working all that well. Add one more commerce to that city by switching just one tile for another (or drop it by 3), and you go from the worst to the best example.
As I stated, this is only one city and only 1 example. I take it from your comments that you accept the above approach of calculating the commerce wasted via science / gold multipliers. As such, I will move onto putting together this spreadsheet so that people can enter the cities that make up their empire and have it calculate for them the best science slider combination.
 
ruff_hi said:
As I stated, this is only one city and only 1 example. I take it from your comments that you accept the above approach of calculating the commerce wasted via science / gold multipliers. As such, I will move onto putting together this spreadsheet so that people can enter the cities that make up their empire and have it calculate for them the best science slider combination.

It's hard for me to see how such a spreadsheet will be useful. The numbers will change from turn to turn. And, if you want to know the current science and gold output of your civilization at different slider levels, it would be easier to just move the slider and look at your advisor screen to see the result, than to enter the numbers from every city into a spreadsheet.
 
Krikkitone said:
Actually, Bureaucracy does NOT affect beakers, Gold, culture from specialists (or buildings like Shrines) it ONLY affects commerce (and so it affects how many Beakers , Gold, etc. you get from the %. (all other effects DO apply to Specialists, Buildings, and Commerce)

You ofcouse correct.
Formular is
Final breakers =(commerce*Burocracy effect*%sci + Beakers from specialists)*Sum(Building%effect)

I need to stop posting when I am deadly tied.
 
Does anyone know if they fixed the binary science exploit in 1.61? I haven't tried the patch yet (need to finish my current game first).
 
binary science is useless,
you gain nothing from it.

however, micromanagment of every city's income is more useful.
 
I examed the research formula in SDK,
there is no rounding error from research percent setting.
the rounding error comes from building modifer and other thing like other civ knowing this tech or not, BUT NOT the percent.

Yes, I read the thread, and lots of people dont agree the binary science is usful,
and so do I.
 
AngelLeliel said:
there is no rounding error from research percent setting.

True but irrelevant. The benefit has nothing to do with "rounding error from research percent setting".

Yes, I read the thread.

OK, that's all we can ask. You can lead a horse to information, but you can't make him understand it.
 
DaviddesJ said:
True but irrelevant. The benefit has nothing to do with "rounding error from research percent setting".

Please tell me if the binary research is not about the rounding error,
what is the actual benefit?

I can understand trying to preserve gold for future research benefit,
but it doesn't mean binary research is the only way to do it.
 
AngelLeliel said:
Please tell me if the binary research is not about the rounding error, what is the actual benefit?

It's about truncation of fractions when you have library, market, etc. (e.g., city with 10 commerce at 70% research, with library, would generate 1.25*7 = 8.75 beakers, but that's truncated to 8 because fractional beakers are lost). On average, when you're at 0% research or 100% research, you lose less gold+beakers to truncation than if you run at intermediate rates.

This has been explained several times previously in this thread.
 
I wouldn't go that far, to call binary research an exploit.
It is a nice startegy for advanced players, but it is not that uberpowerful to call it an exploit.
It is more about knowing the game mechanics and use them.
 
DaviddesJ said:
This has been explained several times previously in this thread.

but binary research is not the optimized option.
I would rather trying to micromanage city tile for better reslut,
not just stick at binary research.
 
AngelLeliel said:
but binary research is not the optimized option.
I would rather trying to micromanage city tile for better reslut,
not just stick at binary research.

Micromanaging the resource yield of your cities does not mean you cannot run binary science.

One option does not exclude the other one. Do both! That is, if it has not been adjusted with the recent patch.
 
AngelLeliel said:
but binary research is not the optimized option.

That is a totally separate question. Before, you claimed there was no benefit from it, which is false. (You used the word "useless".) Now you say that there are other ways to optimize your output, which is true. But your previous statements are still wrong.
 
I've just added a large section on whipping to the original article. A must read if you don't already abuse pop rushing (and the associated exploit) to the max.
 
Top Bottom