No overflow makes them next to worthless IMO. If you don't MM to avoid wasted beakers then if that academy by itself doesn't decrease the time to learn a tech then its not really doing anything. If you do MM then you can work some extra tiles instead of running scientist. I don't MM so I don't know how often a I could get this tech 1 turn sooner if only I had few more beakers per turn situation occurs but probably not often enought to be useful.
Great Scientist: Academy vs Discover Tech
- Thread starter Pragmatic
- Start date
Zechnophobe
Strategy Lich
The math is quite simple. if I bulb an 800 beaker tech, it takes an academy 160 turns of constant use to match it. 80 turns if it is getting +100% science boost from the city.
That is beaker parity. However, even then the bulb is better at 80 turns, since I've had +1 tech for 80 turns.
Civ is an exponential growth game. The value of each turn is greater than the last, so 80 turns out of a 400 turn game is a huge chunk.
Fact is, tech costs keep increasing at a rate that makes Academies never as good as bulbing.
I disagree. You have to count the additional beakers and also discount what the improvement you'd have built on the tile would have provided, probably 2 gold or some production. Also consider that using a scientist specialist, with no special SP, would have given you 2RP and GPP, so just judging beaker output is not sufficient. The additional GPP towards another GS that could bulb means that the output of the academy should be compared to that of using a scientist specialist and when you'll get another GS (and yes, I know, you might not be able to field that specialist since you probably already use all the specialist slots).
So please factor these costs of opportunity in when comparing. An academy only gives you more research at the expense of another improvement, with the possibility of missing on a strategic resource.
Loss of overflow beakers also hurts, but I hope this will be patched someday.
Immediate bulbing also offers some interesting options like being able to build horsemen immediately, or getting open borders sooner allowing meeting more city-states and civs, or allowing RAs sooner depending on the tech...
I prefer getting the tech immediately because it's immediately rewarding, and allows faster beelining with short terms benefits that in my opinion outweight the long term benefits of an academy.
Martin Alvito
Real men play SMAC
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 2,332
With two academies, teching speed to the renaissance is very very fast, backfilling is crazy.
Yes, but if you want to maximize Science, the best use of a GS is bulbing Education. Universities in all of your cities ten turns earlier blows +5 Science per turn out of the water no matter how many times you launder that +5 through buildings.
If you have few cities, bulbing Steel and making some puppets is going to give you a lot more than +5 to your Science, and the benefits will outperform the Academy in the long run as well.
You might even get greater returns than an Academy on an 8 turn GA, if you use the GA on Science infrastructure and you have enough cities.
The amount of Science you receive from an Academy is simply too small. Obviously it doesn't need to return 100/turn to be viable, but it needs to return more than it does.
It should be noted that if you like making Academies, it is in your interest to demand their improvement rather than defend them.
WeaselSlapper
Prince
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 505
In Civ IV I almost never bulbed (especially with my pre-industrial scientists at least), in Civ V I only use my GS to beaker. The simple reason is that planting in Civ IV produced good benefits and no opportunity costs. Normally I would plant my first scientist for the extra science and the free hammer, then use my second for an academy, and plant a few more after that. All this was added to the city so I didn't need high pop to get the benefit and there were no opportunity costs of other improvements. They would add up to a nice boost to science and production in my science city, that would also be a decent commerce city and have some nice production.
The problem with the GS in Civ V is that the +5 science is low and you have opportunity costs of the other improvement. So the academy normally only results in 2-3 more output from the tile than normal, which is not worth it compared to the instant benefit of beakering, and the risk of discovering a resource on that tile later. If they made all GP improvements sit on top of any other tile improvements instead of replacing them I might be inclined to plant some instead of using my Great Scientists for bulbing and all other great people (except for 1-2 generals) for Golden ages. Another thing they need to do is have them increase the amount of science they give later in the game either through policies or techs.
That being said they also need to nurf sling-shotting (I don't necessarily think they need to nerf beakering). As a way to limit the deep slingshot they could add a delay between bulbing like there is for peace treaties (10 turns should be sufficient in a normal speed game). This way you can still get that tech you really want, but you won't be able to get rifles by turn 100 anymore.
The problem with the GS in Civ V is that the +5 science is low and you have opportunity costs of the other improvement. So the academy normally only results in 2-3 more output from the tile than normal, which is not worth it compared to the instant benefit of beakering, and the risk of discovering a resource on that tile later. If they made all GP improvements sit on top of any other tile improvements instead of replacing them I might be inclined to plant some instead of using my Great Scientists for bulbing and all other great people (except for 1-2 generals) for Golden ages. Another thing they need to do is have them increase the amount of science they give later in the game either through policies or techs.
That being said they also need to nurf sling-shotting (I don't necessarily think they need to nerf beakering). As a way to limit the deep slingshot they could add a delay between bulbing like there is for peace treaties (10 turns should be sufficient in a normal speed game). This way you can still get that tech you really want, but you won't be able to get rifles by turn 100 anymore.
eric_
Emperor
I liked the % boost provided by academies in cIV.
What kind of logic is that? The early academy has got an influence on all techs you research before and after the 800 bulb which means that you get all those techs a bit faster, especially the earlier ones ("the value of each turn is greater than the last, you know"
)We're speaking about the early game here. First (+ maybe 2nd) scientist for an acadamy, the rest for bulbing.
So when do we get the first academy?
On emperor, standart settings:
Tech: Pottery, Writing, Mining, Calender etc.
Turn 7: Scout
Turn 21: Worker
Turn 35: Library -> 2 scientists while building a settler at pop 4 (with liberty tree, settler is ready in decent 15 turns)
Turn 52: Academy + 2nd city
Science output: 3
(palace) + 4(population) + 2(library) + 5(academy) = 14 science (theoretically + 6 from 2 specialists but growth and production are more important, imo, depends on the situation).This is a ~50% increase in science which is huge at this stage in the game
In this scenario, the academy is great. Period
1. Bulbing education is quite useless because universities cost too many hammers for your low pop cities.
2. GA on two cities isn't useful. Better use the 2nd great person if you need it.
3. Bulbing military techs is always a possibility but that really depends on the map. If you have enough space to expand, I prefer expansion and infrastructure over a boring horse rush or whatever
stealth_nsk
Deity
But wait, aren't everyone save their scientists for bulbing in later eras, like rifles or something? I think if you settle your first GS, it will give you an equivalent of 1 tech by this time?
Martin Alvito
Real men play SMAC
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 2,332
Wrong. Early Unis are stupid, stupid good. Proof from Deity:
With the Babs, every six turns you delay getting Unis up everywhere costs you a tech in the endgame. Those techs cost 2000 Science and up. You aren't going to make that kind of Science even from a beelined turn 20 Babylonian Academy. The game ends too fast, and the multipliers kick in too late.
The limiting factor on starting the Unis is research, not Hammers, in about half of your cities if you settle appropriate production sites.
Interesting
I don't own the babylon DLC but do you build those universities primarily for the additional scientist slot, so you get your GS even faster to bulb more techs?Because I don't think that the +50% science in every city is worth it with other civs ?!? I don't know ^^
Martin Alvito
Real men play SMAC
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 2,332
I build them for both functions. I rely on the research from Secularism and three Scientists per city to clear the Renaissance. At 400+/turn starting around turn 120 (lesser amounts from 90-120), that doesn't take long. Cities without Unis are about half as efficient, so you need twice as many. Achieving that goal forces some undesirable SP choices, which in turn slows things down even further. Eventually an ICS player catches up and surpasses my Science output by a wide margin, but I'm banking on ending the game before then.
While I research through the Renaissance, I'm storing up 18 points per turn in every city. Since the cap only increases by 100 points every time I pop a GS, this effectively means that I pull a GS every 5-6 turns until every city I have makes a GS.
This will also get you a quick Space win; it just takes a few more turns. I suspect that a pure ICS will get you into space faster, because it makes bigger cities and should in principle build parts faster. On the other hand, I can run continuous GAs to speed parts building, so if I can find an extra twenty turns or so I should be able to outrace Paeanblack into space.
While I research through the Renaissance, I'm storing up 18 points per turn in every city. Since the cap only increases by 100 points every time I pop a GS, this effectively means that I pull a GS every 5-6 turns until every city I have makes a GS.
This will also get you a quick Space win; it just takes a few more turns. I suspect that a pure ICS will get you into space faster, because it makes bigger cities and should in principle build parts faster. On the other hand, I can run continuous GAs to speed parts building, so if I can find an extra twenty turns or so I should be able to outrace Paeanblack into space.
Martin Alvito
Real men play SMAC
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 2,332
This approach is new. I was continuing the rush and puppeting everything before, but the patch ruined my puppets by stripping them of Scientists. In this game, I Warrior rushed England and dropped them while beelining Iron. Then I took some choice dirt away from the Ottomans and resettled it. After that I just hunkered down and played defense.
I suspect that the IW beeline is suboptimal; a tech path more like Paeanblack's is probably indicated. I probably could have seized at least one of the three city sites I took from the Ottomans peacefully if I'd just moved all the way over there to settle.
Hills are very, very important to this approach. You want every city to have at least two Hills available to it so that all can simultaneously build a Colosseum in a decent amount of time. Then growth will enable you to get a library and a Uni up quickly.
I haven't had a chance to try this with other civs yet. You probably would be able to run down the Liberty tree as France, which would mean more cities faster and/or bigger cities. The Romans might also work well if you take bhavv's advice, beeline Metal Casting and build Workshops first. That would also potentially let you get a GE out for the UN. I'm not sure if either of those approaches will compete with a dozen Great Scientists, especially for a Space win, but they might.
You don't get a lot of SPs. In the last game, I got three SPs. You need Rationalism and Secularism. I took Freedom as the third SP, and it was as amazing as you'd expect. My Settler pumps used Food to produce, so Liberty would have been wasted.
If you got enough early culture, you'd want to get to Scientific Revolution for the two free techs. But you'd have to start on that early, because you need it about twenty-five turns before the game ends.
I suspect that the IW beeline is suboptimal; a tech path more like Paeanblack's is probably indicated. I probably could have seized at least one of the three city sites I took from the Ottomans peacefully if I'd just moved all the way over there to settle.
Hills are very, very important to this approach. You want every city to have at least two Hills available to it so that all can simultaneously build a Colosseum in a decent amount of time. Then growth will enable you to get a library and a Uni up quickly.
I haven't had a chance to try this with other civs yet. You probably would be able to run down the Liberty tree as France, which would mean more cities faster and/or bigger cities. The Romans might also work well if you take bhavv's advice, beeline Metal Casting and build Workshops first. That would also potentially let you get a GE out for the UN. I'm not sure if either of those approaches will compete with a dozen Great Scientists, especially for a Space win, but they might.
You don't get a lot of SPs. In the last game, I got three SPs. You need Rationalism and Secularism. I took Freedom as the third SP, and it was as amazing as you'd expect. My Settler pumps used Food to produce, so Liberty would have been wasted.
If you got enough early culture, you'd want to get to Scientific Revolution for the two free techs. But you'd have to start on that early, because you need it about twenty-five turns before the game ends.
Zechnophobe
Strategy Lich
What kind of logic is that? The early academy has got an influence on all techs you research before and after the 800 bulb which means that you get all those techs a bit faster, especially the earlier ones ("the value of each turn is greater than the last, you know"
Yes, it adds 5 per turn. And while it is slowly adding up to 800, you will become 'less behind' on science, but still have many turns of lost opportunities.
While that looks awesome for a 'pure tech' standpoint, is that a truly viable build? You still only have one warrior and one city until like turn 50 ish, and have picked up the fairly lack luster liberty settler bonus. Either way, I'd save that first scientist a few turns to bulb civil service or something even then.
Science output: 3
This is a ~50% increase in science which is huge at this stage in the game
In this scenario, the academy is great. Period
Well, it is only +50% if you didn't build that settler earlier, or don't use the specialists. ALso, % doesn't matter so much as raw. The bonus from the library (going from 7 to 15 with two specialists) more than doubles your science output. What if you bulbed civil service, which lets your capital still grow while using those two specialists? The additional food lets you run +6 science from specialists, which not only provides more than the academy but also generates more Great Scientists. Doesn't that sound like a pretty cool thing to do?
Quick rundown on that:
Your size 4 Capital, maybe working: 2 food 5 science square, 2 food 3 trade river, 3 food river, 2 food 1 production 1 trade plains. Growing at +3 per turn.
My size 4 capital, maybe working: 4 food 1 Gold, 4 Food 1 gold, +6 science. Growing at +2 per turn. I have one less production and 1 less food growth, but already have civil service, and more science, and am gaining Great People faster. (I won't even talk about the additional food the second city is getting).
Also, don't get too caught up in '50% more'. The raw is 5, no matter how you cut it. This isn't a Civ 4 academy that produces 50% more. That scaled 100% as time went on, making it substantially a better long AND short term investment. This is +5, which looks (and is rather) big early on, but peters out pretty quick, and still has to catch up to one time boost we already have.
1. Bulbing education is quite useless because universities cost too many hammers for your low pop cities.
2. GA on two cities isn't useful. Better use the 2nd great person if you need it.
3. Bulbing military techs is always a possibility but that really depends on the map. If you have enough space to expand, I prefer expansion and infrastructure over a boring horse rush or whatever
Bulbing Education can be Key however. A third scientist, and an additional +50% science in your 'science' city is very valuable. I'm not sure how you can love +5 science from an academy that took 17 turns of GPP, but not +50% of a much larger base, for a university that takes, at worst, 30 turns of production?
Less behind in science?! With an academy I'm ahead in science at first and then this bonus degrades to a very low percentage. You didn't bulb your tech at turn 0, your scientist just sits there doing nothing ...
I don't build an early wonder, I build a (cheaper) library and immediately assign two scientists. That's a fairly decent opening, imo. It delays the first settler by about 15 turns.
I wouldn't have those early two scientists if I'd build the settler before the library.
Expansion vs tech. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. Bulbing civil service is great when you start near a river but remember that it only costs 400 beakers. Even CIV5 can have complex decisions
Again, academy is better than an idle scientist. You can get an immediate "small" advantage compared to a big one at turn 100.
Of course, if you can generate over 10 scientists by "abusing" babylon, this scientist is worth a future tech but usually you just burn him on a 400-1000 beaker tech.
Obviously, Martins screenshot shows that this is true but 30 turns of production severely limits your expansion/other infrastructure or military production.
With an academy you can easily go ironworking before universities because of that strong boost in the early game. You're more flexible.
All I'm saying is that academies aren't useless. My opinion isn't set in stone ^^
Zechnophobe
Strategy Lich
I bulb for 400 beakers the turn my Great Scientist pops out. I am now 400 beakers ahead. Each turn you become 'less behind' by 5.
It can work, but it has vulnerabilities. You didn't build any military, so barbarians may pillage, or prevent your worker from, well, working. You also won't be able to jump on a weak opponent near you, or kill barbarian encampments for City State reputation.
I wouldn't have those early two scientists if I'd build the settler before the library.
Expansion vs tech. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. Bulbing civil service is great when you start near a river but remember that it only costs 400 beakers. Even CIV5 can have complex decisions
"Only"? In your example you had a city producing 4 + 2 + 3 = 9 science a turn after completing its library. That will take more than 40 turns to research. Even with two scientist specialists bringing you up to 15 you will take 27 turns. Your academy will "Only" take 80 turns to provide that much science.
And while yes, not all starts have fresh water nearby, most do. If you don't, then you don't do this strategy. Just like if you start toe to toe with an AI you likely have to focus a bit more on military. Can't read them to death!
Idle scientists have different opportunity costs, to be sure. But the longer they wait, the more they pop for.
A University costs 220 production, so needing 30 turns would mean only 7.3 production, which is about as lean as you can expect. On average it will be much shorter.
Iron Working costs 150 + 55 for BW + 35 for Mining = 240 beakers.
Education (free) + theology(250) + Calendar (70) + Philosophy(100) = 420 beakers. So even without the academy, you should very much get iron working first if you go for it. Of course, bulbing education also gets you into the Renaissance, which is nice for SPs.
Well, that is good. I'm only this vocal due to me spending so much time considering the two options and being dismayed how good the one option is.
ChevalierdeJstn
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2010
- Messages
- 60
Martin Alvito
Real men play SMAC
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 2,332
You don't even need opportunity costs. It's easy enough to show that you can outearn an Academy's production through bulbing, because the game is so short. As a result, an Academy is never a viable choice, and the only question that remains is when to bulb. That's where the net marginal benefit question comes in - will accelerating a tech now return more than bulbing an endgame tech? If so, bulb it. If not, save the GS.
WeaselSlapper
Prince
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 505
In the beaker now or beaker later equation you must also factor in the value on the GPT in unit maintenance that scientist will cost you to keep him alive until the tech you plan on beakering becomes available. If you don't factor this in you will wind up loosing a lot of gold carrying a GS a lot long than you should have. Unless there's a really high value tech in the not too distant future (Civil Service is a great example of this) I will use him to bulb whatever tech was next in my tech queue or a tech that will get me into the next era to open up more policies.
ChevalierdeJstn
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2010
- Messages
- 60
Wait wait wait - GREAT PEOPLE HAVE UNIT COSTS? What the $%&@ is with that? Did not know this (would be nice if there was a screen to determine unit costs, ahem.) That...does change matters a bit. I suppose Academy on a desert tile MIGHT then be more cost-effective than saving a GS for 30 turns...not sure.
