Also no longer worth it in BNW. AIs without either cash or GPT flow normally have abysmal science beaker rates compared to the ones flush with cash / GPT.
Research Agreements
- Thread starter Croc104
- Start date
Also no longer worth it in BNW. AIs without either cash or GPT flow normally have abysmal science beaker rates compared to the ones flush with cash / GPT.
lokithepunishr
Warlord
Yeah I used pop in the example because it's the easiest way to assess how much science (roughly) they are producing. Before signing a RA I usually look at what techs they have (ie. they have riflemen but other AIs only have musketmen) as well as pop and if you have a diplomat you can see what buildings they have as well. Also if any of their cities are next to mountains or natural wonders, etc.
Generally though looking at pop is a good indicator because pop translates roughly into science. On Immortal/Diety I never sign a RA without looking at these first, on lower difficulties I don't really care. I just want to make sure the gold I spend is worth the beakers I gain.
I just give them a luxury copy. Yes that's technically a lump sum gold value of opportunity cost, but especially with dealing with 'Guarded' AI, it's not very much.
I haven't actually calculated RA agreement, but i thought I gained at least a couple turns of science in late game (when I'm first), which given that an RA is only 400 or 450, seems worth it if I'm generating 1000 to 2000 beakers a turn.
Wodan
Deity
Are you assuming a 1:1 value ratio of
: 
? That seems like a pretty bad assumption.In most games I'd gladly pay a much worse ratio than that. And, even paying 1 gpt or 2 gpt, that's only 45 or 90
for a 45 turn agreement. At that stage of the game, that's a pittance.And again, even if it only gave you one (1)
, that's one that you have that your rivals didn't get.
Fabio1701
King
Playing BNW, I almost never accept a RA because it often asks for gold which I would rather spend on buildings or units. Even when offered a straight RA I hesitate because I would rather they not get a tech boost if I can help it.
I only change this behaviour if I have the Rationalism and the wonder that gives the RA bump. I don't feel I am missing anything by not making RA's, but am I incorrect?
I only change this behaviour if I have the Rationalism and the wonder that gives the RA bump. I don't feel I am missing anything by not making RA's, but am I incorrect?
forcedalt
Warlord
The differential in total science actually makes better sense of it. I always thought the AI was just being a "jerk" ,and , i would worry i somehow hurt the diplo ,and , the AI "felt" this was the only way it could work with me. Its good to know why this is actually happening ,even though : it will not change my policy of blanket refusing such deals. While i would gain more from the agreement in total science from the deal , a highly undereducated AI receives waaaaaaay more percentage wise ,but , never seems to take that in to account , in its obsession to avoid unfair deals. i feel its kind of unfair another civ feels i need to subsidize it for its own poor planning and/or misfortunes.
Wodan
Deity
Wodan
Deity
And this is different from real life, how?
Whoever said it had to be "fair"? Or, another way to look at it: Clearly, since you're ahead, you have an unfair advantage (even if due to your better planning, at this point in time it's an unfair advantage). So, giving some
as part of the deal makes it more fair from their perspective.
This is particularly the case if you consider the AI's alternative -- do an RA with a civ that is in its same era at lower cost. In effect, you are compensating the AI for paying more for an RA with you than it would have to pay if it did a same-era RA with another civ.
Of course, the era differential payment is more than the extra gold cost the AI has to pay for a different-era RA, but it is, in part, compensation for that extra cost.
Of course, the era differential payment is more than the extra gold cost the AI has to pay for a different-era RA, but it is, in part, compensation for that extra cost.
forcedalt
Warlord
And this is different from real life, how?
Or, another way to look at it: Clearly, since you're ahead, you have an unfair advantage (even if due to your better planning, at this point in time it's an unfair advantage). So, giving some
Well, the AI apparently is adamant on making it "fair" for them. Lets say i am the world tech leader, which is usually true in a game vs. only AI's , then : i am the most lucrative option for research partner ,and , will be the first choice of all other Civs. However , financial constraint would leave me unable to be reasonably expected to constantly do RA with everyone all the time. Supply and demand comes into play now ,I should be getting tribute from THEM. They should be in a bidding war for the worlds best RA.
Wodan
Deity
I think that's a fair request to make of Dip options in Civ6.
Yes, you are. Quite clearly you are missing out on
... you forgot to add that such a choice is also keeping science from the AI by not signing such an RA. That is an important strategic decision in many instances and a valid tactic. If gaining science means giving the AI science it needs, it may be better to simply not sign the RA. This is often the case in my games as I see no reason whatsoever to help AIs that I plan to defeat sooner or later (usually sooner, which means that it's bad to have an active RA, anyway).
Also, no one mentioned yet that the RAs in G&K are bugged very badly and it is a very bad idea to sign them due to that fact. Basically, an RA can result in no gain at all or maybe 1 science, and when the bug was confirmed, the details were not offered (at least not while I was on the forum, anyway). Signing RAs in G&K is rather like playing Russian roulette. Since there are many other tactics for victory, there was no point to use them when the outcome was extremely uncertain.
Fabio1701
King
I find this a fascinating discussion. Is it worth it to miss out on some of my
if it means denying the AI ? In what instances is this a good strategy and what instances not?Interesting, and logical. However from a gameplay point of view that might be detrimental rather than beneficial for the game.
Civ is already a game where advantage multiplies: once you get a small lead its easy to get a big lead, and so on.
If anything, in gameplay terms, this game needs more challenge to the endgame, as at present the difficulty of the game is very much in the first third of the game. The "race" elements (racing to the various victory conditions before the AI does) help a little, but generally speaking this is a game that - while excellently designed - tends to start hard and become easy. Anything that exacerbates this (such as having more favourable RAs or diplomacy when you are winning) will weaken the game experience rather than enhance it.
In fact, to make the game more difficult in the endgame, I'd say it would make more sense for RAs to be based on half the output of the current highest science output amongst all civs. That would close tech disparities, and reduce the current game weighting of science production being more important than other stuff.
I find this a fascinating discussion. Is it worth it to miss out on some of my
Well, as I said, I pretty much never sign RAs because I see no reason whatsoever to help the AIs. Aside from my original point about not helping the AI with science, there's also the very important point about Declaration of Friendship and its consequences. In BNW, RAs require Declaration of Friendship, and DoF does not work very well in diplomatic efforts due to the way the AI uses it, at least in my games. Specifically, the AI will ask for DoF, but almost always uses it to settle cities in my backyard, spy on me with units pressuring my borders and/or areas that I consider my territory/resources, etc. The result is simply harassment and I see no reason to allow it. It only adds headaches for very little gain in science from potential RAs (assuming that they'll even sign an RA, as they won't or can't in many cases, at least not when I want one). I find it far more efficient to avoid the hassles and headaches by relying on my own resources and city-states as these are far more dependable than AI civs.
In other words, the answer to your question in my approach is: always, or at least the vast majority of instances. I always find it far more efficient to avoid helping the AI with RAs (science plus allowing encroachment for settling and spying), resources, or other assistance (e.g., gold). The exceptions are if an AI is in very bad shape or is in a specific situation where they can deal with another AI that is problematic (until I can deal with the problem myself, of course).
Other approaches are possible, but this is what I find to be the best.
Wodan
Deity
Facts in counterpoint:
- Candidate AIs already have strong friendly relations with you (enough that they're willing to sign the RA in the first place)
- Candidate AIs usually are far behind you in score, so giving them some is not as big a deal as it is being made out to be
- A RA partner is the only ONE of the AIs who benefits. There is a relative LOSS of by ALL the other AIs
Wodan
Deity
That's an entirely different question. Is it worth it to sign a DoF solely to get the RA?
I might disagree with many of your assertions about DoFs being bad. Plus, there are some positives that you are missing out on, that you don't mention.
You mention you don't help them with resources, etc. That, too, is missing out on a lot... e.g., if you trade lux resources with an AI, YOU get +4
plus some chance of city celebrations. Again, the flip side of this coin is that ALL of the AIs (except one) get a relative MINUS 4 
. If there was an ability that said: "All other players get -4
except for one, which you designate." Wouldn't that be a good deal? You can pick one of the AIs that is weak, which means that your primary rivals / enemies get a relative -4 . Pretty cool, actually.
danaphanous
religious fanatic
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2013
- Messages
- 1,501
I don't think they take into account the rationalism tree and porcelain tower. I have both and always get the better deal due to the 100% boost!
Similar threads
