Best civs for science?

[dragonxxx]

Vitruvius - see, the problem is completely different. With your current CPT, it takes forever to unlock 3 policies in patronage compared to 1 in rationalism Rationalism + Secularism would give way more than this. At that time you have 4 univercities, thats 16 + 22 from the opener = 38. And you work some guilds, so its more or less same, but you do not need to invest more and more money just to keep having this BPT.
Not to speak about the public schools that come around this point
Spending money on a non-cultural, non-mercantile (in some cases) CS is luxury ...

 

[Vitruvius]

Vitruvius - see, the problem is completely different. With your current CPT, it takes forever to unlock 3 policies in patronage compared to 1 in rationalism Rationalism + Secularism would give way more than this. At that time you have 4 univercities, thats 16 + 22 from the opener = 38. And you work some guilds, so its more or less same, but you do not need to invest more and more money just to keep having this BPT.
Not to speak about the public schools that come around this point
Spending money on a non-cultural, non-mercantile (in some cases) CS is luxury ...

First of all, it was unlucky that there were 0 cultural CSes in that game which explains why my cpt is so low.
Second, of the 3 policies in patronage, 1 or 2 (i don't remember how many exactly) were taken before Renaissance.
Third, that was only 5 city states. By the time my economy is established, I am earning 150 bpt from all the city states.

In terms of raw bpt, scholasticism will trump rationalism opener + secularism until the late game when your own population is up with research labs built. Yes, you need to invest a bit more for the CS allies but at the same time you are receiving other benefits like faith, culture, food, happiness and units. And most importantly you are denying the opponents these benefits and controlling the world congress. Patronage just offers a better all-round game than rationalism. What rationalism does better, is that it will give you more great scientists to bulb for a faster win.

 

[Acken]

Can't disagree more with this.

First of all with absolutely 0 cultural CS I usually can't get more than 1 additional policy before entering renaissance after completing tradition. So I don't really see how I'd be able to find 3 extra to invest into patronage for scholasticism. Renaissance is achievable around turn 115.

Then that seems hard to believe that in raw bpt scholasticism is better than both opener and secularism together before labs. I guess maybe if you swim into allies at turn 120 but that seems VERY unlikely to me, having between 1 and 5 allies at that turn number is a more realistic scenario and there is no way (again at turn 120-130) that you'll get more than 20ish from opener PLUS another 30ish from secularism. At that point in time CS have barely 10pop and certainly no univ... if you get more that 4-5bpt per CS at that turn time I'd be surprised.

If I take your earlier screenshot I can see it being taken at turn 169. Schools can already be built at that time and with a good game you can be over 400bpt without scholasticism... so we are already looking at approimately 40bpt for the opener and a normal 4 cities will be working 12 to 16 specialists at that point, which will net you 24 to 32 bpt before modifiers... (so for 16 with 7 in cap it would be 14x1.88 + 18x1.33 = 50.26, with no observatories). Yeah... almost 100bpt total.

Now on the other hand, having only 5 allies at turn 169 isn't impressive so I can see someone having more allies at turn 169 being way more interested into that policy. But then we just come back to what I was saying on page 2, that it can be a policy AFTER secularism. In a scenario where the points in patronage are already invested and you have a healthy number of CS allies, getting scholastism right away after secularism is probably a good idea.

Edit: The argumentation for OCC/Venise can obviously be very different since they get less out of rationalism but more gold for more allies and therefore more out of scholasticism.

 

[tetley]

It's possible that both are true: that scholasticism is better than rationalism--but that does not mean you should pick patronage first. I've won deity simply by cranking up the CS on the map settings all the way up go 41 and centering my game around CS quests. And the reason I need patronage opener is because I "grow my science" through puppets. I need FP.

 

[Vitruvius]

Can't disagree more with this.

First of all with absolutely 0 cultural CS I usually can't get more than 1 additional policy before entering renaissance after completing tradition. So I don't really see how I'd be able to find 3 extra to invest into patronage for scholasticism. Renaissance is achievable around turn 115.

Then that seems hard to believe that in raw bpt scholasticism is better than both opener and secularism together before labs. I guess maybe if you swim into allies at turn 120 but that seems VERY unlikely to me, having between 1 and 5 allies at that turn number is a more realistic scenario and there is no way (again at turn 120-130) that you'll get more than 20ish from opener PLUS another 30ish from secularism. At that point in time CS have barely 10pop and certainly no univ... if you get more that 4-5bpt per CS at that turn time I'd be surprised.

If I take your earlier screenshot I can see it being taken at turn 169. Schools can already be built at that time and with a good game you can be over 400bpt without scholasticism... so we are already looking at approimately 40bpt for the opener and a normal 4 cities will be working 12 to 16 specialists at that point, which will net you 24 to 32 bpt before modifiers... (so for 16 with 7 in cap it would be 14x1.88 + 18x1.33 = 50.26, with no observatories). Yeah... almost 100bpt total.

Now on the other hand, having only 5 allies at turn 169 isn't impressive so I can see someone having more allies at turn 169 being way more interested into that policy. But then we just come back to what I was saying on page 2, that it can be a policy AFTER secularism. In a scenario where the points in patronage are already invested and you have a healthy number of CS allies, getting scholastism right away after secularism is probably a good idea.

Edit: The argumentation for OCC/Venise can obviously be very different since they get less out of rationalism but more gold for more allies and therefore more out of scholasticism.

Your numbers are based on an ideal situation. Having 400 bpt + 16 specialists by turn 170 represents a perfect science game with good growth and no early warfare. Having public schools up by turn 180 is already a very good benchmark. As you can see from my screenshot I had to fight an early war to take Ankara for my fourth city. On a good day Portugal would have 10 city state allies by now and earning close to 100 beakers per turn. And this number is not even based on how much growth my own cities have. I could have done it with liberty and I could have done it with piety even. My argument is that getting 3 pts in patronage before rationalism offers a more foolproof approach to the game especially if you have a civ that has economic or CS bonuses such as Greece and Portugal. I am not arguing against going rationalism first if you have other civs.

 

[bhavv]

Scholactism is better towards the mid to end game when you have enough gold to ally most or all of the CSs. When you enter into the renaissance, you wont have enough GPT for it to work well by then.

 

[Acken]

Your numbers are based on an ideal situation. Having 400 bpt + 16 specialists by turn 170 represents a perfect science game with good growth and no early warfare. Having public schools up by turn 180 is already a very good benchmark. As you can see from my screenshot I had to fight an early war to take Ankara for my fourth city. On a good day Portugal would have 10 city state allies by now and earning close to 100 beakers per turn. And this number is not even based on how much growth my own cities have. I could have done it with liberty and I could have done it with piety even. My argument is that getting 3 pts in patronage before rationalism offers a more foolproof approach to the game especially if you have a civ that has economic or CS bonuses such as Greece and Portugal. I am not arguing against going rationalism first if you have other civs.

Heee no.
Schools at turn 160 to 170 is pretty standard and if you cannot show at least 400bpt with schools then there is another problem. A perfect science game would be having them before 150 and already be over 500.

Im pretty sure you ll be able to find others being able to confirm they can get such numbers regularly.

 

[The Pilgrim]

100 ... I had around 250 BPT from the 12 allies at the end. Well, it was a bit late - I finished it on T329, as it takes a while for the diplo if there are some conquered CS + those u buy ... But it was over 200 around turn 240, so its good thing for sure. Especially in OCC. Venice had 530BPT, the puppets roughly 200 ea. and the rest came from CS (around 1200 total). So this was like +25% on my science per turn.

I finished the whole tree, as I had never done it before to see how many GPs I get. I did that around T240 I think, so for the around 90 turns I got 3 GPs - 1 merchant and 2 writers. That from all remaining 12 CS my allies. It doesn't seem to be worth it tbh.

Yeah, my CS's dropped like flies trying to defend me. Not many survived. But it was still worth it. As for GP, I don't really care about the finisher, I totally ran out of policies /tenets to pick. Had so much culture, it was silly... I got a scientist and an artist, I think. Both were helpful and at the last turn I got a useless general. Oh well... In OCC you can have both Rationalism and Patronage easily.

 

[The Pilgrim]

Heee no.
Schools at turn 160 to 170 is pretty standard and if you cannot show at least 400bpt with schools then there is another problem. A perfect science game would be having them before 150 and already be over 500.

Im pretty sure you ll be able to find others being able to confirm they can get such numbers regularly.

Yeah, not having public schools by 170 is definitely a slow science game in my copy of secret Civ5 guide.