gold, science, and people

[Haz]

Hi all,

Background info:
During my last couple games, I found myself well ahead of competitors in tech and the space race during the modern age, but still wanting to increase my tech rate to speed the end-game as much as possible. In other words, even with a democracy and a 70% science rate, it was still taking approximately 7 turns to research synthetic fibers, etc. I tried playing around with different factors to get my tech-rate to 4 turns (without crashing my treasury) but couldn't do it. This led me to ponder several questions that I have no answers for (since I don't play around with the editor and am a relative newbie on this forum).

Questions:
1. During the mid to late-game, if one wishes to maximize tech-rate, is it a better strategy to set a metropolis on "wealth" and try to crank up the science% OR shift over a whole bunch of citizens to be scientist-specialists and just have enough pop to bring in necessary food OR shift citizens to tax-men to bring in more cash for science?

This leads to a couple larger questoins:

2. What exactly is the relationship between one scientist and the tech-rate? How much does that one scientist give you in terms of speeding things up? How many scientists are requires to jump from 7 turns to 6 turns, for example?

3. What is the exact relationship between gold (tax income) and science? How much extra gold (dedicated to science) is necessary to jump from 7 to 6 turns?

I assume that the answers to these questions are variable depending upon how many other civs have researched a given tech, but fundmamentally I really have no idea whether it's a better strategy to make lots of scientists or just maximize money. How much are scientists worth, really? I assume that one scientist gives you more in terms of science-rate than one tax-man does (via transference of cash to science), but I honestly don't know.

I would appreciate any help/ideas on this matter.

- Haz

 

[Padma]

I don't know the detailed answer to your questions (and am posting from work, so don't have my Civ3 stuff at hand), but:

one scientist = one beaker toward science.

So it takes a lot of scientists to make much of a dent in the modern age.

Oh, and welcome to the forums!

 

[kb2tvl]

ok, I play on emporer and if I can get into republic around the late industrial age, I will have a better than fair chance of getting the SETI program and labs in all my core cities. This alone will allow you to set the tech slider at 30% and get techs in 4 turns while at peace.

That said, other methods of speeding research is to get everyone at a tech parity with you which might not be a good idea in the early modern era.

ok, now if your playing demo, you can support a HUGE army. I would recommend that you build/hurry build. Keep 2k of gold on hand but keep your units up-to-date and make sure your military is strong.

 

[Tatran]

If you are some techs ahead speak to all the civs in 1 turn to see
how far they are in research.Then choose one of your techs to
sell to all of them.Let them pay for the specific tech in gold/turn.
Most of the time you get a lot of gold per turn.So you can speed
up you research to 100% and still making money.After 20 turns
do the same thing.They're paying your reseach and another
important thing they can't keep up a large military and you can
with their money.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

to max tech rate, sell older techs to AIs.... they pay up to 80 or 100 gold per turn on standard maps; so if you cna sell it to two for that price you can go 100% no sweat. Takes some trying out to get that to work though....

 

[cracker]

Originally posted by Haz
Questions:
1. During the mid to late-game, if one wishes to maximize tech-rate, is it a better strategy to set a metropolis on "wealth" and try to crank up the science% OR shift over a whole bunch of citizens to be scientist-specialists and just have enough pop to bring in necessary food OR shift citizens to tax-men to bring in more cash for science?

Haz,

Neither one of these ideas is any good in the big picture.

IN EMERGENCIES, for perhaps a turn, you can use wealth to perhaps grab a few extra coins if it is in a case where you have your economy maxed out and the 1 or 2 coins from wealth will make a difference in dropping the research time by one turn.

You really have to be major league on teh ball to know when to use the wealth thing and for most people this does not apply.

NEVER BUILD WEALTH is a better rule for most people to have etched into the lower faceplate of their computer monitor.

On the converting citizens to scientists issue, think about this for a minute and see if the right answer smacks you on the forehead:

The average citizen in your cities will produce enough food to feed themselves plus at least one and perhaps two shields of production plus at least one gold coin if working on a square with a road. If a river is next to the square, tehn the citizen produces two gold coins per turn.

If you take this same citizen and convert it to a scientist, then the scientist now produces 1 gold coin in the form of a direct science beaker. This scientist still eats two food units per turn so effectively its food production is now a minus two.

So here is typical comparison:

( Citizen = 2 food+ 1 shield + 1 gold at least) >>>> (Scientist = -2 food + 1 gold max)

When you have excess specialists just hanging around the concept would be different.

If you do not have enough cities in your TWO core areas to support researching any tech in 6 turns or less, then look to better city placement (usually closer) and better positioning of the palace and FP. If you do a good job in the city placement and development issues tech research is not a substantial problem.

 

[WillJ]

Cracker is right except for one little thing:

Originally posted by cracker
So here is typical comparison:

( Citizen = 2 food+ 1 shield + 1 gold at least) >>>> (Scientist = -2 food + 1 gold max)

But if an average citizen produces 2 food, since it eats 2 food, it should be like this:
Citizen = 0 food+ 1 shield + 1 gold at least) >>>> (Scientist = -2 food + 1 gold max
But of course cracker's point still stands, and that is that both wealth and taxmen/scientists are usually pointless and worthless to use.

 

[wohmongarinf00l]

food production is terrain-dependent. grassland produces lots of food and desert damn near zero. that's why u have starvation sometimes.

 

[Haz]

Hi all,

Thanks for the comments. I simply can't believe how worthless scientists and taxmen are, but the evidence is pretty strong. Please confirm: the only situations in which one would set a citizen to either are...

1. to prevent civil disorder, if an entertainer isn't necessary but some sort of specialist is

2. when all squares are worked, and the extra citizens MUST be specialists of some sort (and entertainers are unnecessary because the city as already celebrating WLTKD, etc.)

Question: Is there truly absolutely no difference (fundamentally) between taxmen and scientists? One scientist simply converts the one gold that a tax-man would make directly into a beaker, which is all you're doing anyway when you play with the slider. If this is so, why did Firaxis include both?!


To Cracker, on Wealth:
I am not convinced that Wealth should only be reserved to special occasions. Here's a quick calculation I conducted in my current Monarch game, playing as Iroquois (20% luxury rate, 60% science rate):

Centralis
Production (after corruption): 18 shields
Treasury income w/out Wealth setting: 12
Treasury income w/ Wealth: 16 (+4)

(NOTE: I am not including the number of beakers the city produces, as that is irrelevant for this calculation)

Niagra Falls
Production: 80 shields
Wealth difference (as above): 20 -> 40 (+20)

Mauch Chunk
Production: 104 shields
Wealth difference: 18 -> 43 (+25)

Thus, apparently 1 shield of production gets turned into 4 gold of income for the treasury (excuse my ignorance, if this is common knowledge in the forums). Given that 1 gold equals 1 beaker, setting large metropolises on Wealth seems like it could significantly increase tech-rate. Of course, I agree that Wealth is a short-term solution in one sense, and that if there is an obvious city improvement that would radically increase science (research lab) over the long-haul, that is a better choice. But given a choice between Wealth and a Coal Factory? Wealth and Mass Transit? Comments?


- haz

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by Haz
Question: Is there truly absolutely no difference (fundamentally) between taxmen and scientists? One scientist simply converts the one gold that a tax-man would make directly into a beaker, which is all you're doing anyway when you play with the slider. If this is so, why did Firaxis include both?!

Taxmen add one gold to your treasury every turn. Scientists give you one extra beaker every turn. They are unrelated unless you use the money from taxmen to raise the science rate. Including taxmen and scientists makes sense because you can only adjust the science/tax by 10% increments; including both lets you micromanage more. If you could determine where (science, tax, or luxury) every single commerce unit goes, then having both wouldn't make sense, but sense you can't do that it does make sense.
OK, so does that make sense?

 

[cracker]

Haz,

The wealth conversion issue is designed to trap you into thinking you may be getting a good deal when in fact you are getting less than a 25% return on your dollar.

The key issue is to look at things big picture. The decision point that created your cash shortage was actually many turns before when you chose how the cities of your civilization were placed and then how they were managed.

If you get to the point in the game where you really don't need the shield production for anything, then the game ought to be over.

If you have every terrain square in your empire being worked by a citizen and every one of those squares has a road and or is next to a river plus you are in democracy and have libraries and universities in every city within 10 clicks of your palace and your FP then you have amazing research power. The math says that each one of your core areas could easily be producing 1200 gpt even without any wealth. With two core areas that would be 2400gpt so you would need a massively ununused military plus well over 1000 gpt im maintenance just to waste that economic power down to where you would not have 1000 gpt available for research.

Ultimately it comes down to what are your trying to do.

There is no value in researching technologies at a faster rate if you already have the game in such total control that your production capacity is of no value to you.

Choose the victory condition that you wish to engage and then get it over with and move on. Many of the late game tech features are included to give you the one time thrill of saying "Yup, Jethro ah bombed them thar aztechs with my fleet of 135 stealth bombers." After you get that out of your system, you realize that you may have been able to make an earlier decision that would have made every one of the stealth bombers seem like the ravings of a future madman.

Oh and to one of your questions: "Coal Plants? perish the thought."

 

[MAS]

cracker,
I think he decided he wants to end the game with space ship and just wants to speed up his progress so he can win on an earlier date!

I had this regent game where i had 24 city's i was making 48gpt and inventing modern age techs every 4 to 5 turns!
the key FOR ME in THIS game was that about 20 of my city's had nuke power plants and only 1 citizen more than could work the land. I had a lot of grass and mined most of it. i was making on everage 20 gpt from weath with eacht city! All of them had lib's uni's and lab's!
4 of the 5 remaining civ's payed 50 to 80 gpt to me for varius deals. one of those deals being an alliance against the 5th civ.

When i put 4 of my best production city'sto space ship parts my income would go to the -51 gpt right away, but that didn't matter becouse i had 7053 gold in cash!

 

[Haz]

Cracker, Willj, MAS:

Thanks for the very coherent and well-thought out replies. As MAS reiterated, my goal in asking these questions was, at heart, quite silly -- I simply want to launch my space shuttle sooner in time, and was curious to know what late-game strategies are available to maximize tech-rate. Cracker, I appreciate your primary focus on city placement and management -- I would wholeheartedly agree that this is the weakest aspect of my game. I still find the thought of overlapping squares between cities to be horrific, though the advantages of closer city placement are obvious and overwhelming. Willj, thank you for your succinct "micromanagement" explanation of taxmen and scientists. It seems to me that a scientist should be worth more than his weight in gold, in terms of science production. In other words, would it seriously unbalance the game to have a scientist generate 2 beakers instead of one? If I make a citizen a specialist, i expect to see some results!

I find Wealth-production to be an interesting aspect of Civ III, and I'm wondering if there's any more discussion of it in the forums? Cracker, what exactly did you mean by "getting a less than 25% return on your dollar"?

- Haz

 

[Kemal]

Scientists can be useful though, in large, totally corrupt cities you've conquered from the AI transforming citizens in scientist/taxmen is useful since these citizens won't be producing anything for your empire if you let them work the land because all shields and commerce in these cities are lost to corruption/waste.

Just make sure that you leave enough citizens producing food to support the specialists.

 

[MAS]

wealth will turn 8 shields into 1 gold
After you get the tech "economic's" it will transform 4 shields into 1 gold

this means that if a wealth creating city has 1 shield per turn output (not counting wasted shields of course (the red colored ones)) wealth will give you 1 gold per turn extra wich is NOT effected by the lux tax or sci tax sliders!
the same if it has an output of 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 shields per turn!

Only when the city has a 16 shield per turn output wealth will give you 2 gold per turn!
Once you have economic's those 16 shields will return 4 gold per turn with wealth.

If you become a more experianced Civ3 player you will eventually become aware you are better off on the long run by using those 16 shields to produce units, those units can be used to steal land, ehh, i mean, rightfully take back what was yours all along from the AI and thus have more land that can be worked to produce even more gold!
If you want to win peacefully you are still better off using those 16 shields to pre-build for buildings that will come with a tech you are about to get in a number of turns.

Or to make units and then disband those units inside other city's. that are in need of more shields than they can output themself. Disbanding a unit inside a city will add 25% of the cost of building the unit to a city's build box. So if a unit costs 20 shields, it will add 5 shields to the building box when disbanded in a city.
But rushbuilding something with gold means that each 4 gold from your cash will be transformed into 1 shield When the build box is empty
wealth transforms 8 shield into 1 gold, so you are WAY better off building units and disbanding them later if you use your gold for rushbuilding!