City State looking for tech leader task

[CaptainPatch]

I had been hoping that with a new DLC, this would have finally been altered from the base game. Sadly, .....

The way the task reads, the CS in question allots 90 turns (Marathon game) to ascertain which civilization adds the greatest _number_ of new techs during that period. That view is rather incorrect for the intent implied -- whoever adds the greatest amount of Science to Science. That is equating, as an absurd example, Advanced shoelace Tying with Curing Cancer. Which is that CS _actually_ looking for? Lots of trivial minor items, or a few really BIG scientific breakthroughs?

As a player, I'm really big on pushing Research. Invariably, I'm waaaaayyyy ahead of all the other civilizations on the tech tree when these requests get posted. That means that during the time period, I'm researching techs that cost something like 900 Research Points while the others are still working on @600 point stuff. As a result, I almost invariably never win these Research contests.

I really think that rather than counting how many techs get completed, the AI should be tallying up how many Research Points were generated during the time period. It may reflect a smaller integer of techs completed, but it would acknowledge the greater impact that that the more expensive research will have on the world.

 

[fyar]

Even if it's not very realistic, gameplay-wise I don't mind the way it is, because if you're waaaaaayyyy ahead of the other civs in tech, I think the other civs probably need the help more. You're going to win the game anyway, why do you care about a meager 50 influence from a few city-states?

On another note, have you tried going up a difficulty level? I just moved up to Immortal, and I find it more rewarding to win at higher difficulties. But I understand that it depends on what you find fun... for me, it's more fun to beat back an army which is equal or even superior to me in tech, even if it means losing cities first to the enemy before being able to fight back and retake them. But for others (including myself not too long ago), it was more fun to dominate than to maybe lose. There's nothing wrong with the latter by the way, what's more important is enjoying the game.

 

[cpm4001]

The reason this City-State Quest is the way it is is an attempt to give players (AI or Human) with weaker Beaker output a chance to get the influence boost. By having it count Techs, rather than total Beakers, it gives even the player with the worst literacy rate an even chance.

 

[Yzman]

Also yes, this should be remedied by going up a difficulty.

 

[CaptainPatch]

Meh. It just seems so contrary to all of the other assigned tasks. Most Cultured civilization and most Spiritual civilization DO go to whichever civilization has the most accumulated points in those categories. I'd feel more comfortable if the pattern was consistent. The way it is, it feels more like some dev hadn't thought things all the way through to maintain the rationale consistency of the task assignment and just what it is that the City States are rewarding.

 

[zukenft]

the tech quest is actually the most balanced in my opinion. all the other quests - culture, faith, gold, resources - favors the wide civs too much.

 

[redwings1340]

I personally like it the way it is. The faith and culture challenges are going to go to the leaders in those categories barring some great writer/worlds fair action going on, but this gives a chance to those with fewer beakers. When I see city states propose this challenge, I generally start working on some of the lower beaker techs and change my style for them. Now, I will admit that logically, a city state probably shouldn't be impressed by sailing in 1000 AD, but hey, our civ was focusing on more important things! Discovering this tech with no access to the sea is impressive!

 

[iamdanno]

I don't mind the way it works. As long as it is CLEAR what the requirements are, they could have it both ways. Sometimes, they could ask for the most techs/policies/whatever, and sometimes they could ask for the most science/culture/whatever.

 

[MarshalN]

the tech quest is actually the most balanced in my opinion. all the other quests - culture, faith, gold, resources - favors the wide civs too much.

This. All the other tasks favor the wide civs significantly.

 

[CaptainPatch]

Uhm, just _why_ would a City State want to reward weaker contenders? "Best" means _best_. Would I be more impressed by a lot of ho-hum, or by "Wow, that's impressive!"?

If the mechanism doesn't follow reasonable logic, it's irrational and contrived. If you want to provide weaker players with handicap advantages (like in golf), then do it by boosting things like income increases, strength modifiers, etc. But come to think of it, isn't that what the Difficulty settings are _supposed_ to do?

 

[headcase]

If you want to provide weaker players with handicap advantages (like in golf), then do it by boosting things like income increases, strength modifiers, etc. But come to think of it, isn't that what the Difficulty settings are _supposed_ to do?

It's not just about giving inferior players a leg up. Civilization by design has a lot of elements that lead to Unstable Equilibrium, and they need to mix it up to prevent civs from running away from the game (which happens anyway).

 

[CaptainPatch]

It's not just about giving inferior players a leg up. Civilization by design has a lot of elements that lead to Unstable Equilibrium, and they need to mix it up to prevent civs from running away from the game (which happens anyway).

If the idea is to keep losing players competitive, then you may just as well have a Miracle occur, or a Fate Intervention. Something like a meteor crashes to the Earth, made of precious metals, enough to bankroll the nation it lands in enough money to stimulate his Economy, cause a Religious revival, and create a pilgrimage Holy Site, etc. It would be as about as logical as giving awards for irrational reasons. You don't give the Gold medal to the competitor that turns in a poorer result, just because he needs the boost to remain competitive.

 

[redwings1340]

I like to think of this quest as the civ who suddenly starts to get it. Sure, Siam may be the runaway tech leader, but when the mayans get to education and suddenly buy a few universities, suddenly you have to start paying attention to them. The civ with the most new techs will surprise the city state and catch them off guard, while the civ with the largest tech is predictable.

Ok, fine... You win, it makes no sense from a logical perspective. I'm far more impressed by Radio than by bronze working and horseback riding. From a gameplay perspective, I still like it more the way it is though. It adds a bit more strategy and unpredictability in to the results. If you're thinking it's unfair though that you're losing these because you're way ahead in science, I'll counter with the fact that you're way ahead in science and therefore losing this challenge shouldn't hurt you all that much.

 

[CaptainPatch]

Two thoughts on the subject:
1) As it stands, a lesser tech researcher is getting awarded for "discovering" what the actual tech leader has _already_ discovered some time ago. (Probably.) I'm sure that those giving the award _should_ be aware of that fact.

2) What I am actually arguing against is the fact that as the "CS wants to reward the leader in this subject matter" (Culture, Spiritualism, etc.), only the tech path is doing it counter to the general pattern. And I believe the reason is obvious: NONE of the other categories are measured in discreet blocks. That is, tech "levels up" one tech at a time. All those others are just a running tally of advancement points. For the sake of consistency, these contests should be one way or the other. For the others to be done like tech, it would be necessary to create entire tables of Levels with distinct labels. That is, a LOT of makework for no real benefit. So the _logical thing to do would be to drop the tech count and just score by Research Points accumulated.

 

[hudders]

I'd further this idea by saying that the CS should really be impressed by *new* techs that are discovered - i.e. ones that they themselves don't know.

But from a gameplay perspective, handing this prize to the runaway leader in science doesn't make a great deal of sense.

 

[digitCruncher]

If culture and faith benefits 'wide' nations and the reason why tech benefits 'backwards' nations by rewarding more scientific discoveries (which, incidentally, would already have been found before, so they wouldn't be that great), wouldn't it be better to swap culture and science?

In other words: the science quest will reward the person with the most beaker output (which is good because tall nations can be just as good as beaker output as wide nations). However, the winner of the culture quest will be the 'nation that advances their government the most' (IE. Most policies *adopted*). Obviously this would need a longer duration (for example, a double-sized reward, but twice as long duration).

That would make more sense from a role-playing perspective, and keep balance for the quests more or less unchanged from the previous role. Of course, it would be yet another nerf for wide nations, but if that is an issue, you could make a wide-nation special 'production quest', seeing who can create the most things in a period (rewarding the highest hammer output). I don't know how the flavor would go, and which personalities would create that quest, however.

 

[sherbz]

I dont really understand the view of trying to put yourself in the position of the city state, or thinking something should be a certain way because its more realistic. Computer games HAVE to make compromises for gameplay, and this is hardly a massive deal. If you choose realism all of the time over gameplay then things would be pretty boring. I mean, imagine playing any first person shooter if it was realistic? Driving games would also suck. Civ is not a simulator, its a strategy game. The mechanic is fine as it is.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I think the current system is better because it avoids rewarding a runaway, as others have said (and, contrary to efforts made to change this, science is and always will be king). However, I hate that it rewards the civ who finishes a tech one turn after the quest while punishes the civ that finishes it the turn before the quest.

 

[CaptainPatch]

1) I'd further this idea by saying that the CS should really be impressed by *new* techs that are discovered - i.e. ones that they themselves don't know.

2) But from a gameplay perspective, handing this prize to the runaway leader in science doesn't make a great deal of sense.

Hmm. It would make for an interesting twist that, in exchange for those 40 Influence points that the CS gives the winner, the winner _gives_ those researched techs to the CS. So, in that light, which would the CS value more: 5 Tech IIs or 4 Tech IIIs?

2) About as much sense as giving rewards to the runaway leaders in Culture and Spiritualism.

Anyway you look at this, we're saying that Firaxis got this area of the game WRONG. Either the Science contests were done wrong, or the Culture AND Spiritualism contests were done wrong. Or maybe contend that all three were handled poorly?)

 

[redwings1340]

Hmm, well, one difference is that the leader in tech late game wins 99 times out of 100 (barring human or Alexander diplo victory shenanigans), while the leader in culture and faith have to work a bit more to create a science lead. Technology is actually that powerful that I'm just hesitant to back buffing it more. There isn't really a good way to measure religion other than amount of faith collected, and you don't get social policies as fast as you get technology, so doing culture by amount of policies collected would be almost completely random and would often have 5 way ties on an 8 player map.

I could get behind the idea that you have to research techs the city state doesn't have, but in that case I think we would need some sort of indicator so we can know what city states have in the first place. Also, it would be kind of annoying if a city state researched, say, machinery one turn before I did, so maybe the prereqs would be set at the start of a challenge, and we can get a screen by looking at the city state that can tell us what can or can not help win this challenge? This could make beelining certain techs slightly less powerful, so from a gameplay and realistic perspective, I could accept this.