Delaying Scientific Method?

[RJM]

If you went from 13 to 22 based off the great scientists I have to think you never went caste system in this game and are on only your 3rd or 4th great person. Go caste plus pacifism earlier, pop a golden age, pop 6-7 gp in a few turns, then by the time you research sci method you'll hardly notice. You'll go from like 50 turns to 55.

I was using caste system and on my way to my 8th GP. I had just finished a golden age in which I popped 2 GPs. I have never managed to pop 6 (let alone 7) GPs in a GA.

 

[MyOtherName]

I was running representation. I usually choose Nationalism as my free tech and then go for Constitution because of the benefit of Representation. Not sure why you think that means a lot of farms. In this case I seem to have less than 1 farm per city, which is probably unusually few and hence why in this case bio didn't give me much benefit.

His line of reasoning is probably that if you're putting the effort into getting and using representation, this suggests you plan to make extensive use of specialists, which in turn implies farms to support them -- especially in anticipation of biology becoming available.

 

[RJM]

His line of reasoning is probably that if you're putting the effort into getting and using representation, this suggests you plan to make extensive use of specialists, which in turn implies farms to support them -- especially in anticipation of biology becoming available.

That probably gives me too much credit for a clearly thought out strategy which I then execute reasonably efficiently. In truth, I go for representation because it is natural to research constitution once I have chosen nationhood for my free Liberalisation tech. I rarely build farms to exploit the specialists I will have when at some point in the future I adopt representation. That having been said, I tend to use a lot of specialists - particularly merchants to enable me to keep my research rate higher - as well as settled GPs. In the save I was using for this experiment, I have just over 1 specialist or settled GP per city.

 

[The_Reckoning]

Obsolete and the other guys ranting about it - you KNOW it's coming later along the tech tree. Plan for it. Don't blame Firaxis for your failure to plan.

From my perspective you're like -

OMG FAILAXIS SUCK

i build wall and castle and chizetn itza so my 2 longbowman can defend without being upgraded but then STUPID TECH comes along and ruins it bcos FAILAXIS cant design a game bettr than a 2yr old so tanks and gunopowdr makes it obsolete THEY SUCK

Yeah - you know the tech tree, plan for it, put SM off as much as possible if it's beneficial. It's more interesting strategically when it's not always the best option to beeline for a specific tech - the obsolescence system makes it even more interesting as not only are you rushing for certain techs but you're partially incentivised to delay others. Have you even considered the possibility that those wonders would be imbalanced if it weren't for the obsolescence mechanism?

 

[NoSuchName]

The loss of the Great Library shouldn't be so bad as Biology is so much stronger. Two scientist are regained if you have 4+ farms in that city+happy/health to support them. Neither is of course certain (I rarely do), but with Biology comes also National Park! Plan ahead for this wonder and you can easily have 12+ free specialists of your choice given a good site. Finally a good use for tundra forest and non-resource jungle! Who cares if the city is too unhealthy to reach size 3 when it has 15 free specialists?

Even on a forest-poor map it shouldn't be too hard to find a city with at least five or so, which is bad but still considerably better than the Great Library and probably worth building.

 

[RJM]

The loss of the Great Library shouldn't be so bad as Biology is so much stronger. Two scientist are regained if you have 4+ farms in that city+happy/health to support them. Neither is of course certain (I rarely do), but with Biology comes also National Park! Plan ahead for this wonder and you can easily have 12+ free specialists of your choice given a good site. Finally a good use for tundra forest and non-resource jungle! Who cares if the city is too unhealthy to reach size 3 when it has 15 free specialists?

Even on a forest-poor map it shouldn't be too hard to find a city with at least five or so, which is bad but still considerably better than the Great Library and probably worth building.

That's a good point. It takes a little while to build the National Park but should be able to generate more beakers in due course.

 

[civvver]

RJM you should post the save you used to do this calculation so we can see the setup for ourselves. Generally the loss of parthenon and glib isn't this drastic.

 

[RJM]

The loss of the Great Library shouldn't be so bad as Biology is so much stronger. Two scientist are regained if you have 4+ farms in that city+happy/health to support them. Neither is of course certain (I rarely do), but with Biology comes also National Park! Plan ahead for this wonder and you can easily have 12+ free specialists of your choice given a good site. Finally a good use for tundra forest and non-resource jungle! Who cares if the city is too unhealthy to reach size 3 when it has 15 free specialists?

Even on a forest-poor map it shouldn't be too hard to find a city with at least five or so, which is bad but still considerably better than the Great Library and probably worth building.

Actually, I just tried it. I finally built the National Park 30 turns after discovering SM. Even with 4 scientists my bpt were still higher if I didn't go for SM. Settling two great scientists in my Oxford city helped keep the the rate moving on. Part of the problem was that I needed to research chemistry after SM for biology. (Perhaps the strategy should be to discover Chemistry before SM, but I traded for it, so no big problem.) In addition I researched Physics before biology to get the free great scientist. Not sure whether it would have been better to build the NP in a city with more hammers, but less forest/jungle. It's difficult to maintain parity between the 2 approaches over 30 turns. But the lesson still seems to be to delay SM if you are a peaceful builder with a small empire.

 

[RJM]

RJM you should post the save you used to do this calculation so we can see the setup for ourselves. Generally the loss of parthenon and glib isn't this drastic.

Here it is. (No Parthenon by the way)

 

[Smokey McDope]

I love this tech and jump on it very quickly once available. Knowing where the oil is often dictates where the renisstomp blob will be heading. Biology. Physics. Commies. I often don't notice a drop in science myself, though I pretty much ignore religion I usually always have the great library in my GP city. Biology is really huge and you honestly can't ever get it early enough imo.

 

[Htadus]

Please tell me it was a typo or brain fart when you said you got 1k worth of infrastructure before Alphabet...

I am afraid I have to say, neither. As AutomatedTeller noted I was refering to Alpha Centauri.

 

[Civman33]

I usually hold off SM for as long as I can. As some of you guys said, it SHOULD provide extrafor researching it, just not a gamebreaking amount. Maybe 10%?

 

[coanda]

I am afraid I have to say, neither. As AutomatedTeller noted I was refering to Alpha Centauri.

Alpha Centauri, Alphabet... who's counting.

Ok, that makes a lot more sense then.

 

[MilesBeyond]

Free Religion helps to counter it, but not very much. You need to know that I'm a culture-monger so having 2-3 Monasteries in even minor cities isn't unusual. Major cities can have upwards of 6-7 depending on the map and spread of religions.

Monasteries are one of my favourite buildings because +2 Culture and +10% Beakers for hardly any hammers is a great deal. Plus, unless you're running Org. Religion, Monasteries are the only way you can get Missionaries, which are crucial to expanding late religions to get their cathedrals.

 

[jihe]

As a peace-monger I always build the Parthenon and the Great Library, which I consider to be two of the best wonders in the game (two free scientists and faster Great Scientists!), not to mention the fact that the AI seems to leave off Aesthetics and Literature so they're pretty easy to get even without IND or marble. I also build tons of Monasteries because, well, stackable 10% beaker boost.

Because of this, I loathe Scientific Method. By that point the Parthenon usually isn't terribly useful, but obsoleting the Great Library and all those monasteries is usually a huge blow to my tech, so I end up putting it off as long as possible, most recently making it to Combustion and Assembly Line first (so I could mine oil, I just couldn't see it LOL).

So any thoughts? If you run a similar approach to science, how do you negotiate this transition?

If you get to take over the world with infantry then you don't need scientific methods. I like communism and all that beyond, but it is around the same time frame as rifling and steel and other military techs which I always get first.

 

[Orion Pax]

More necroing, because good stuff here.

Delaying Sci Meth has definitely been my habit, at first for the beakers, but then for industrial techs. Now I’m most focused when I want to phase out my Scientist GP points so I can switch to Great Merchants & Engineers or especially Artists if going for cultural. Then it’s pretty crucial.

Historically it seems like they got the balance mostly right I think: Upending an intellectual order like that is highly disruptive, and historically monasteries and other religious institutions (e.g., the actual Univ. of Sankore) really did anchor and drive learning. Muslim scholars and medieval scholasticism were a powerful force. And yet only 10% in monasteries shows the religious model had a ceiling right? Observatories (from a prereq of Sci M) give 25%. The ensuing techs give huge benefit but show it took a little time for the new method to produce results, right? It wasn’t flipping a light switch. So here you get a free scientist after you take Sci M and discover physics. Electricity comes after that, etc..

 

[Orion Pax]

My main beef though is that Sci Meth leads to Communism, lol. Makes no sense. It’s a social theory/structure, not a hard science. It was a response to industrial capitalism. The Scientific Method had nothing to do with modern Communism and came much earlier. Would make much more sense for the prereqs to be Lib and either Steam Power or Corporation.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

My main beef though is that Sci Meth leads to Communism, lol. Makes no sense. It’s a social theory/structure, not a hard science. It was a response to industrial capitalism. The Scientific Method had nothing to do with modern Communism and came much earlier. Would make much more sense for the prereqs to be Lib and either Steam Power or Corporation.

I disagree, Marxism is literally a science and the foundation for all of modern sociology and similar sciences.

 

[BornInCantaloup]

I disagree, Marxism is literally a science and the foundation for all of modern sociology and similar sciences.

That's bold, I like it !
Easier to say the 18th-19th century Sci Meth would be considered a joke nowadays. "Biology ? Uh ! I've heard about that joke before."
But yes, marxism holds strong logical assumptions and much of its nomenclature is relevant today, like divisions between infra and superstructure.

That said, the Civ tech path just is what it is. It's got its limits, of course. And it doesn't need to be exact to the point of historical determinism. "What's that ? Progress is linear ?"

 

[Fippy]

More techs like SM would be fun imo,
i like thinking about tech choices more than "okay Rifling / Steel, let's go there cos this always works".
State Property locked behind more than 1 tech makes sense, would be too easy without SM as small sacrifice (reading this thread, you could sometimes think Monasteries carry Empires ~~).