1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Does more population really generates more science?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by sovietchild, Oct 12, 2017.

  1. sovietchild

    sovietchild Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't know how it is in CIV 6 but in CIV 5 the more population one has the more he or she becomes advanced. However, is it really how it is in reality? In that case shouldn't India, Pakistan, Nigeria, and Brazil be one of the leading countries? I believe the reason why certain civilizations advance faster then others is because of the resources they have. The more resources one has the more faster one should advance. One of the crucial resources that helps advance the nation are horses. Because of them civs were able to advance much faster then others. They were like trucks back in the day, bringing goods from one point to another.

    How can India, Africa and Americas advance faster if they don't have any horses? Of course civs like Europe will advance much faster if they have woods, crops, and animal husbandry. Animal husbandry should be one of the best if not the best resources in the game.

    Another example how can one excel in desert conditions like middle east? How can they builds ships and with what?

    Does more population really generates more science?
     
  2. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    1,731
    The development of a civilization is largely dependant on how many mouths one farmer can feed. The less people you need to feed the population the more people are free to do other tasks.
    Animal husbandry plays a big role in this as oxes and horses can be used to plow the lands, etc. And surplus foodstocks can be traded for other resources or simply money that can be used to raise armies.
    The rise of Europe is largely thanks to a climate that favors growing crop.
     
  3. sovietchild

    sovietchild Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    in 1800's Britain's population was only 10 million while India's was in 200's. That is like saying London is population "1" while Delhi is population "20". In that case why did the Britains were the ones that came up with a lot of technological stuff like steam train for example?

    How can one advance with such population in Civ games? And, How can one not advance with such big population?
     
  4. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    1,731
    Like I said: a climate that favors growing crop. No harsh winters, no scorching summers or rainy season.
    Of course, the invention of fertilizer changed everything.
     
  5. Guandao

    Guandao Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City
    How would the resources boosting science work from a gaming point of view? If England has a small territory in-game but has the only iron resource in the entire continent, would they have the technological lead over their larger neighbors?

    Also if you have a larger empire, you are bound to have several cities with a higher population.
     
  6. sovietchild

    sovietchild Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Resources gives on an advantage. Resources like horses and ox can boost science output. Horse for example can give one 10% more science or even 50% more science or maybe even 100% which sounds fair or even 200 or 300
     
  7. Guandao

    Guandao Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City
    I would only have the resources boost specific technologies, not the science of the entire Civ. Why should owning horses boost research towards chemistry, for example? It should only really boost horseriding, and maybe a few other early techs.
     
  8. Xur

    Xur Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2016
    Messages:
    426
    It's a game... duh....
     
  9. sovietchild

    sovietchild Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Why early? Didn't horse conquer the world? At list till Napoleon's age. Animal husbandry helps civs advance without them they would be slow at it.
     
  10. Guandao

    Guandao Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City
    Cause horses don't have anything to do with Chemistry? It wasn't just horses which enabled Europeans to conquer the world. Gunpowder, metal weapons, using native people against other native people, diseases, all of those played a part in the colonial expansions.
     
  11. sovietchild

    sovietchild Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Are you forgetting about Mongols? They were able to conquer the world because of the horse. Horses should be a bigger impact in civs games. Because of horses a lot of nations got destroyed. Including Kievan-Rus and maybe the big Muslim nation as well.
     
  12. Guandao

    Guandao Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City
    They didn't conquer the entire world, just a part of it. How bigger an impact do you want horses to have on a game? Should it boost science output immensely? The Mongols weren't that advanced.
     
  13. sovietchild

    sovietchild Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Whoever spawns next to a horse should be the conquers of the world.
     
  14. Guandao

    Guandao Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City
    Then every game would be the same. What if two or more Civs have horses? Do you want to make the horse units more powerful? I thought this thread was about Resources boosting science as opposed to large populations.
     
  15. bbbt

    bbbt Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,319
    It's a game with a historical theme, it's not an attempt at a historical simulation at all. It has pretty much no industrial or economic model. The vast majority of cities were not formed by their leaders sending people out from their capital dictating that they settle in a particular spot. Heck, most world wonders did not actually have semi-magical powers (we've build tombs, now our workers are more efficient for the rest of history). I mean it's a fun game, and a lot of the historical 'shout outs' are cool, but seriously don't take this as a primer a how civilization actually developed.
     
    Japper007, Olleus and Siptah like this.
  16. ashvin.l

    ashvin.l ITendToLoseALot

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    54
    Historically, India and China had the highest world GDP for 16 of the last 20 centuries. Most of the scientific discoveries of the east were rediscovered in the west centuries later(astronomy, algebra, etc). Let the anomaly of just 2-3 centuries not fool you.
     
  17. Esperr

    Esperr King

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Messages:
    868
    Your trying to find one variable to explain something extremely complicated.
     
  18. antimony

    antimony Warlord

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    192
    Not sure if you played the game, but in the game, population is only a major factor for science in the ancient times. After that, you build specialized science districts and buildings and that is what generates most of your science.

    Also, the fastest way to get more science or anything in the game is to create an army and conquer other civs and gain the science from their population or infrastructure. Sounds familiar?

    EDIT: I'm aware this is off-topic. But I tried to steer things back to Civ6 just a bit.
     
  19. Kyro

    Kyro Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2014
    Messages:
    599
    What's wrong with more population generating more science?

    More people = higher number and chance of people who think scientifically = more science.

    Advanced Technologies rarely develop in small and isolated communities why do you think that is so?

    This is a game and games have to be fair; so everyone must get an equal opportunity to research technologies or else players who start isolated in "non-technology inspiring" locations will for your desire to emulate accurate reality end up being disadvantaged. Do you think it will be fun for the player who gets the short end of the stick just because?
     
  20. Kimurae

    Kimurae Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2016
    Messages:
    55
    Basically.... the discovery of not gunpowder, but firearms, along with advanced sailing gave Europe a huge advantage. Its hard to tell with VI, but I remember past civilizations did capture just how devastating musketeers were to an enemy without access to them.

    As for the Mongols, while horseback archery was definitely part of it, another part may have also been.... everyone else was recovering from the Plague and fighting each other when the mongols just came upon them.

    I sort of feel pollution and disease should be added back to Civ, I don't think it should force builders to "clean" it up per se, but incorporated into the existing amenity/housing mechanic, one consequence of not enough housing/too much pollution could even be negative modifiers to defense.... etc.
     

Share This Page