Dynamic Research Rates?

[Olson]

In Civ's I-III we didn't have overflow and I didn't realize Civ IV (C4) did until I saw it mentioned somewhere on the Forums. Until then I was simply unknowing why the first build was often less expensive than the others queued. I wasn't sure if overflow applied to teching until the following:

I'm researching (teching) Mysticism (65 beaker cost) with Polytheism (Poly) queued and am at 55/65 beakers needed and producing 11 beakers/turn @ 100%.

I reduce research to 80% (8.80 beakers) and end turn (ET).

Now I have 64/65 and increase tech to 100% (11 beakers). ET.

I get Myst. and the overflow is showing in the green Poly progress bar and/but the pop-up states "9 turns (0/130)". I'm thinking 9t x 11 beakers/t = 99 beakers...31 short! How about 130 - 10 (Myst. overflow) = 120; take 120/9 = 13.33 beakers/t....but I'm doing 11/t @ 100%!

Since the green progress bar shows overflow but the pop-up states "9 turns (0/130)" I figure I have to ET to get a true calculation of my progress. I stay @ 100% (11 beakers) and ET.

Now, after 1t of tech'g Poly @ 11/t (+ 10 beaker overflow from Myst), I have 27/130! I was expecting 21/130. From where did the other 6 beakers come?

I searched the Forums and War Academy and found: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/tech_research.php

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/tech_research.php

and was reminded Civ3 (C3) research (and maybe CivI & CivII, also) was influenced by how many civs there are, how many already have the tech, and how many civs with the tech one has met. I never learned the formula as it was well enough that I got the general gist of what was going on.

In the above, I'm playing Qin/China in a 7civ, normal speed, Civ4-Warlord (C4W)@Noble game with no contacts yet. I tech'd Myst. by 3720BC and, so far, no one knows Polytheism (since Hinduism isn't announced as being founded). But I'm confident someone somewhere started with, tech'd, or goodyd Myst.

So, from where did the extra 6 beakers come? I'd like to do it some more.

[Addendum: A few of turns later...

I'm tekg Poly @ 12/t (100%) and am told "2 turns (102/130)". But in 2t I'll add only 24 beakers, giving me 126/130). BTW, I met Brennus/Celts whom have Myst. as a starting tech. Poly's Hinduism is still up for grabs.]

[Edit: Is 'Noble' not the 0 modified difficulty level?]

 

[BornInCantaloup]

Indeed, excess research overflows into the next tech.
Indeed, there is a discount on techs for each known civ that knows said tech (5% per civ).
Also, there is a discount on techs for each pre-requisite that is known (20% per pre-req).

When you're researching Polytheism, Mysticism thus gives a discount. Maybe that's the missing element?

 

[Olson]

Indeed, excess research overflows into the next tech.
Indeed, there is a discount on techs for each known civ that knows said tech (5% per civ).
Also, there is a discount on techs for each pre-requisite that is known (20% per pre-req).

When you're researching Polytheism, Mysticism thus gives a discount. Maybe that's the missing element?

Thanks. One follow-up ques.: I'm unclear (was w/ C3, too)...does it matter how many unknown civs do or do not have the tech?

[BTW,Yes, I know the total # of surviving civs does matter.]

 

[BornInCantaloup]

No: unknown civs do not affect tech costs. If an unknown civ discovers a tech: no 5% bonus for you on that tech.

The total number of civs may or may not affect tech costs: I don't know. I'm tempted to trust you when you say they do. So killing a civ would reduce tech costs?

On another note, map size does affect the costs, I think. Larger map = greater costs. I usually play Normal/Standard and I'm not familiar with other settings.

Also, I've just noticed your question was for Warlords... I've never played that version: BTS only, here. Hence, I do not know what the differences between the two are, or if they matter at all, here. I suspect they don't but, still, they might.

 

[s.bernbaum]

Quoting Olson:
[Edit: Is 'Noble' not the 0 modified difficulty level?]

Yes. It is supposed to be no bonuses to the player nor the AIs. (Some folks will argue about that but that is the way it is intended by the game authors.)

 

[Olson]

No: unknown civs do not affect tech costs. If an unknown civ discovers a tech: no 5% bonus for you on that tech.

The total number of civs may or may not affect tech costs: I don't know. I'm tempted to trust you when you say they do. So killing a civ would reduce tech costs?

On another note, map size does affect the costs, I think. Larger map = greater costs. I usually play Normal/Standard and I'm not familiar with other settings.

Also, I've just noticed your question was for Warlords... I've never played that version: BTS only, here. Hence, I do not know what the differences between the two are, or if they matter at all, here. I suspect they don't but, still, they might.

"The total number of civs may or may not affect tech costs: I don't know. I'm tempted to trust you when you say they do. So killing a civ would reduce tech costs?"

I got that from: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/tech_research.php

I also have noted, sometimes, when I've completed a tech and the pop-up to select another shows two techs with the same base cost will take a different number of turns. This indicates something going on so I assumed it was the deflationary impact of having that tech not being so rare because some other civ has it. I could be wrong.

 

[Merovech]

Known tech bonus is calculated from the ratio (amount of met civs with tech) / (amount of total civs), so yes, the total amount of civs on the map does matter.

 

[Olson]

Known tech bonus is calculated from the ratio (amount of met civs with tech) / (amount of total civs), so yes, the total amount of civs on the map does matter.

In the end, I guess having a tech lead is beneficial only if one makes good/quick use of whatever unit/wonder that tech allows. Otherwise it seems best to do as runners do....stay back a bit until one 'makes their move'.

The other options would be:
1) have a great tech lead but let no one find you, or
2) kill-off any civ that isn't in the forefront of the tech curve so the # of civs w/ tech is nearly the same as # of existing civs.

 

[God-Emperor]

Having the tech lead is always beneficial. The discount is irrelevant to this.

As for your metaphor: The other runners in the pack are not going to pull out swords and try to kill you. The other civs in the pack will. You are much better off if you can counter the swords with guns.

 

[pomthom]

Also, there is a discount on techs for each pre-requisite that is known (20% per pre-req).

Huh ? Not sure I get that last part. Is that a 20% increase in beakers per turn for each pre-req ? So this is relevant only for techs that have multiple non-mandatory pre-reqs I guess (like Priesthood: if you tech it with Meditation AND Poly, you get à 40% increase in beakers instead of just 20%...?)

But this should also mean you always have the pre-req bonuses because 99% of techs have pre-reqs...

EDIT: actually you said discount so I guess the tech is 20% cheaper, which means even less beakers to produce

 

[Merovech]

In the end, I guess having a tech lead is beneficial only if one makes good/quick use of whatever unit/wonder that tech allows. Otherwise it seems best to do as runners do....stay back a bit until one 'makes their move'.

The other options would be:
1) have a great tech lead but let no one find you, or
2) kill-off any civ that isn't in the forefront of the tech curve so the # of civs w/ tech is nearly the same as # of existing civs.

Nah, the goal is almost always to build up a huge tech lead, then either stomp some faces or build a spaceship or whatever. First-to bonuses are much bigger than known-tech bonuses. Tech leads also help with diplomacy and culture wins, but are certainly not necessary. Even on very high difficulties, where the player starts in a huge hole, getting a tech lead in some category, normally pulling an important military tech before a chosen sucker to springboard ahead of the AIs.

Edit: Note, this does not mean that teching at the expense of expansion is a good idea. Most expansion pays off incredibly quickly.