Feedback: Tech Progression

Having lead in medieval or early renaissance is normal. Problems with research speed starts in industrial age.
 
Jusy rolled a 600 AD regent/epic Netherlands start, and the AIs are teching crazy.
Spoiler :
Civ4ScreenShot0035.JPG
 
The reformation doesn't seem to be hitting at the right time, in several games as the British I start it myself somewhere in the late 1500's or early 1600's. Definitely a noticable change from 1.14, where HRE reliably reached it in or shortly after the 15th century (though French or British sometimes one-upped them).

On my first game I went in as regent with the British and had done all the rennaissance techs in the 1750's, reaching a new tech every 4-5 turns. Up until 1700 it was reasonable. After then my civ became a powerhouse. Realised I would have ironclads at 1800 at the rate I was at and started again on monarch. Been playing on monarch since - the pacing seems much more challanging and have done several restarts to try and get things right.

Overal great and fun changes, definitely the update I was dreaming of! Looking forward to seeing how it develops and adjusts to the tech tree changes from here.
 
Jusy rolled a 600 AD regent/epic Netherlands start, and the AIs are teching crazy.

That's interesting. For comparison my monarch/normal 600 AD game as Russia had this very reasonable situation at 1610 AD (so 50 turns less, a couple decades later).
Spoiler :
1610 trade window.png
 
I agree, I think I have overdone it with the Renaissance onwards. Expect an update increasing their costs.
 
Played 3000 BC Romans monarch 1.15 and I dont think 3rd UHV is possible: simply too many tech, too slow process and too many civs competiting. I failed when Byzantine spawned so I dont know if Byzantines triggered failure or some other civ.
 
I also noticed that many of the European civilizations tend to beeline Exploration a lot. Even England, France, and Holy Rome. And Holy Rome does not research Academia early on. Geography and Geology are also highly likely to be beelined.
 
Normally you should expect crazy AIs in higher difficulty levels. If they have a good start, they can tech real quick.
 
Yes, although feedback from Regent suggests a similar problem for lower difficulties as well.
 
3000BC Monarch Babylonian 1st UHV always failed. You simply cant tech fast enough before Greeks spawn with Aritmathy and Architecture. And then India gets Calendar before you.
 
3000BC Monarch Babylonian 1st UHV always failed. You simply cant tech fast enough before Greeks spawn with Aritmathy and Architecture. And then India gets Calendar before you.
You can't go for mining + mansory. I went Mythology + Ceremony, Sailing + Divination and Property + Writing. Then when i built the Oracle i got Calendar, Leverage and Arithmetics. But China still got Construnction first so...
 
You can't go for mining + mansory. I went Mythology + Ceremony, Sailing + Divination and Property + Writing. Then when i built the Oracle i got Calendar, Leverage and Arithmetics. But China still got Construnction first so...
Teching is not the problem but amount of requirements and pretty flat goal are. Like goal tech are on same "level" and all of them requires almost all previous techs, so first you have to tech all previous less expensive techs (if you are optimal) or beeline on your goal tech. But the issue is even if you beeline on goal tech you have three of them which makes it very likely other civs will simply beeline your goal tech before you.
 
Teching is not the problem but amount of requirements and pretty flat goal are. Like goal tech are on same "level" and all of them requires almost all previous techs, so first you have to tech all previous less expensive techs (if you are optimal) or beeline on your goal tech. But the issue is even if you beeline on goal tech you have three of them which makes it very likely other civs will simply beeline your goal tech before you.
Beeline writing for library and divination for oracle. That should give you the best chance of success, though from what it sounds like not even that will help.

Basically we either need to give Babylon more free techs or increase their default tech rate.
 
No, we need to adjust its historical victory condition. It is over-ambitious to want to be first to discover 4 of the 7 third column technologies, don't you think?
 
No, we need to adjust its historical victory condition. It is over-ambitious to want to be first to discover 4 of the 7 third column technologies, don't you think?
I guess whether or not it's over-ambitious depends on whether or not this is the fictional historic condition. From what I understand each UHV has 2 real life achievements and 1 they tried for but failed. Is this the former or the latter? @Leoreth @AnyHistoryBuff
 
I don't view that as a hard and fast rule (and I didn't come up with it), and if you review both the UHVs that I created and Rhye's original goals the mod itself does not really support this pattern. Especially for these early goals it is hard to judge what was historically accomplished and what wasn't. For example, there are different real life innovations that are represented by the techs in game and you could argue that Babylon had some of them but not others. I chose those techs to reflect areas where Babylonia was innovative in actual history, but it's easily possible to drop some of them without losing that much accuracy.
 
I don't view that as a hard and fast rule (and I didn't come up with it), and if you review both the UHVs that I created and Rhye's original goals the mod itself does not really support this pattern. Especially for these early goals it is hard to judge what was historically accomplished and what wasn't. For example, there are different real life innovations that are represented by the techs in game and you could argue that Babylon had some of them but not others. I chose those techs to reflect areas where Babylonia was innovative in actual history, but it's easily possible to drop some of them without losing that much accuracy.
Oh? I read that somewhere on this forum once. Guess that person was wrong or I read it wrong.
 
They weren't really wrong because it often works out like that, but what is definitely incorrect is that this is a rule I deliberately follow.
 
Top Bottom