• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Making research slower by default?

SebastianP

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 28, 2021
Messages
32
I'd like to have my techs in Civ III develop slower. I know how this can be done by either setting the minimum research turns to another value OR by increasing the cost for each technology by altering the rules. The later is a chore, however, since it have to manually do it for every map, every time.

Is there a better way to do it? Changing the default values in some master file?

I just use the Civ3QEditor that came with the game, if that matter ...

Thanks for your help in advance, appreciated!
 
Two ways come in my mind:

1.You can rise the tech rate for each of your 5 maps sizes in the World Sizes Page of the editor (I never did this with the intention to slow down research generally). This setting can be imported easily to each other biq and it works, even when the other biq uses different techtrees.

Tech Rate.jpg


2. To rise the tech costs for each one of the advances. These are much more settings to change and importing only work for each single tech, if the
other biq uses the same tech (as the techs are changed), but the advantage is, that here the slow down for each tech can be manually adjusted for each individual tech. The import of the settings to other biqs can be done as easyly as in 1), but those imports only can be done for all map sizes and (with method 2) for all techs in general.

Import advances-costs.jpg
 
Last edited:
Apologies if I am talking rubbish, but it feels like even if the tech rate is identical on a Huge and Standard map, it will still take a little longer to get a tech on the Huge map. If you have the same number of cities in both that is.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, guys! I totally forgot about the Tech Rate setting. Does anyone know where Civ 3 stores the default values ? (e.g. as in what it uses if you just pick "New Game" from the main menu? I'd like to make these changes not per map, but in general)
 
Thanks, guys! I totally forgot about the Tech Rate setting. Does anyone know where Civ 3 stores the default values ? (e.g. as in what it uses if you just pick "New Game" from the main menu? I'd like to make these changes not per map, but in general)
I'd suggest going into a default map (e.g. an Earth one) bundled with the version of Civ3 you are playing. I think it should be Small 200, Standard 240. I can't remember the others.
 
Thanks, guys! I totally forgot about the Tech Rate setting. Does anyone know where Civ 3 stores the default values ? (e.g. as in what it uses if you just pick "New Game" from the main menu? I'd like to make these changes not per map, but in general)
The default values for C3C are stored in the C3C biq in the mainfolder of C3C. I worked a lot with that biq in the CCM mod. Before changing anything in that biq, please make a copy of that biq, because if you are doing here anything wrong and you don´t have such a copy, mostly the only thing that helps, is a complete new installation of Civ 3 Complete.

The biq in the C3C mainfolder is shown in the screenshot below. Please don´t be irritated by the additional folders and files I have added to that mainfolder by the different versions of the Flintlock mod and my translations for the German version of C3C.

Conquests Mainfolder.jpg
 
This will likely help me in working Storm Over the Pacific scenario. A major problem is that the current tech tree for the Allies has a fair number of techs that apply only to the US, and this does not include the ones dealing with the Atomic Bomb. China does not need to be researching Submarine technologies or Aircraft Carrier technologies for one thing.

Another major problem is that as this is a pregenerated map. the cities are already located and there is no provision for Settlers. Japan has 110 cities, the US has 56, British India and Australia each have 17, China has 15, and New Zealand had 7. Running a quick check of starting the various nations, Japan has an initial research rate of between 3 and 4 for new techs. The US is similar. Everyone else is looking at 15 to 28 turns for research. This basically makes the Japanese a technology powerhouse, and the Allies, except for the US, as technology disasters. As Japan has a totally separate tech tree, the solution may be to significantly increase the tech costs of all of its techs. I know how much research was done in Japan during the war. They actually had working microwave radars by 1944, for in advance of Germany. They also had one nasty bioweapons program going. However, the Japanese Army was not that technologically minded, as they took an individual working on the bioweapons program with a Master's degree, drafted him into the Army as a private, and sent him to Peleliu in 1944. The individual managed to get himself captured, and sang like a little bird about the bioweapons program. (I have a copy of the report of what he said. It makes from somewhat sickening reading, and no I will never post anything regarding it.)

Increasing the cost of Japanese techs seems to be a viable way of slowing down Japanese research.
 
timerover51... Regarding Tech research rates... if a Civ has many more techs (Not all as important compared to the other Civs) they may need a faster research rate than the other Civs that have fewer techs.
Depends on the reason why a faster tech research is given to one or more Civs than others... Game Play, etc...
 
timerover51, I think changing the tech rate is not an appropriate solution for the problem in SOP. Vuldacon is right and the tech rate influences all civs in a game equally.

Increasing the tech costs for the "Japanese techs" would work, but I think I have found a very good solution for Civ 3 WW2 techtrees in the scenario SOE (Storm over Europe): Transform the techtree into a calendar. Per example the tech "Early 1940" can be received by January 1940. This tech allows the "research" of the techs "Land 1940 I", "Air 1940 I" and "Sea 1940 I" in the months February, March and April 1940. The techs "Land 1940 I", "Air 1940 I" and "Sea 1940 I" are the three prerequisites for the tech "Mid 1940" that is received in May 1940, allowing the techs "Land 1940 II", "Air 1940 II" and "Sea 1940 II", which are the prerequisites for the tech "Late 1940" in September 1940 (and so on).

SOE calendar.jpg


This methode allows a very limited freedom for the player, if the land-, air- or sea"tech" should be gained first to reach the next "fixed" month tech, but, beside limiting massively the cherry picking for the player to reach the best units as soon as possible, this method allows to create timed events in the game (see per example Operation Barbarossa by a GW in May 1941, that allows the start of that operation in June 1941 (where it doesn´t matter, if the player will research "Land 1941 II", "Air 1941 II" or "Sea 1941 II" first).

You can read more informations about this setting in that post under topic B.
 
Last edited:
timerover51, I think changing the tech rate is not an appropriate solution for the problem in SOP. Vuldacon is right and the tech rate influences all civs in a game equally.

Increasing the tech costs for the "Japanese techs" would work, but I think I have found a very good solution for Civ 3 WW2 techtrees in the scenario SOE (Storm over Europe): Transform the techtree into a calendar. Per example the tech "Early 1940" can be received by January 1940. This tech allows the "research" of the techs "Land 1940 I", "Air 1940 I" and "Sea 1940 I" in the months February, March and April 1940. The techs "Land 1940 I", "Air 1940 I" and "Sea 1940 I" are the three prerequisites for the tech "Mid 1940" that is received in May 1940, allowing the techs "Land 1940 II", "Air 1940 II" and "Sea 1940 II", which are the prerequisites for the tech "Late 1940" in September 1940 (and so on).

View attachment 682983

This methode allows a very limited freedom for the player, if the land-, air- or sea"tech" should be gained first to reach the next "fixed" month tech, but, beside limiting massively the cherry picking for the player to reach the best units as soon as possible, this method allows to create timed events in the game (see per example Operation Barbarossa by a GW in May 1941, that allows the start of that operation in June 1941 (where it doesn´t matter, if the player will research "Land 1941 II", "Air 1941 II" or "Sea 1941 II" first).

You can read more informations about this setting in that post under topic B.
I think that I follow what you are doing. I am just not sure how well this will adapt to the existing scenario.
 
I think that I follow what you are doing. I am just not sure how well this will adapt to the existing scenario.
The most important change in my eyes would be the switch from weekly to monthly turns. SOE in its original conception had weekly turns, too. The change to monthly turns made that scenario far better, as the testers of that scenario with weekly turns after tons of weekly turns frequently ran out of will to continue the game in the middle of the conflict. With monthly turns there is a more realistic chance, that the game will be continued up to the victory of one side.
 
The most important change in my eyes would be the switch from weekly to monthly turns. SOE in its original conception had weekly turns, too. The change to monthly turns made that scenario far better, as the testers of that scenario with weekly turns after tons of weekly turns frequently ran out of will to continue the game in the middle of the conflict. With monthly turns there is a more realistic chance, that the game will be continued up to the victory of one side.
That will not work given the victory conditions of the game. As you can see in the CivAssist image, to win you need 3120 Victory Points. The only way you get Victory Points is by holding specific cities. The Japanese start with 26 VP cities, the Allies with 13. As New Zealand, at turn 65, I have captured 8 VP cities, in the Solomon Islands and on New Guinea. None of the other allies have captured any, while China is down to one city, Chungking. The US has figured out that SeaBees can build cities, and built one city between Oklahoma City and Albuquerque. That does nothing to help victory points.
NZ Turn 65.png

If the turns were monthly, I would be in October of 1947, with a very long way to go to win. The Japanese are 47+% of the way to victory. The Japanese will win at this rate around turn 138, unless I manage to capture more Victory Point cities. For the Allies to win, they also need 3120 Victory Points. The Allies are still playing catch-up, with it questionable if they can catch up. The way this is set up, it will be a very long game.

New Zealand is a long way from the center of action, as was discovered by the U.S. Army Quartermaster Corps in World War 2. It takes a long time to build units, and then to get them where they can be used. In my view, this game is biased towards Japan by quite a bit. Think about that a minute, El Justo would like Japan to win in the Pacific Theater in World War 2. Think about it.

I have a limited time left on this earth, and this is not what I am going to spend any more time on. As for playing with the Tech Trees, I am not sure that my graphic ability is up to that. Someone else that wants to spend their time on this can play with it. Over and Out.
 
timerover51, I think here you have missed a very important point: Besides the victory by Victory points in this scenario there exist the victory options victory by Domination and victory by Conquests, too. In my eyes the options "victory by victory points" and "victory by conquest" are completely secondery compared to the victory by domination.

The victory in Storm over the Pacific is set as a Coalition Victory, meaning that the added victory points of Australia, British India, Communist China, New Zealand, Republic of China and the US are added and that this sum is compared to the victory points of Japan. The same is true for the domination victory, that mostly ends this kind of scenarios. In both components of the domination victory, even in your screenshot, the alliance (with the weak NZ as the human player) is leading.

May be it would be better to set only the US in that alliance as playable by the human player.

Btw.: The option of victory points is needed for enabling the raw materials setting. Additionally victory point locations are mostly set to trigger AI actions against those locations.

Coalition Victory.jpg
 
Last edited:
With all do respect, Civinator, no. The only reason that the Allies are doing fairly well in terms of population and area is that I have boosted food yields in coastal areas and also land areas of the allies, along with boosting bonus yields of food, shields, and gold for coastal building. This unfortunately also benefits Japan. I have also made it possible for Seabees and British Commonwealth combat engineers to build cities, which increases the area controlled. This is of limited use however, do to the requirements for resources for certain building to be within the city radius. I have added Kodiak to the US city list, along with two cities for New Zealand, and the US has build at least one additional city that I have seen. China, on the other hand is down to one city, and as I have the Chinese Communists set to "neutral", the Japanese have not attacked them. If set to be part of the Allied Nations, the Chinese Communists disappear fairly quickly. Australia has launched one pathetic attack that I have observed, and as far as I know, British India has done zip. The US has launched at least one hopeless amphibious attack on Iwo Jima that I know about. That is about it.

As for Tech Advances, I figure that if I do anything more with this, I will set maximum research time to 5 turns, which will sort of keep me about where things should be. I have also decided to toss No Tech Trading out the window for the Allies, as that flies in the face of how much technical data was actually shared in World War 2. The only exception to this was the Atomic Bomb, which data was shared with Great Britain.

The Allies might win through territory if I put large numbers of Industry and Imperialism resources in Canada and Mexico, and those, along with the Pacific Island resource on every island in the Pacific not already under Japanese control. The Japanese do not have any way of founding new cities. Somehow, I suspect that would not thrill you in the least.

As it is, I may keep poking away periodically at this, but I am more likely to use all of the units, with my changes, on a generated map. I will give Japan the ability to settle new cities.
 
timerover51, if you still have done a lot of other changes, it is very difficult to write here anything additional about improving the early SOP biq. May be you can post here the biq you did play, so other modders who want to improve that early biq (not me at present) can have a look on it ?
 
Global warming has reared its ridiculous head in the scenario. That is totally ludicrous, considering that the winter of 1939-40 was the coldest in recorded European history (which is not saying much as they only had maybe a century of data, which would not include 1816, the Year Without a Summer, or 1795, when a cavalry regiment captured the frozen-in Dutch fleet). At this point, I have pretty much given up on this. Anyone foolish enough to work on this has my sympathy.
 
Top Bottom