Research agreements great scientists will they finally fix it?

So far I like the 'Average of Next Tech' idea best when it comes to altering the Great Scientist research ability. It seems more fair and provides incentive to spread out research rather than slingshot.

With research agreements I believe a 'per turn boost' is the best way to implement it, but as CYZ proposed the tech(s) to be researched would be decided beforehand. This is where our ideas deviate. I believe that RAs should only be allowed as either Tech/Tech exchanges, limited to what each party knows, or Tech/Gold exchanges in case one party completely out-techs the other. For example, the gold acquired by the RA could be 1/2 beaker production of tech-granting Civ per turn. This alteration would also function as a handicap for those who are leading the technology race, as it's much harder to come up with something undiscovered than emulating existing technology. It also allows players to once again "sell" technology, while being less powerful than the old Tech Trading system due to time requirements in tech diffusion. However, taking a RA wouldn't lock research, and instead directly adds beakers to whichever tech is being aided for as long as the RA remains in effect.
 
Well if you simply remove the Free great scietnist a player will not get the free academy allowing everyone to have a fairer start. Even if Great scientist tech bonus is fixed, they won't fix academies which are balanced to be honest. That what the GS is used for, and makes no sense to use the free GS otherwise. That extra tech allows for players to rush to wonders faster or build state of the art armies faster.

In multiplayer it is deadly. Simply removing it would balance Babylon. Receiving faster great scientists is still a great ability. Bowmen rushes are still deadly and couple it with Temple of artmesis Babylon would still be a great civ.

Just removing that free GS would balance Babylon in multiplayer
 
Back
Top Bottom