Science in today's VEM

[Thalassicus]

I instructed the AI to not get the Recon promotions for land units because Recon 1 and 2 provide no combat bonuses. The combat bonuses on guerrilla/trenches are more useful in most games. I only get Recon for vanguards in maybe... one out of ten games.

On the other hand, I did tell the AI to get Recon for ships, because the capability to pass a block of ice while circumnavigating a continent is useful in almost every game. I often see the AI doing that with ships.

 

[wobuffet]

Different strokes for different folks. I love mountain ranges, because they allow a tall civ to develop much more peacefully. I wouldn't worry about being "completely protected" by mountains, since I have never seen this short of a bottleneck. I also always make quick use of the observatory improvement, and would not object to restoring it to its pre v137 strength to make mountains more appealing to those who have an issue with them.

Fair enough. I agree Mountains shouldn't typically be powerhouse tiles, even at the endgame – only in particular circumstances: probably for tall civs (who have enough population to work a -less tile) playing Cultural or Science games.

I'd like to keep the Observatory powerful too. I do think the +50% was probably a bit too much though: they were pretty much worth building right away no matter what victory type, no matter what the circumstances (= not interesting gameplay). Especially with a couple Academies (and the large Happiness bonus for tall empires if we're talking about the Capital), +50% represents a simply enormous increase in beaker output.


@Thal:
Yeah, a Mountain-specific improvement would probably be better balanced than my original proposal. Would a choice (mini-Observatory for vs mini-Monastery for ) be too much, you think?

Or just 3 as a natural yield upon building a Monastery (leaving the mountain untouched lets the natural beauty influence culture), +1 upon discovering Archaeology, and -2 +3 if improved with a Mountain Laboratory (Scientific Theory)... but I'm not sure negative yields are possible for Improvements.

 

[Txurce]

Fair enough. I agree Mountains shouldn't typically be powerhouse tiles, even at the endgame – only in particular circumstances: probably for tall civs (who have enough pop to work a -less tile) playing Cultural or Science games.

I'd like to keep the Observatory powerful too. I do think the +50% was probably a bit too much though: with a couple Academies, that's an enormous net increase in beakers (= pretty much worth building right away no matter what victory type, no matter what the circumstances).


@Thal:
Yeah, a Mountain-specific improvement would probably be better balanced than my original proposal. Would a choice (mini-Observatory for vs mini-Monastery for ) be too much, you think?

Or just 3 as a natural yield upon building a Monastery (leaving the mountain untouched lets the natural beauty influence culture), +1 upon discovering Archaeology, and -2 +3 if improved with a Mountain Laboratory (Scientific Theory)... but I'm not sure negative yields are possible for Improvements.

Going along with this general line of thought, and using the Observatory as a precedent, I could see culture coming early-game from mountains (as I could with forests). Each mountain could provide a modest amount of culture to temples (or a new building); obviously it would have to be minor to not make the buildings OP. Late game, I could see all mountains giving a small amount of production, not by mining them, but by having them within range of a factory (or even later production) building. This also goes along with what pthmix proposed earlier. I don't think the game needs it, but doubt it would throw off its "ecosystem."

 

[wobuffet]

Going along with this general line of thought, and using the Observatory as a precedent, I could see culture coming early-game from mountains (as I could with forests).

Gods & Kings will allow you (at least when playing as the Celts, I think) to gain Faith – the new Religion yield – from working Forests.

I do think the early game (pre-Renaissance, say) yields would have to be at least 21 or so to ever be worth working. But I'd be more than happy with your suggestions. (Or all Mountains could simply generate at least 1 Coal each, accessible either via Improvement or a Building...)

 

[Txurce]

Ocean tiles as well, I believe. That's what I had in mind in imagining culture coming from mountains. Late-game production is easier to imagine, just like shale oil becoming viable.

 

[Txurce]

In lieu of a possible shift to gold vs sci/prod bonuses for the AI, or as an interim adjustment, would it make sense to cut back on the AI's production from the mid-game on? I bring this up strictly with regard to controlling population, and its waterfall effects. Runaway population seems to be not from conquest (which I would find acceptable anyway), but from multipliers. But rather than nerf a civ (like Siam) I'd prefer to reduce the base bonus, and then let certain AI civs stand out.

 

[wobuffet]

Ah, interesting... leave AI Science bonuses as small, but increasing over time, but do the opposite for the AI's Production and/or Food bonuses?

As far as I can see, this could be a permanent solution to the "1 or 2 Science runaway AI Civs" problem, not just an interim solution!

 

[Txurce]

Yes. Era-based changes have always seemed smoother to me. I don't think there are actual food bonuses, but cutting back on production should reduce population directly (not to mention those gigantic, useless armies) and science indirectly. And science bonuses scaling up as needed would keep AI units (and science) current, should they focus on it.

 

[mitsho]

Is the Science Bonus the AI receives tied to the era they are in or to the one you are in. The latter should stop runaway civs since the bonus would run up against the higher prices of the techs and help out the lower ranking ones?

 

[Txurce]

I'm happy with science being nerfed by raising RA prices. However, I've noticed that I often scrape together the gold for an RA, then have a hard time finding partners. I find myself making loans more than half the time. Would it make sense to increase the size of the AI's treasury by era, so that they are more likely to not spend themselves down before they have a chance to buy an RA?

 

[rhammer640]

I'm happy with science being nerfed by raising RA prices. However, I've noticed that I often scrape together the gold for an RA, then have a hard time finding partners. I find myself making loans more than half the time. Would it make sense to increase the size of the AI's treasury by era, so that they are more likely to not spend themselves down before they have a chance to buy an RA?

My only concern with this is that if they have a minimum treasury limit then they might not be able to spend that 'in a pinch' if they are being invaded etc where they need every bit of gold they have. Maybe something where when they are at war they can spend it but will save it if at peace?

 

[Txurce]

I meant a maximum, rather than a minimum. They can spend it whenever they want - they just don't have to, until a higher threshold is reached. That gives everyone more of a shot at being able to afford an RA. The human player can't exploit this, because of his own lack of gold.

Does that make sense?

 

[rhammer640]

Ok that makes a lot more sense. I would second that.

 

[wobuffet]

Is the Science Bonus the AI receives tied to the era they are in or to the one you are in. The latter should stop runaway civs since the bonus would run up against the higher prices of the techs and help out the lower ranking ones?

One thought I had: I suspect the increasing-per-era AI Science help modifier is, as an unintended side effect, making tech runaway leader problems worse.

It depends on the human player's era, not the AI's era.

Great minds?

And Txurce's proposal sounds great... I imagine it wouldn't be too hard to link AI "target" treasury levels with (some fraction of) the cost of a contemporary RA?

 

[Thalassicus]

Is the Science Bonus the AI receives tied to the era they are in or to the one you are in. The latter should stop runaway civs since the bonus would run up against the higher prices of the techs and help out the lower ranking ones?

The experience, production, and science bonuses are tied to the human's current era.

yieldModPerEra = handicapInfo.AIResearchPercentPerEra/100 * activePlayer:GetCurrentEra()

Would it make sense to increase the size of the AI's treasury by era, so that they are more likely to not spend themselves down before they have a chance to buy an RA?

This is how it works:

goldTarget  = 2 * GameInfo.Eras[activePlayer:GetCurrentEra()].ResearchAgreementCost
budget      = goldStored - (0.5 * goldTarget)

The budget is how much the AI can spend. If its budget is under 50 it skips the turn. It attempts to spend gold in the following order. If any purchase succeeds, it waits to do another until the next turn.

1. Citystate influence (if the UN is available).
2. Unit upgrades (if militaristic or at war with the human).
3. Leader preferences.
   • Happiness preference depends on current happiness.
   • Unit preferences depend on if the leader is militaristic or at war with the human.
4. Citystate influence (if nothing affordable can be purchased with the chosen leader preference, and more than 300 budget is available). Choice of citystate depends on:
   • Distance
   • Influence
   • Rival influence
   • Personality
   • Trait
   • Resources
5. Citystate influence (if human is in ancient era, and more than 100 budget is available).
6. If all of the above fail, the budget is saved for a better purchase next turn.

 

[Txurce]

This is how it works:

goldTarget  = 2 * GameInfo.Eras[activePlayer:GetCurrentEra()].ResearchAgreementCost
budget      = goldStored - (0.5 * goldTarget)

The budget is how much the AI can spend. If its budget is under 50 it skips the turn.

Okay, but would raising the treasury target make it more likely that they would have the gold for an RA?

 

[Thalassicus]

The algorithm does not drop AI gold below the cost of a research agreement (unless in the ancient era where none can be signed). Raising the target would help the AIs sign more agreements among themselves, speeding up AI research, which would be counterproductive to the goal of slowing down AI research. Since they'd spend more gold on AI agreements they would not likely have more gold overall than before. I think it's better to just give AIs loans when needed for signing agreements.

 

[Txurce]

Raising the target would help the AIs sign more agreements among themselves, speeding up AI research, which would be counterproductive to the goal of slowing down AI research.

I think it's better to just give AIs loans when needed for signing agreements.

Thanks for the clarification. The present system seems to hurt tall civs (wide runaway pop/sci civs, fewer RA's, even the nerfed Observatory) and this has yet to be balanced. I don't think it's worth focusing on tall vs wide in human play, though, until we are happy with AI balance.

 

[rfxmills]

Going back to the observatory discussion. I see mountains as obstacles which give you a defensive advantage by forming chokepoints and they shouldn't have any resources on them, even in the late game, apart from a few exceptions like Machu Picchu as that's really cool

How about needing to be within 1 hex of a mountain to build an observatory which doesn't have a scientist slot, but converts 1 mountain tile into an academy (affected by tech and policy boosts to academies) and gives 10% to the city. Would probably need to up the cost. It's slightly better for tall as someone has to be up their working in the observatory to get the most out of it.

And I also like the idea of a culture equivalent, mountain shrine, which also needs to be within 1 hex of the city and creates a landmark up a mountain. Would these need to be mutually exclusive though?

If you think you there are too many mountains near a potential city spot, settle somewhere else, you should be gently pushed toward settling on a river unless you really want the science (or culture) boost.

 

[Txurce]

All of that sounds fine to me.