Science

[gladoscc]

From what I see at higher difficulty levels science is (close to) mandatory - that is, spamming research agreements, building slingshotting to science techs..

Is it just me, or should science not be the must-have aspect of winning? I'm not saying a nation that has no libraries should win, but make science less important. I think this would add variety in game, like not every tech path starting out the same to writing.

 

[_Calyx]

Well, throughout history science has been kinda important, and I think it should remain that way in CiV.

However, I agree that the tech paths could use some work - adding more variety in the tree would be excellent. Civilizations should be able to be advanced in some areas while hardly having any research invested into others.

 

[Camikaze]

I think a lot of things are fairly mandatory at higher difficulty levels. Science being one of them seems to make sense to me.

 

[RD-BH]

Well! There you go, it's not just you 8)

VCs requiring science:

All:
... settling generates science.
Domination:
... puppeting/annexing generates science.
... archery (minimum)
Culture:
... requires settling city (build Utopia project).
... tech to around modern.
Diplomacy:
... 4 techs into modern.
Science:
... requires settling city (build Apollo program).
... 2 techs into future.
Time:
... ???
... ... increase score
... ... survive.

Various ways to accumulate science:

1) trade food for science.
... generated by population.
... feeding science specialists.
... puppeting/conquering AI cities.
2) trade production for science.
... buildings that generate science.
... building science directly.
... puppeting/conquering AI cities.
... exploring ancient ruins.
3) trade gold for science.
... research agreements with neighbors.
... buying science buildings.
... allying citystates.
... buying AI cities.
4) trade culture for science.
... adopting social policies.
... you literally trade Piety for Rationalism.
5) trade exploration for science.
... explore ancient ruins with starting warrior (no production).

Avoid science:
... don't settle city (population generates science).
... don't explore ancient ruins (discover tech)

Possible VCs:

Time:
... don't settle city (population generates science).
... avoid ancient ruins (discover tech).
... outscore AIs with:
... ... 1x settler
... ... 1x warrior
... possible path:
... ... duel map
... ... Aztec
... ... honor tree
... winable ???
... ... not likely.

Conclusion:

Science is:
... balanced (various ways to accumulate).
... required (all VCs).
... avoidable (you will lose).

 

[Rockflake]

Being from the land of saints and scholars I am among those who count science as a pretty much core to any civilization. And as this is a strategy game I enjoy having to think strategically about it.

 

[gladoscc]

Being from the land of saints and scholars I am among those who count science as a pretty much core to any civilization. And as this is a strategy game I enjoy having to think strategically about it.

I'm not saying science isn't important, I feel science is too important. If you prioritize science, you should have to sacrifice other aspects too.

 

[qemist]

I'm not saying science isn't important, I feel science is too important. If you prioritize science, you should have to sacrifice other aspects too.

You do. You can defer science and still win on immortal. To do this you put your early hammers into units instead of libraries/NC and conquer (minimum) two neighbors. Then you you can start annexing your puppets and building libraries.

 

[Tabarnak]

You need science somewhere for most victories, but you are not forced to build science right of the bat. Some domination games on some levels and maps don't need science at all. Science is not that important. RAs are.

 

[RD-BH]

I'm not saying science isn't important, I feel science is too important. If you prioritize science, you should have to sacrifice other aspects too.

I wonder if moving Nat'l College further from Library might help?

 

[Ruler]

Play on Emperor if that what you want and rolf-stomp AI until you get bored. Everything is mandatory. The thing is player is the underdog.

 

[RD-BH]

Play on Emperor if that what you want ...

This doesn't address balance issues regarding science.

... and rolf-stomp AI until you get bored. ...

I'm already bored.

... Everything is mandatory. ...

This is why I'm bored.
If it is all mandatory,
... what happens to player choice.
This game suffers from a serious lack of diversity.

... The thing is player is the underdog.

Competent AI would allow a more level playing field
... and still allow levels of difficulty.
As it currently sits,
... the AI is the underdog
... and bonuses are fed to it enmasse
... trying to replace quality with quantity.

Competent AI, handicapped to play at my level
... would be more challenging than incompetent AI
... with bonuses and/or player handicapped to play at the AI's level.

It's like playing chess with a 2 year old.
... you can spot him your pieces,
... but it isn't very challenging
... when he doesn't even know how to move his own pieces.

Thoughts:
... if science is important to all VCs
... ... why is it all bunched up in one area of the tech tree?
... ... player may as well start with library/nat'l college.
... spread science around among the different VC paths
... ... and let the player choose how much of each he wants to utilize.
... this gives player choices
... ... food/science, gold/science, production/science ???
... currently the choices are either/or
... ... 'science+culture' or gold or production
... ... (food is spread around)
... ... boring!

 

[Ruler]

I see where you're coming from. Ive played ton of Immortal games and it gives you flexibility, you dont need RAs, wonder tactics, you can choose what policy you want, also your starting spot doesnt need to be perfect, so try that. Science advantage just makes Civ way too easy.

 

[KiffeLesBiffles]

This doesn't address balance issues regarding science.

I'm already bored.

This is why I'm bored.
If it is all mandatory,
... what happens to player choice.
This game suffers from a serious lack of diversity.

Competent AI would allow a more level playing field
... and still allow levels of difficulty.
As it currently sits,
... the AI is the underdog
... and bonuses are fed to it enmasse
... trying to replace quality with quantity.

Competent AI, handicapped to play at my level
... would be more challenging than incompetent AI
... with bonuses and/or player handicapped to play at the AI's level.

It's like playing chess with a 2 year old.
... you can spot him your pieces,
... but it isn't very challenging
... when he doesn't even know how to move his own pieces.

Thoughts:
... if science is important to all VCs
... ... why is it all bunched up in one area of the tech tree?
... ... player may as well start with library/nat'l college.
... spread science around among the different VC paths
... ... and let the player choose how much of each he wants to utilize.
... this gives player choices
... ... food/science, gold/science, production/science ???
... currently the choices are either/or
... ... 'science+culture' or gold or production
... ... (food is spread around)
... ... boring!

Come and play MP. You will get your ass full of bruise.

 

[Aspon]

There have been famous cases in history where a technologically inferior power successfully wins a war against against its more advanced rival. However these are rare and famous for a reason. one of the most famous cases though not realised by many is Nazi germany who were vastly superior technologically fortunately they were unable to take full advantage of there new technologies adequately due to the gains been in such a short time and hard to input. They were the ones who invented rocketry modern aero dynamics and flying saucers.

of course due to famously bad tactics and international political decisions made by Hitler they failed.

Bottom line is though in the majority of cases tech lead wins the war thats just how it is.

it is possible to win as the one with inferior tech on civ 5. I have seen it done with both Japan and China on multi player games.

In this regard I think civ is pretty realistic.

I think one of the the major things civ does not take into account is country's are more adapted to there terrain and this can cause a big difference in conflict. such as the failed nazi invasion of russia the english invasion of the American continent and the American wars generally.

civ 5 captures this to spome extent with the inca and the Irouqi though.

is a shame they got rid of religion is big part of human history.