Scientific Leaders - Unneccesary?
- Thread starter Frostyboy
- Start date
Black Waltz
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2002
- Messages
- 569
To give you an incentive to be tech leader.
Anyone figure out the odds of getting one yet?
I have been the tech leader in this, my first conquests game, since the early middle ages. It is now late industrial era and have only gotten 1 SGL.
I have been the tech leader in this, my first conquests game, since the early middle ages. It is now late industrial era and have only gotten 1 SGL.
kring
Asst Cook & Bottle Washer
3% for non Scientific civs, 5% for Scientific civs if you are the first civ to research the tech.
It is also an incentive to research techs. A number of players don't research techs at all, preferring to acquire them from the AI.
Black Waltz
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2002
- Messages
- 569
It's also to encourage more styles of play. Before warfare was indispensable because if you didn't go to war then you wouldn't get leaders. But now it's all changed. :-D
Masquerouge
Deity
That's about as much as you can expect
I've figured out that even if you're a scientific civ and discover ALL 84 techs (quite unlikely, eh ?), then your reasonable maximum of SGL will be 10, and you would be quite lucky to get 10. If you're extraordinarily lucky, you might get 11.
slothman
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2001
- Messages
- 1,223
5% of 84 is closer to 4 than 10 and 3% of 84 is like 3. The problem with the current rate is that it's so small that you might really only get 2 per game, if you play til future tech. 10% for a sci civ might be better. Or better yet allow us to modifiy the rate.
TheNiceOne
Emperor
I'm all for making the game's balance between war-mongering and builder better, and giving a reason for reaserch instead of setting the research to zero and buying techs, but I really dislike the choise made.
A SGL is very random, but if you get one, it have a major impact on your game. Something that is so random and uncontrollable should not have a major impact, it should definately not be able to hurry wonders. Something that has a 3 or 5% chance is very little strategy and instead pure luck.
IMHO, SGLs should therefore not be able to rush great wonders. I'm happy that MGLs cannot rush great wonders anymore, but neither should SGLs that are even more luck dependant.
A SGL is very random, but if you get one, it have a major impact on your game. Something that is so random and uncontrollable should not have a major impact, it should definately not be able to hurry wonders. Something that has a 3 or 5% chance is very little strategy and instead pure luck.
IMHO, SGLs should therefore not be able to rush great wonders. I'm happy that MGLs cannot rush great wonders anymore, but neither should SGLs that are even more luck dependant.
Masquerouge
Deity
Well for a scientific Civ you have 0.64% of getting 10 SGL if you discover all techs. That's what I called "quite lucky". 11 SGL brings the probability down to 0,21%, thus "extraordinarily lucky", which implies that "extraordinarily lucky" is three times greater than "quite lucky"
In fact it's not 5% of 84 you should do... It's "the probability of having 10 success in 84 tries when you've got a 5% chance of success at each try", that's quite different.
FYI, you have a 19.92% chance of getting 4 SGL if you're scientific and discover all 84 techs.
EDIT : to TheNiceOne : you've got a point, however given that in a game, for ALL CIVS, there will be at most 10-11 SGL, and more probably 5-6, the scarcity of it balances its huge impact, I think. Whereas in Vanilla and PTW you could have theorically 540 MGL in a game just for ONE civ ! So at least things are improved, in that way
TheNiceOne
Emperor
I disagree with you, IMHO, the scarcity of it makes the huge impact worse. Since its so scarce, you will be unable to make any decent strategic planning that includes SGLs for either you or the AI. And when a SGL then suddenly pops up, it comes not as a part of planning, but due to pure luck, and topples all good plans.Originally posted by Masquerouge
EDIT : to TheNiceOne : you've got a point, however given that in a game, for ALL CIVS, there will be at most 10-11 SGL, and more probably 5-6, the scarcity of it balances its huge impact, I think. Whereas in Vanilla and PTW you could have theorically 540 MGL in a game just for ONE civ ! So at least things are improved, in that way
I don't want a factor in this game that is so pure luck as this that also is so important. MGLs were actually a bit better in this respect. With MGLs I could go to war with a lot of elite cavalry and actually expect to get a MGL for my ToE or Hoover Dam. With SGLs there is none such choises to make.
I'm still glad that MGLs cannot rush wonders anymore though, because they made war-mongering too important.
Capt Buttkick
Emperor
I agree with TheNiceOne in that, if anything, the balancing has become worse because of this change, especially on higher difficulties. Luck is now more of a factor, so far I might add. Who knows when our elite players will come up with a way of farming SGLs at Sid level? 
A more prudent question imhso is: do the enforced strategy switch offset the increased random factor?
And I think it does. This was a necassary and well-thought out choice to decrease the advantages of constant warmongering.
That said: warmongering is still the way to go with the super-powerful armies. In my current game I've had 1 SGL and 5 MGLs. The SGL was good cause I'm doing a 20K culture game. The 5 MGLs however (1 used to rush the Epic and 1 to rush the Pentagon) makes me the power to be reackoned with w/r to military as well.
A more prudent question imhso is: do the enforced strategy switch offset the increased random factor?
And I think it does. This was a necassary and well-thought out choice to decrease the advantages of constant warmongering.
That said: warmongering is still the way to go with the super-powerful armies. In my current game I've had 1 SGL and 5 MGLs. The SGL was good cause I'm doing a 20K culture game. The 5 MGLs however (1 used to rush the Epic and 1 to rush the Pentagon) makes me the power to be reackoned with w/r to military as well.
Masquerouge
Deity
Originally posted by Capt Buttkick
I agree with TheNiceOne in that, if anything, the balancing has become worse because of this change, especially on higher difficulties. Luck is now more of a factor, so far I might add. Who knows when our elite players will come up with a way of farming SGLs at Sid level?
Well farming SGL is impossible... But hey, never say never
What I'm trying to say is that before C3C, you could reasonably hope to rush every wonder you'd built. You would have to be lucky, indeed, but as you said, a pack of elite cavs and boom ! Let's go MGL fishing. So most of the Wonders you built were rushed (if you were militaristic, of course). Now I'm not a warmonger. I'm a builder. And before C3C, I still managed to grabd 2 MGL, usually in the second half of the game, that I used to rush wonders. Now I didn't plan them, I certainly didn't fish them, but the result was that I was able to rush 2 wonders.
With SGL in C3C, it's just the same : I can expect 2 SGL in a good game, not more. BUT it does not matter if I'm a warmonger or a builder, NOW it's the same for everybody. Plus I can get one early in the game (which I never did pre-C3C)
So there's an improvment in that sense ; warmongering civs are no longer advantaged when it comes to wonder-rushing.
Now of course what you don't like is the ability to rush wonders. Well, I completely understand your point. However, given that you'll only get 2,3 at max SGL in a game, I don't quite see how it can ruin a strategic planning. My plans never include getting SGL. And if I get one, hey, all the better, if the AI rush a wonder and beat me to it with an SGL, well, too bad... I'm usually not able to tell if I'm going to beat the AI to a wonder anyway, I'm just hoping and do the best I can.
Black Waltz
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2002
- Messages
- 569
But in a way it can be more stratigic. You get a SGL early on in the game... Do you save it for a certain wonder or use it to increaes science and try to get another one?
TheNiceOne
Emperor
I mostly agree with Masquerouge's last post, but...
Now, what would I want then? Having SGLs is OK, but first of all, they should not be able to rush great wonders. Letting (M/S)GLs rush small wonders is even too much IMHO.
Most of all, I would want to see that the game score was affected by being the first to research a tech. If I've been in the tech lead most of the game, I feel that I've played a better game than if I only bought available techs, and I want this reflected on the score.
I don't mean that it will ruin strategic planning (except that I may feel it so if the AI gets a SGL the turn before I finish ToE), but rather that getting those 2-3 free wonders due to SGLs feel cheap and not something I could plan. It's hardly better than having 1% chance of getting a wonder for free each turn. It doesn't improve the game. When I get more SGLs than expected I will be happy, when I get less I will feel slightly cheated, but it certainly doesn't make the game better.
Now, what would I want then? Having SGLs is OK, but first of all, they should not be able to rush great wonders. Letting (M/S)GLs rush small wonders is even too much IMHO.
Most of all, I would want to see that the game score was affected by being the first to research a tech. If I've been in the tech lead most of the game, I feel that I've played a better game than if I only bought available techs, and I want this reflected on the score.
Masquerouge
Deity
That's right ! That would be an excellent idea.
And to Black Waltz : I agree with you, getting an SGL makes for strategic decisions, although in my case the case is clear : if there's a wonder, rush it. If not, wait until there is a wonder. I'm not sure it's the best strategic solution, but it's mine
Capt Buttkick
Emperor
I'm not sure about sci research being reflected in the score. I mean: I hardly ever get lucky with my gambits on diety (the few games I've played there). Hard difficulty games are at a disadvantage score-wise already imhso.
Masque: I do that too. Espescially because two or more SGLs can exist at the same time, there's no rush to rush a wonder if you know what I mean
Masque: I do that too. Espescially because two or more SGLs can exist at the same time, there's no rush to rush a wonder if you know what I mean
slothman
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2001
- Messages
- 1,223
So you guys that think SGLs shouldn't ruch GWs what should rush wonders? Nothing? Then it's back to a "which city has the most production" which I don't like. Should SGLs do anything other that a science age? Just rush regular buildings and units?
CIVPhilzilla
Reagan Republican
Uh question can u get a SGL if you get a tech no1 else has from a goodie hut?
TheNiceOne
Emperor
Yes, I think nothing should rush wonders. Wonders is something you should work hard for, not get by (close to) pure luck. A city with high production is something you must work for, and is very little luck dependant (except for starting position), so I feel accomplishment when successfully building a wonder. Getting a wonder by GLs feels cheap.
I think its ok if GLs could rush regular buildings and units. Both MGLs/SGLs could rush everything that can also be rushed by other means, but not wonders, great or small. Wonders is something you should work hard to get.
slothman
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2001
- Messages
- 1,223
Not rushing great wonders does make sence when you put it that way but they should still be able rush small wonders. I don't think of small wonders as a wonder that every civ can build but as a building that you only need, or should have, 1 of. Especially the FP. Imagine trying to build that when you only have 1 shield to do it from. I don't even like building the temple when religios, i.e. 30 shields, in 95% corrupt cities. And that's the cheapest building!
