Scientific Method

[CajNatalie]

One thing that really bothers me is that when you discover Scientific Method, your science rate plummets due to simultaneous failure of all research buildings and wonders apart from the basic Libraries/Universities and Oxford.

This makes no sense at all. A great advance in the way science is carried out occurs, and your nation's science is destroyed...?!

I'm just ranting here, but anyways, my personal opinion is that Scientific Method should have been given an effect like 'science output in all cities boosted by 25%' or something, so it's not such a bad tech anymore.
=/

 

[moaz2]

i can see it! players beelining to scientific method in 300 AD

 

[karadoc]

Well, your research rate drops, but it gives you the ability to research some important things that you couldn't research before. Maybe that's fair enough. It could be seen as fewer people being qualified to work as scientists, but the method they use allows research into more complex things.

...

Actually I agree that it seems a bit silly. I'd also expect it to boost the tech rate rather than drop it. But I do like how it works from a game mechanics point of view. I like that scientific method is a very important 'gateway tech' which has a high cost... The sooner you get it, the more beakers you lose from lost monastery bonuses, but the sooner you are able to get into a variety of techs which give free great people, a bunch of great wonders, an important civic, empire-wide food bonuses, and so on. I think it's good for gameplay.

 

[Dragonxander PR]

I would rather change Laboratories from being available @ Superconductors & rather have them available @ Scientific Method.

 

[revengeofmakno]

I've never been happy with the idea that there is a strong incentive in place for certain techs to be avoided because they will make a previous benefit disappear in a heartbeat. It seems to me that the previous benefit could slowly fade out over time. E.g. if it was a +10%, it could go to 7 or 8, then to 5, then to 2, then out. An extra trade route could lose a third of its value, then another, then completely, etc.
Come to think of it, I wouldn't object to a fade in of a benefit either.

 

[obsolete]

Well, your research rate drops, but it gives you the ability to research some important things that you couldn't research before. Maybe that's fair enough.

Umm, no.

 

[Dragonxander PR]

Let's see what Scientific Method does:

Obsoletes Monasteries (minus 0-70% of research per city)

Obsoletes The Great Library (minus 6 of 8 GPP for Great Scientist, minus 6-30 research points, depending on research multipliers & Representation)

Obsoletes The Parthenon (GP farm becomes less efficient if player has The Parthenon)

Obsoletes Temple of Artemis (smaller trade route yield, thus leading to less research)

Reveals Oil (huge advantage)

Leads to Physics (first to discover gets Great Scientist, reveals Uranium, allows Blimps to be built; leads to Flight, Artillery, Electricity)

Leads to Biology (farms +1 , farms can be built without irrigation, can found Cereal Mills, allows National Park, leads to Medicine, Ecology, Refrigeration)

Leads to Communism (first to discover gets Great Spy, unlocks State Property, unlocks Permanent Alliances if allowed in the game, allows Intelligence Agency, allows Kremlin)

Allows Forest Preserves

 

[Derakon]

I'd kinda like to see what the game would be like if obsoletions happened for everyone as soon as anyone researched the required tech. So if someone else has the Great Library, then you have a serious incentive to tech Scientific Method so you can make it go away.

Obsoletable wonders would probably have to be cheaper or more powerful to make up for it, though.

 

[Iranon]

I think making you avoid techs isn't necessarily bad, and I think it works with Scientific Method: "We have a strong (religious?) scholarship tradition at odds with it, let's not open the can of worms". No good having scientists and scholars trolling one another instead of getting some research done.

 

[obsolete]

The argument that scientific method can somehow still count as scientific (despite it kills your science), because the reason it does lead to other techs, which do something down the road, is really sad.

One can apply the same silly argument to any tech in the tech-tree. The truth of the matter is, Firaxis made another mistake in their nomenclature. It simply was not thought out well enough. Sort of like the AP.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

The argument that scientific method can somehow still count as scientific (despite it kills your science), because the reason it does lead to other techs, which do something down the road, is really sad.

One can apply the same silly argument to any tech in the tech-tree. The truth of the matter is, Firaxis made another mistake in their nomenclature. It simply was not thought out well enough. Sort of like the AP.

Agreed. Scientific Method and Computers are two techs I generally try to delay getting although these technologies should be giving great benefits in theory.

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Agreed. Scientific Method and Computers are two techs I generally try to delay getting although these technologies should be giving great benefits in theory.

Thirded. Why does a LIBRARY with little religious connection historically - it contained great technological advancements! - go obsolete as soon as the EUROPEAN dark ages of technology end? The Great Library didn't even exist at that time. If anything, it should obsolete with computers. (Transition to Google and Wikipedia)

 

[pi-r8]

It's bad for gameplay to have techs that just instantly speed up your research with no downsides. If you're the first to research scientific method then you're already leading in tech, so giving you a bonus will just let you run away with research even more. scientific method lets the slower techers catch up a little.

 

[Paw]

It's bad for gameplay to have techs that just instantly speed up your research with no downsides. If you're the first to research scientific method then you're already leading in tech, so giving you a bonus will just let you run away with research even more. scientific method lets the slower techers catch up a little.

Does it really though? Because they're just going to slow down when they finally research it themselves anyways.

That said, I like how scientific method is implemented in the game.

 

[obsolete]

It's bad for gameplay to have techs that just instantly speed up your research with no downsides. If you're the first to research scientific method then you're already leading in tech, so giving you a bonus will just let you run away with research even more. scientific method lets the slower techers catch up a little.

What nonsense.

The tech leader is always paying the most expensive price in the races as is. Now you want to penalize those nations who have worked very hard to get into the lead, which is the whole frieken point in the game. Where do you get these ideas from?

And how does scientific method allow the slower techers to catch up exactly? And why should someone who's let themselves fall back be allowed freebies instead of being punished?

 

[pi-r8]

What nonsense.

The tech leader is always paying the most expensive price in the races as is. Now you want to penalize those nations who have worked very hard to get into the lead, which is the whole frieken point in the game. Where do you get these ideas from?

And how does scientific method allow the slower techers to catch up exactly? And why should someone who's let themselves fall back be allowed freebies instead of being punished?

Because that would totally ruin the game. The reason techs are more expensive for the first person to research the game is also to allow people that are behind in tech. Of course being ahead in tech gives many advantages, but it shouldn't be such a massive advantage that it's just an automatic win to get a small tech lead. And no, getting a small momentary tech lead is not "the whole frieken point in the game".

As it is now, someone with a larger but more backwards empire has a chance to come back, since they can still use monostaries and old wonders, and techs are cheaper for them. If you take that away, there would be no point in even playing the second half of the game- whoever reached liberalism or scientific method first would always win.

 

[Countmonte8242]

I agree with you 100% OP, it makes no sense. Scientific method changed the face of the world, yet in Civ 4 your research either drops slightly or plummets depending on how many monasteries you have, if you have GL, etc.

The fastest way to reach steam power to build your railroads, to get combustion to build your engines, to get assembly line to build your factories, is to actually avoid scientific method as long as possible! Lol, no sense in it whatsoever.

Then again, topics like this have been discussed endlessly for the last 5 years, time to move on to Civ 5. Can't wait to see what nonsenses are in the new tech tree! I already joined in the complaints about the Giant Death Robot being fusion powered yet requiring uranium, but I'm sure there will be other issues. Can't wait to see.

 

[TLF]

I don't know if techs being cheaper is to allow others to catch up, but in a way it models reality to an extent.

Cultures have contact with each other and if one invents something the others will see it.
They won't generally have it given to them, but just seeing the existence of something makes it easier to then figure it out and develop it for yourself.

It's always more difficult to be the originator of a new idea.

The problem with scientific method slowing things down is that codifying the methods of science should actually help speed up development, unless it gets too bureaucratic and stifling.

 

[6K Man]

The truth of the matter is, Firaxis made another mistake in their nomenclature. It simply was not thought out well enough. Sort of like the AP.

Agree with this.

Regardless of whether you agree with the idea that researching SM (or any other tech) should reduce your research rate... they should at least give it a less misleading name.

 

[Mathias]

The solution: Don't waste your hammers on monasteries.

Let's see what Scientific Method does:

Obsoletes Monasteries (minus 0-70% of research per city)

Actually, the most a city's science output can be reduced by SM is 41.2%. If you have 7 monasteries and no other science modifiers (highly unlikely), then your city's science output is 1.7 times its base output. The reduction then is from 1.7 to 1.0, the 70% increase representing 41.18% of the total.

If you are focusing on research, then you probably have Astronomy and Observatories. Your major cities then have +75% from science buildings and maybe +20% from monasteries. A reduction from 1.95 to 1.75 is just over 10.25%.