Separating Commerce from Science

[slightlymarxist]

Since Civ1, Commerce (money) have been used to measure speed of research. More money = more can be "spent" on Science.

What if we scrap this model for Civ4? Science should be independent of Commerce, and should always be evolving. People don't stop having ideas just because they're poor. In fact, it's often the other way around - need fosters invention. War always gives boosts to scientific discovery, as do crises of other kinds. Still Science is represented by Commerce.

I propose this: Science should evolve independently of Commerce, just like Food and Production already does. Poverty should not put a limit on Science. Comemrce, instead, could be used for any kind of short-term "boost" with long-term diminishing returns as boundary - not only for Science, but also for fast Military buildups (eg. Iraq) and other rushed projects. Kind of like an all-purpose rush-build function, that only works for a short period but quickly winds down.

Am I being controversial? I'm not suggesting scrapping Commerce, it's just that science and research has so many other aspects to it than funding, and funding is just as important for every other activity - military, agriculture, industry, etc. etc. Why is Science a special case? Without a scientific tradition it doesn't matter how much money you allocate. Einstein wasn't rich, he didn't need any money to come up with his theories. Germany was in a state of crisis since WW1 but came up with the most brilliant military designs anyway.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

But to what would you tie science in the game? Commerce give you means to have many units, buildings, happyness and more food through buying luxury instead of having entertainers. It's all connected to money anyway.

 

[Idylwyld]

Military expenditures are modeled in the unit maintenance cost. Agriculture is modeled in the worker improvement times and ag improvement (granary) maintenance cost. Industry pays back itself and is modeled in the opportunity cost of building the improvements (you could have been producing wealth instead). Science and Luxuries (government entitlements) are usually funded off the tax revenue "skim". The current system fairly accurately reflects this. For cultures with a scientific tradition the Scientific trait grants free techs (albeit in a very limited manner) regardless of science spending, reflecting the verditas of learning. Otherwise the Great Library has a similar effect. Maybe a small wonder (National Archives?) could grant an effect similar to the GL but at a slower pace, say when 4 opponents have discovered the tech.

 

[slightlymarxist]

But to what would you tie science in the game? Commerce give you means to have many units, buildings, happyness and more food through buying luxury instead of having entertainers. It's all connected to money anyway.

It could be tied to raw population level vis-a-vis Education, ie a large, well-educated population generates more Science than a small, uneducated one. To increase Science you build schools, libraries and universities (perhaps you could build several universities in a city?) and increase population levels. You'd get Literacy level (how many people total can read and write?), later on # of Graduates all the way up to # of Ph.D's...

Commerce (taxes) would still be used to pay the upkeep cost for science improvements, just not in a more profound way than agriculture and industry.

 

[Idylwyld]

@Slightly Marxist:
That's probably the best alternative right there. Let the educational/research improvements provide a set amount of research (like culture points are generated). Add a research rush feature and you've got a perfectly workable scheme that is probably better than what we have now.

 

[dh_epic]

This is a challenging idea, but I'm not sure what you're proposing to change.

Are you saying that the player shouldn't be able to allocate his tax money to science, and just leave it at that? Taxes are a trade off between luxuries for your people, and money for your development?

 

[Loppan Torkel]

It seems that this only would increase the gains of having a large empire. The bigger - the better. I have to say that I think the current system seems better at the moment.
Libraries, Universities and Science centers hasten the scientific progress plus you are free to adjust the funding.
Perhaps the means to adjust scientific funding should be restricted, especially during the early eras, and perhaps the research should be blind or semiblind. But it has to be adjusted for the gameplay foremost.

 

[Maniac]

Personally I think the current way of determining research speed works just fine. I hope though you can have social engineering "civics" settings that affect research speed, eg innovative versus closed society. Just like in SMAC with the Research SE factor.

 

[rhialto]

I think this is actually a bad idea.

In early societies, if you were so poor that subsistence agriculture was your economy, you literally didn't have time to think up wonderful new inventions, let alone get an education. To develop science, you need a combination of people with suficient leisure time and sufficient ducation. I see the gold->beakers paradigm as representing people who have sufficient education and time devoting their time to research instead of making money.

One thing I would like to see if for different governments to have different multipliers to research. A democracy that gives education-based voting rights would have a better research bonus than a unversal suffrage one (but would lose out in other areas of course).

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

A simple solution could work something like this:

1) Each city gets a basic 'science output' based on the ratio of population assigned to tile improvements vs. city improvements (or just simply make it population based).

2) This base rate could be boosted according to what % of your national budget you assign to Education/Research-but this would have a very limited effectiveness.

3) Best way to boost science output is through the % of your population devoted to science, and the building of scientific improvements.

4) Scientific/Education improvements both boost overall science rate AND increase the base % of people specialised in science. The cost of specialists and improvements would automatically come out of your treasury through your education/science allocation.

5) Reducing the aforementioned allocation, below the base cost, reduces total science output, wheras increasing above the base cost increases science output.

6) Theism, Libertarianism and Absolutism levels would also have an impact on your total science rate-sort of along the lines proposed by Rhialto.

Hope that makes sense.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.