[GS] Shall we inherit number-of-city Science and Culture Penalty to Civ6?

[kotpeter]

Alright, I came up with a more brilliant idea than my previous one. Here's the example for science yield:

1) Rework rationalism to "+1 science per campus specialist. +2 science per campus district (this counts as an adjacency bonus).";
2) Add national wonder "National college". It's effect is "+5 science to this city. Friendly cities within 4 tiles from this wonder generate +100% science from their raw population (+1.4 spt instead of +0.7). Once powered, these bonuses double. Available with Education. Can only be build once in every empire. Captured national wonders only keep their flat yield bonus (+5 science in this case)".
3) Remove city-state bonuses to science for libraries and universities.

Similar applies to culture.

 

[Victoria]

so i played around and found that under the assumption most of your science comes from buildings

Does it come from buildings? here are non city specific bonuses leaving out a lot of card/trade route type bonuses. basically a late game city is 100 plus science if pushed. An who said tall is dead? Research labs and specialists have changed things a bit. Is population so lame? Especially considering you need good pop to get 3 specialists.

Of course Early game is a little different, how much comes from buildings here? Those that spawn in the mountains and near the reefs shall be queen.

if 3/6 envoys rewards were just +1 yield per specific specialist

I think you need to say 1/3/6 not just 3/6

 

[Ownsya]

Does it come from buildings? here are non city specific bonuses leaving out a lot of card/trade route type bonuses. basically a late game city is 100 plus science if pushed. An who said tall is dead? Research labs and specialists have changed things a bit. Is population so lame? Especially considering you need good pop to get 3 specialists.
View attachment 537739

Of course Early game is a little different, how much comes from buildings here? Those that spawn in the mountains and near the reefs shall be queen.
View attachment 537740


I think you need to say 1/3/6 not just 3/6

Why is Kilwa at +7? With two city states shouldn't it be 4*(1.3) for the owner of Kilwa and 4*(1.15) for all other cities? Also, adjacency 6 is pretty rare, I find +3 is a more realistic average value but maybe that's just me. Finally why are specialists giving 9, I thought you only get 2 per specialist for 6 total?

 

[Sostratus]

Does it come from buildings? here are non city specific bonuses leaving out a lot of card/trade route type bonuses. basically a late game city is 100 plus science if pushed. An who said tall is dead? Research labs and specialists have changed things a bit. Is population so lame? Especially considering you need good pop to get 3 specialists.
View attachment 537739

Of course Early game is a little different, how much comes from buildings here? Those that spawn in the mountains and near the reefs shall be queen.
View attachment 537740


I think you need to say 1/3/6 not just 3/6

What I meant was that loosely speaking cities produce similar amount of science each if they have an up to date campus, so that we can infer science output would linearly grow with number of cities. Otherwise the calcs I posted wouldn't make sense. I should have said: adjacency and the per pop benefit are relatively uniform and won't be a make or break on setting up a new campus once everything else is factored in, with a 5% penalty per city. At least when you're still in low double digits of cities.
Adjacency is a semi random variable that as the game progress, matters less and less (unless there was some strong, consistent correlation between a player's first few cities and high campus adjacency.)
But even in your examples, (thank you for posting those by the way) almost all the science output is something replicate-able from city to city, since ICS doesn't mean you have all these size 1 colonies planted everywhere, those cities can all be size 10, and thus they can even all run scientists for the most part. Really just focusing on city X+1 can make roughly as much science as city X with a full campus down.
The real deity optimization with a 5% penalty will be when the setup time for a size 10 city (and thus the lag time where you pay a penalty but aren't getting the science income to match) exceeds the net benefit once it is in place. That function will have two core arguments: number of cities and turns remaining in game. IE, stop settling new cities once you already have 13 and its past turn 150. Etc.

Finally why are specialists giving 9, I thought you only get 2 per specialist for 6 total?

The lab gives scientists +1. No longer are they pained by the petulant whines of the undergraduates at the university about how the homework is too hard; with their own space they can finally research in peace.

 

[Ownsya]

The lab gives scientists +1.

Huh, this detail seems to have eluded me all this time. Can't believe I'm just learning this now! Thanks for clarifying.

Spoiler :

Those pesky undergrads

 

[Victoria]

Why is Kilwa at +7?

15% of 49. It would be 30% in the city with Kilwa, if that city had Pingala, Oxford university, Amundsen, trade routes etc it soon blossoms so a OCC can be quite high.

 

[Ownsya]

15% of 49. It would be 30% in the city with Kilwa, if that city had Pingala, Oxford university, Amundsen, trade routes etc it soon blossoms so a OCC can be quite high.

Okay it seems I completely misunderstood what Kilwa actually does. I thought it boosted the yield (amount) coming from the city-state. I take it now this is referring to the type of yield that is the same as the CS's. Wow, that's huge.

So if you were suzerain of 2 of each type of CS you'd be boosting all your yields by 15%, empire-wide! That's insane. That's like having Pingala in every city, but he's also on drugs boosting other types of yields too.

 

[Victoria]

Wow, that's huge.

I'll double check but yes.

 

[kotpeter]

Alright, I came up with a more brilliant idea than my previous one. Here's the example for science yield:

1) Rework rationalism to "+1 science per campus specialist. +2 science per campus district (this counts as an adjacency bonus).";
2) Add national wonder "National college". It's effect is "+5 science to this city. Friendly cities within 4 tiles from this wonder generate +100% science from their raw population (+1.4 spt instead of +0.7). Once powered, these bonuses double. Available with Education. Can only be build once in every empire. Captured national wonders only keep their flat yield bonus (+5 science in this case)".
3) Remove city-state bonuses to science for libraries and universities.

Similar applies to culture.

Guys, what about this one? Sorry for bothering, but I'm really curious

 

[Jeppetto]

Okay it seems I completely misunderstood what Kilwa actually does. I thought it boosted the yield (amount) coming from the city-state. I take it now this is referring to the type of yield that is the same as the CS's. Wow, that's huge.

So if you were suzerain of 2 of each type of CS you'd be boosting all your yields by 15%, empire-wide! That's insane. That's like having Pingala in every city, but he's also on drugs boosting other types of yields too.

Yeah I also though so and always forgot to check, now googled it and according to one reddit post it is the huge version.

 

[Sostratus]

Yeah I also though so and always forgot to check, now googled it and according to one reddit post it is the huge version.

When kilwa was added to the game i think there were some snafus around displaying modifiers properly, leading to all sorts of confusion. I think I've thought it was both of those interpretations multiple times because the wording is so unclear!

Guys, what about this one? Sorry for bothering, but I'm really curious

The question is always what you are trying to achieve with a change. Are you trying to bring wide/tall closer? Are you looking to prevent tech runaways? Do you just think the game is too fast?
Quick reaction:
1) This is a massive blow to current rationalism. Although it would lead to many people pairing it with Natural philosophy/5 year plan. Arguably that combo grants +4 per city with a campus, but only +7 to cities running all 3 scientists, so it's not particularly assisting tall empires. If the card was just straight up +100% to scientists you'd be getting up to +9 extra science one you have a lab.
2) National wonders are something a lot of people seem to miss but in your specific implementation, where it is a wonder on the map, it would somewhat lessen the relative gulf between wide and tall, in the sense that 20 vs 10 is 2x but 20+5 vs 10+5 is 1.6x. Because there isn't really a way to concentrate your resources on a few cities to somehow make them better than someone who keeps settling (excluding the cost of the settler but everyone will get their victory districts out) it does not itself favor one type of empire over the other. Although FYI i think in R&F they reduced science per pop from 0.7 to 0.5.
3) doesn't reduce the incentive campus spam, but it reduces the power of campus spam. CS types are very random, so there's a huge gap between having no blue CS and getting 3. Or the other types. If you're trying to play 'meta' or something, you already know that campus is one of the best things you can get, regardless of CS in the game.

 

[kotpeter]

When kilwa was added to the game i think there were some snafus around displaying modifiers properly, leading to all sorts of confusion. I think I've thought it was both of those interpretations multiple times because the wording is so unclear!

The question is always what you are trying to achieve with a change. Are you trying to bring wide/tall closer? Are you looking to prevent tech runaways? Do you just think the game is too fast?
Quick reaction:
1) This is a massive blow to current rationalism. Although it would lead to many people pairing it with Natural philosophy/5 year plan. Arguably that combo grants +4 per city with a campus, but only +7 to cities running all 3 scientists, so it's not particularly assisting tall empires. If the card was just straight up +100% to scientists you'd be getting up to +9 extra science one you have a lab.
2) National wonders are something a lot of people seem to miss but in your specific implementation, where it is a wonder on the map, it would somewhat lessen the relative gulf between wide and tall, in the sense that 20 vs 10 is 2x but 20+5 vs 10+5 is 1.6x. Because there isn't really a way to concentrate your resources on a few cities to somehow make them better than someone who keeps settling (excluding the cost of the settler but everyone will get their victory districts out) it does not itself favor one type of empire over the other. Although FYI i think in R&F they reduced science per pop from 0.7 to 0.5.
3) doesn't reduce the incentive campus spam, but it reduces the power of campus spam. CS types are very random, so there's a huge gap between having no blue CS and getting 3. Or the other types. If you're trying to play 'meta' or something, you already know that campus is one of the best things you can get, regardless of CS in the game.

Thanks for your reply! I was trying to bring tall/wide closer:

1) Is intended to compensate for #3, to make the science-per-campus bonus evenly available to everyone (favoring wide empires); by combining it with a natural philosophy you effectively gain +4/campus, which is equal to having 6 envoys now. Speaking of science-per-specialist bonus, this benefits wide more than tall, since more campuses - more specialists. I was also thinking of 1 science per ANY specialist (not just campus), because the strength of tall cities lies in being able to build many districts at the same city. More districts -> more specialists -> more yields, but I'm still unsure about this one;
2) Is intended to be a massive boost for tall empires vs a not so significant boost for wide empires. The national wonder is available relative early for a reason: to be able to provide early-mid game science tempo for those who dedicated their resources to growing their cities beyond what you normally do. The reward is a science based on population which would benefit tall much more than wide (at this stage of the game, because later on everyone grows their cities). Another tempo gain would be at industrialization where you power up the building to gain another science tempo boost. This way you're able to keep up with ever-increasing yield of your neighbors with more cities, but smaller capital and surroundings.

 

[Sostratus]

Speaking of science-per-specialist bonus, this benefits wide more than tall, since more campuses - more specialists.

The reward is a science based on population which would benefit tall much more than wide (at this stage of the game, because later on everyone grows their cities)

People generally consider specialists something that large cities have but smaller cities don't. The autogovernor won't place citizens into districts until you're working most landtiles. (IDK if that would change if you start really upping their yield.) In any case, a city can afford to run specialists much sooner if it's bigger. As you yourself note, the end game involves transitioning to "huge" empires that are wide and tall, but it's hard to be both right away.

Oh, also, regarding national wonder with regional effect: it'll give science to the surrounding cities regardless of how many other cities there are in the empire. It's like a flat, empire level boost. Proportionally this helps tall empires more but because there's a real dearth of mechanics beyond governors to actually boost up cities (and even then, we don't have a card like +growth for cities with governors, which is what we really need) anyone who runs magnus with the settler promo will hardly sacrifice building up their core while also sending out settler waves. It's a tricky situation because this would work in civ5 but we just don't have the same supporting pieces at play.

 

[kotpeter]

People generally consider specialists something that large cities have but smaller cities don't. The autogovernor won't place citizens into districts until you're working most landtiles. (IDK if that would change if you start really upping their yield.) In any case, a city can afford to run specialists much sooner if it's bigger. As you yourself note, the end game involves transitioning to "huge" empires that are wide and tall, but it's hard to be both right away.

Oh, also, regarding national wonder with regional effect: it'll give science to the surrounding cities regardless of how many other cities there are in the empire. It's like a flat, empire level boost. Proportionally this helps tall empires more but because there's a real dearth of mechanics beyond governors to actually boost up cities (and even then, we don't have a card like +growth for cities with governors, which is what we really need) anyone who runs magnus with the settler promo will hardly sacrifice building up their core while also sending out settler waves. It's a tricky situation because this would work in civ5 but we just don't have the same supporting pieces at play.

I'm not trying to confront you, but Magnus himself has the promotion that helps growth quite a bit; also, there are dark age policies Isolationism and Collectivism that help with growth as well. Collectivism is often forgotten, but it leads to insane growth with Surplus logistics and a handful of farm triangles. I do agree that we need more age-independent growth boosts.

 

[Victoria]

and even then, we don't have a card like +growth for cities with governors, which is what we really need)

We have a tonne of general city growth cards but we also have Audience chamber which is governor specific.

 

[darkace77450]

I'm not trying to confront you, but Magnus himself has the promotion that helps growth quite a bit; also, there are dark age policies Isolationism and Collectivism that help with growth as well. Collectivism is often forgotten, but it leads to insane growth with Surplus logistics and a handful of farm triangles. I do agree that we need more age-independent growth boosts.

The problem with Isolationism and Collectivism is it's exceedingly difficult to attain a Dark Age without purposefully sandbagging your play.

While we're on the subject of city growth policy cards, it's a shame we can no longer combine New Deal with Collectivization.

 

[Sostratus]

I'm not trying to confront you, but Magnus himself has the promotion that helps growth quite a bit; also, there are dark age policies Isolationism and Collectivism that help with growth as well. Collectivism is often forgotten, but it leads to insane growth with Surplus logistics and a handful of farm triangles. I do agree that we need more age-independent growth boosts.

We have a tonne of general city growth cards but we also have Audience chamber which is governor specific.

I didn't say these bonuses didn't exist, just that there is an extreme shortage
Policy card support for play-styles other than wide is really hard to come by. I mean, God-King never upgrades. There's nothing like Civ4's Bureaucracy civic that gave +50%,+50% in your capital. I think civ5 tradition in vanilla had a policy for +33% in the capital. Stuff like that (but perhaps extended to cities with governors or palace +government plaza type boosts) would be needed. You can have the best mechanics but without a policy card follow up it's a crippled effort.