Tech Balance 1.18
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
Taccola
Chieftain
- Joined
- May 25, 2025
- Messages
- 5
With the latest changes to tech cost, I figured it was as good a time as any to finally make the jump to 1.18 and do a few trial runs as the Inca. 600AD - Regent/Normal (dev. ver 7d4932d, 25/5/25). Inca being Inca, minimal interference or tech trading involved.
1200 AD -
Nothing egregious that I noticed. Everyone else seems to be where they're supposed to, fluctuating around early/mid Medieval. Arabs leading but not egregiously so. Almost each of these screenshots were immediately followed the next few turns by catastrophic collapses of one of the Indian powers and Mesoamerica.
1500 AD -
Carried on a couple of the later runs up to the next key date.
1200 AD -
Spoiler Run A :
Spoiler Run B :
Spoiler Run C :
Spoiler Run D :
Nothing egregious that I noticed. Everyone else seems to be where they're supposed to, fluctuating around early/mid Medieval. Arabs leading but not egregiously so. Almost each of these screenshots were immediately followed the next few turns by catastrophic collapses of one of the Indian powers and Mesoamerica.
1500 AD -
Carried on a couple of the later runs up to the next key date.
Spoiler Run C :
Spoiler Run D :
Last edited:
Taccola
Chieftain
- Joined
- May 25, 2025
- Messages
- 5
No problem. I don't think I had much issue with either Arabia or Mongolia in these runs, as they tended to collapse under pressure easily enough to let the rest of the world catch up tech-wise. What caught me off-guard instead was this monstrosity:
1700 AD -
Spoiler Run D :
I have some thoughts regarding the Americas I'll bring up in the Feedback thread, but so far this is everything I've got regarding tech balance. Lot of fun moments this run.
Last edited:
SultanRedSnake
Prince
A few Tech Graph (all 600AD) shots following increase Medieval costs. Pattern seems to show later Medieval civs starting out noticeably more advanced. However, I have to confess holding a shallow bias against the across-the-board cost increases in the first place so my eyes might be finding what I went them to. More samples to follow.
Attachments
SultanRedSnake
Prince
Another 600AD Tech Graph from 1737. Kind of a random date, and a bit far past 1700AD, but I wanted sufficient turns to pass for Prussia to be visible, and the graph resembled a reasonably typical game (except that Poland was absent because I picked Canada start for autoplay). It was also at this moment in which I noticed that a) Portugal is the last civ to spawn at about the same advancement as others b) Italy is the first notably more advanced spawn c) Prussia is the first to spawn notably behind. Hope some useful insights can be gleaned.
Attachments
I personally find 1700 AD hard to judge because my knowledge of that century is biased towards the last quarter of it (French Revolution and so on), so I am prone to retroject the tech level of e.g. 1780 to 1700 even though those were very different worlds. My recollection is that I scaled back the Prussian starting techs to account for this, so perhaps everyone else is actually too advanced for the time.
I am less concerned with civs starting a bit ahead, especially if that evens out in the long run. Usually civs waste their first 20 or so turns catching up with everyone else in economy by growing their cities and building improvements etc, so a little headstart to account for that is warranted.
I've had Sweden in my sights for a while now though. In my original test games they struggled with tech a bit, especially in light of an already demanding conquest goal. I think I compensated too much for that though, and a lot has happened since then. I'll have to give them another pass.
I am less concerned with civs starting a bit ahead, especially if that evens out in the long run. Usually civs waste their first 20 or so turns catching up with everyone else in economy by growing their cities and building improvements etc, so a little headstart to account for that is warranted.
I've had Sweden in my sights for a while now though. In my original test games they struggled with tech a bit, especially in light of an already demanding conquest goal. I think I compensated too much for that though, and a lot has happened since then. I'll have to give them another pass.
SultanRedSnake
Prince
As always grateful to hear a ruling on a design goal, and it didn’t take much consideration to affirm that cases like these are indeed endemic. Armed with some official policy I can now hone the scope of my observations to civs that would appear undesirably hampered, or those that routinely fail to hit a stride toward intended potential. Sound like a plan?
Cacaso
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Messages
- 226
Some observations/opinions about my gameplay with BrazilCIV in the version before the 5-point increase in tech costs for some European CIVs.
First, note that I attacked and completely destroyed EnglandCIV and took all the cities in the Caribbean + New Orleans + Ndorna/Dakar from FranceCIV, in a war that was already in the 1830s, which slowed down the development of these CIVs.
First, I noticed that the techs that the European CIVs had in 1822 when I spawned were a little more backward than what I normally saw before when I started with BrazilCIV. But they were all at a standard appropriate for the time. So tech progress has improved a lot with Tech Divergence, it helps to slow down the most advanced players and makes the game more balanced.
Around the year 1900, the fourth most advanced CIV was KoreaCIV, as it had a national college in Piongyang since 1854, even though it was a vassal of ChinaCIV. (You can see this in the image below, with 200 turns missing). But I think it's a one-off and nothing too out of the ordinary.
AmericaCIV's development is good, its territorial expansion is now happening properly. And its technology is also strong, but historically compatible. It starts off a little slower but then really picks up pace and in the end it was one of the strongest. Good balance.
GermanyCIV is very strong in terms of technology in the Industrial Age, and it usually gets the technology first, and since it has two cities with excellent production, Berlin and Frankfurt, it ends up being able to build many wonders. After getting the engine and build coal plant, it was building the Crystal Palace in 8 turns. and several other wonders around 12. So it ends up being something that maybe should be changed, the build cost of wonders is low for the large production that these cities can reach after the coal plant. It becomes unbalanced. In terms of Tech, it is strong but I think it is balanced. just a little more than it should be at the end of the industrial age, so as not to go around getting all the wonders.
NetherlandsCIV is also one of the CIVs that is a little stronger. But the fact that MalayCIV decolonized around the year 1940 helped to rebalance the CIV very well, this happened by luck in my game but I found it very appropriate in timing and strength in decreasing the tech progress of this CIV. One point that I think is making this CIV stronger than it should be in the 1920s/1930s in the Global Era is that it is gaining several cities in the Indonesian area via congress without having to spend money on wars, which is just increasing the beakers in a CIV that is already strong.
FranceCIV, even after losing the entire Caribbean + New Orleans + Dakar, for me, still managed to do well in terms of tech. I think it is balanced at the ideal point. Strong (as it should be for being one of the main advanced European CIVs) but not excessively so.
Tech graph in the final situation in 2013.
(played with BrazilCIV) - the largest graphs are in order Russia, USA, Germany, Iran (which was a vassal of the USA, so it received techs), Canada and Holland
Tech graph in the situation with 50 turns left before victory.
Tech graph in the situation with 100 turns left before victory
Tech graph in the situation with 150 turns left before victory
Tech graph in the situation with 200 turns left before victory
First, note that I attacked and completely destroyed EnglandCIV and took all the cities in the Caribbean + New Orleans + Ndorna/Dakar from FranceCIV, in a war that was already in the 1830s, which slowed down the development of these CIVs.
First, I noticed that the techs that the European CIVs had in 1822 when I spawned were a little more backward than what I normally saw before when I started with BrazilCIV. But they were all at a standard appropriate for the time. So tech progress has improved a lot with Tech Divergence, it helps to slow down the most advanced players and makes the game more balanced.
Around the year 1900, the fourth most advanced CIV was KoreaCIV, as it had a national college in Piongyang since 1854, even though it was a vassal of ChinaCIV. (You can see this in the image below, with 200 turns missing). But I think it's a one-off and nothing too out of the ordinary.
AmericaCIV's development is good, its territorial expansion is now happening properly. And its technology is also strong, but historically compatible. It starts off a little slower but then really picks up pace and in the end it was one of the strongest. Good balance.
GermanyCIV is very strong in terms of technology in the Industrial Age, and it usually gets the technology first, and since it has two cities with excellent production, Berlin and Frankfurt, it ends up being able to build many wonders. After getting the engine and build coal plant, it was building the Crystal Palace in 8 turns. and several other wonders around 12. So it ends up being something that maybe should be changed, the build cost of wonders is low for the large production that these cities can reach after the coal plant. It becomes unbalanced. In terms of Tech, it is strong but I think it is balanced. just a little more than it should be at the end of the industrial age, so as not to go around getting all the wonders.
NetherlandsCIV is also one of the CIVs that is a little stronger. But the fact that MalayCIV decolonized around the year 1940 helped to rebalance the CIV very well, this happened by luck in my game but I found it very appropriate in timing and strength in decreasing the tech progress of this CIV. One point that I think is making this CIV stronger than it should be in the 1920s/1930s in the Global Era is that it is gaining several cities in the Indonesian area via congress without having to spend money on wars, which is just increasing the beakers in a CIV that is already strong.
FranceCIV, even after losing the entire Caribbean + New Orleans + Dakar, for me, still managed to do well in terms of tech. I think it is balanced at the ideal point. Strong (as it should be for being one of the main advanced European CIVs) but not excessively so.
Tech graph in the final situation in 2013.
(played with BrazilCIV) - the largest graphs are in order Russia, USA, Germany, Iran (which was a vassal of the USA, so it received techs), Canada and Holland
Spoiler :
Tech graph in the situation with 50 turns left before victory.
Spoiler :
Tech graph in the situation with 100 turns left before victory
Spoiler :
Tech graph in the situation with 150 turns left before victory
Spoiler :
Tech graph in the situation with 200 turns left before victory
Spoiler :
Attachments
Cacaso
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Messages
- 226
Now talking about Tech divergence and tech costs in Digital and Modern Age.
I think that the prices of Digital Age tech divergence will have to be rebalanced.
First I need to explain my situation. At the beginning of the Digital Age I managed to stay about 7 techs ahead of the other more advanced CIVs because I managed to steal about 5 to 6 techs in espionage by having Lubyanka+State party. At the beginning of the Global Age, I was only 2 or 3 techs ahead of the most advanced CIVs, which was GermanyCIV, and we were 3 more techs ahead of the rest (BrazilCIV > +3 techs ahead > GermanyCIV > +3 techs > rest)
DIGITAL AGE
The "artificial intelligence" and "unified theory" techs cost me around 630,000. While the techs in the "supermaterials" and "fusion" columns... around 190,000. And the techs in the "aerodynamics" and "satellites" columns cost between 86,000 and 100,000.
So first, the cost cutting of the last column of AI and unified theory will have to be brutal. I even suggest zeroing the tech divergence cost of these two techs. Because they are more towards the end, where the player is already heading towards the end in scientific victory. and the cost is very unbalanced. (side note, since the Mars control center is usually the last building to finish because it is the last tech to be researched, perhaps its cost could be reduced to around 3000/4000 hammers)
In the super materials column, the cost of tech divergence was around 63000 added to each tech, which corresponded to almost a third of the total cost of the techs in that column. Not including the cost of tech spread. And in my scientific production at the time, it was taking about 12 or more turns to get each tech in that column. So it was unbalanced. If the cost decreases by this one third, I think it will be balanced.
In the "Aerodynamics" column, the costs were no longer so oversized. Because at that point in the game, all my cities already had all the scientific buildings + all the trade routes, so this helps to make it less bad. and there's the fact that the other CIVs aren't that far away yet for costs to skyrocket. But I still found it a bit expensive, maybe a reduction of 10% to 15% might help balance things out.
Overall, this was the most unbalanced Age in terms of tech costs, with the last two being really glaring.
GLOBAL AGE
The "Radar" techs column is an interesting point. As the Player usually naturally goes to the computer tech, which gives access to a supercomputer building that gives +25% science and Internet Project that helps increase trade. So, this ends up making me feel less of the impact of tech divergence in this column, because I went straight to this tech before the others.
On the other hand, the "Aviation" tech column seemed quite painful to me because the tech divergence costs only increased in this column and there are no science or trade buildings. So in this column I think there should be a certain reduction in the costs of beakers (I don't know what to do, whether in tech divergence or tech spread, or base cost). Because it seemed more expensive than in the "Radar" techs column because of computation. I think a reduction of about 5%/10% of the base cost would perhaps not be so absurd.
Something that I think could be interesting is to check if the tech divergence is linked to the research cost component of each CIV. Since I was with BrazilCIV, which is 90, compared to the Europeans, which were 80, there was already a good difference in costs in these last columns, although relatively manageable. If it is another CIV that has worse modifiers, then it could make things very unfeasible.
CIVs with vassals pass almost all of their techs to their subordinates. then it creates some strange things like the fact that IranCIV is in 4th place in techs at the end because it is a vassal of the USA and receives/exchanges techs. I think this could be the focus of attention too.
Because they are a little bit ahead in techs at the end of the industrial age, GermanyCIV and NetherlandsCIV (mainly in the cities Amsterdam and KaapStade) have built a lot of wonders. and you can't compete against them in terms of turns to build these wonders in the middle/final, Industrial Age column
I think that the prices of Digital Age tech divergence will have to be rebalanced.
First I need to explain my situation. At the beginning of the Digital Age I managed to stay about 7 techs ahead of the other more advanced CIVs because I managed to steal about 5 to 6 techs in espionage by having Lubyanka+State party. At the beginning of the Global Age, I was only 2 or 3 techs ahead of the most advanced CIVs, which was GermanyCIV, and we were 3 more techs ahead of the rest (BrazilCIV > +3 techs ahead > GermanyCIV > +3 techs > rest)
DIGITAL AGE
The "artificial intelligence" and "unified theory" techs cost me around 630,000. While the techs in the "supermaterials" and "fusion" columns... around 190,000. And the techs in the "aerodynamics" and "satellites" columns cost between 86,000 and 100,000.
So first, the cost cutting of the last column of AI and unified theory will have to be brutal. I even suggest zeroing the tech divergence cost of these two techs. Because they are more towards the end, where the player is already heading towards the end in scientific victory. and the cost is very unbalanced. (side note, since the Mars control center is usually the last building to finish because it is the last tech to be researched, perhaps its cost could be reduced to around 3000/4000 hammers)
In the super materials column, the cost of tech divergence was around 63000 added to each tech, which corresponded to almost a third of the total cost of the techs in that column. Not including the cost of tech spread. And in my scientific production at the time, it was taking about 12 or more turns to get each tech in that column. So it was unbalanced. If the cost decreases by this one third, I think it will be balanced.
In the "Aerodynamics" column, the costs were no longer so oversized. Because at that point in the game, all my cities already had all the scientific buildings + all the trade routes, so this helps to make it less bad. and there's the fact that the other CIVs aren't that far away yet for costs to skyrocket. But I still found it a bit expensive, maybe a reduction of 10% to 15% might help balance things out.
Overall, this was the most unbalanced Age in terms of tech costs, with the last two being really glaring.
GLOBAL AGE
The "Radar" techs column is an interesting point. As the Player usually naturally goes to the computer tech, which gives access to a supercomputer building that gives +25% science and Internet Project that helps increase trade. So, this ends up making me feel less of the impact of tech divergence in this column, because I went straight to this tech before the others.
On the other hand, the "Aviation" tech column seemed quite painful to me because the tech divergence costs only increased in this column and there are no science or trade buildings. So in this column I think there should be a certain reduction in the costs of beakers (I don't know what to do, whether in tech divergence or tech spread, or base cost). Because it seemed more expensive than in the "Radar" techs column because of computation. I think a reduction of about 5%/10% of the base cost would perhaps not be so absurd.
Something that I think could be interesting is to check if the tech divergence is linked to the research cost component of each CIV. Since I was with BrazilCIV, which is 90, compared to the Europeans, which were 80, there was already a good difference in costs in these last columns, although relatively manageable. If it is another CIV that has worse modifiers, then it could make things very unfeasible.
CIVs with vassals pass almost all of their techs to their subordinates. then it creates some strange things like the fact that IranCIV is in 4th place in techs at the end because it is a vassal of the USA and receives/exchanges techs. I think this could be the focus of attention too.
Because they are a little bit ahead in techs at the end of the industrial age, GermanyCIV and NetherlandsCIV (mainly in the cities Amsterdam and KaapStade) have built a lot of wonders. and you can't compete against them in terms of turns to build these wonders in the middle/final, Industrial Age column
Cacaso
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Messages
- 226
People, try playing games for the science victory to see how the technology costs for space victory are balanced.
Since before the May 24th update, which increased the adjusted civilization research modifiers for European CIVs (+5 in England, France, Germany, and the Netherlands), I haven't been able to play another game until the science victory.
So, as you play, you'll observe how these European Frontrunners, as well as the USA and Russia (usually the ones competing in the space race), are developing in terms of research.
And also observe the wonder dates/if it's too concentrated in just a few CIVs/cities (usually Frankfurt/Amsterdam and London end up getting almost all the wonders) and then share it here in writing.
I don't have much time, but in the middle of next month I should try again with BrazilCIV to compare the evolution throughout the updates.
Since before the May 24th update, which increased the adjusted civilization research modifiers for European CIVs (+5 in England, France, Germany, and the Netherlands), I haven't been able to play another game until the science victory.
So, as you play, you'll observe how these European Frontrunners, as well as the USA and Russia (usually the ones competing in the space race), are developing in terms of research.
And also observe the wonder dates/if it's too concentrated in just a few CIVs/cities (usually Frankfurt/Amsterdam and London end up getting almost all the wonders) and then share it here in writing.
I don't have much time, but in the middle of next month I should try again with BrazilCIV to compare the evolution throughout the updates.
Similar threads
