What are your thoughts about tech trading?

J

Jeddite

Chieftain
Joined
Feb 4, 2025
Messages
63
Hey all, just like in the title.

I've come to think they are useful. They can be cheesed but only a bit and it can backfire (you can bet what tech you will be able to buy from a friendly civ next, if you are both on same/around the same tech number and start researching the other ones, but it betrays you half the time, the mecchanism is the same as with tech stealing from spy).

After coming back to civ and VP I thought that they are making things easier and probably if you tech leader consistently/on like Emperor, even Immortal they are. But many times when I thought I was safe to sell a lot for tremendous profit I've come to realize I invest so heavily this money while my income could be 1/3 from tech selling, of total (literally all after expenses). This backfired several times already when vassals were finally able to decalre independence and start war (mainly due to x3 population) usually coupled with some other wars/peopel turning on you which cut that profit. Influx of easy money can lead to over investment and periods stagnation/being unable to buy important buildings later until ideologies kick in, mostly due to investing and constructing a lot of infrastructure and giga buildings mantainance. Secondly, I am much mroe careful now. A few times I feeded two most important threaths myself, as I though they are safe backwards stagnating authorities. Until they get many techs from you, conquer a bit now when their bonuses are really big, and start to catch up FAST. Ans this Sweden that was backward and unable to do anything starts eating up. Suddenly Denmark or Mongolia or the Aztecs who did nothing but settling some strange, desperate island cities grows a modern navy covering continous 30 tiles of ironclads aimed at your cities scrumbling to build castles, bastion forts, arsenals, and praying for mines and planes soon, and realy nukes.

They are useful to make less turns to finish a game which is nice but imho are not making game easier, they can in ideal terms, but they lead to some comeback mechanisms and I also grown progress rationalism order empires able to compete on wonders and beating me to apollo program along with having nuclear weapons much faster than I expected. Happened to me to grow a number 1 score and serious threat to me with Morocco that I was feeding tech as it was losing a war and behind in tech and policies but was warring my number then number one enemy. Happened to me with Portugal, who did not even have own religion. I forgot those mechanism like you also feed them culture if they are progress. And they can go rationalism, big cities and order. Last game I won France culturally cause nobody gave a **** but I was going to lose in diplo to Siam (which became my freedom best buddy), militarily to Denmark and the Netherlands nukes (they intercepted 5 of the 7 I fired at them, they used two against me ofc both not intercepted, nice) and scientific to Portugal, because I was whoring out myself with tech when they were still in reinassance while I felt safe close to modern and adopting ideology. I also bought some techs. I don;t thiing this backfiring is always bad play, they are lot of things to invest into at that time and you need tons of cash to buy some techs too, on deity you're much more likely to be ahead in policies if anything, tech leader is very rare and usually 1 tech tops and that is maybe only for few turns. You need to aim for science heavily to be ahead and you can get very ahead but only in late atomic with clear goal of scientific victory. And being just better in policies even like 5 ahead is no longer an auto-win as it many times was in VP years ago. You can still get outproduced, outscience by order civs, and grinded down in war by authorities. And that's good, and I think tech selling creates more interesting games. Or rathrer can create, it is not guaranteed. Remember that scholars in residence should be replaled when you catch up in tech (and it can also boost a rival tech leader heavily if he is statecraft with many alliances)and this one that gives culture and production big percent boost when you lead policies are very very dangerous. I sometimes coudn't even propose repealing them, as I lost seat to propose at all to those statecraft seats. It's important to keep getting leader seat of the , the host iirc, the world congress through alliences that will vote on you (not just vassals, they won't most likely). I had even many CS aliances Morocco voting on me, or even when to vote some friendly civ on (that you know will vote on themsleves) so that your enemy statecraft civ will not get it.
 
Last edited:
For me personally I always disable tech trading because the only way I win is through conquering (which then usually leads to culture victory), so every Civ hates me and even if they are friendly I assume they are plotting against me, so I'd rather not give any other civ any potential advantages. Simple as that. But I haven't really played around with it much so it might not work the way I expect it too if I actually gave it more of a chance. My experience in tech trading is from much earlier versions.
 
I might have written this all convoluted yesterday so I will try to clarify in much better format and no typos this time:

1. When you only sell a couple of techs to backward nations for a guaranteed and safe 100-300 GPT influx, and assuming AIs are not using this option too much: the game will more likely become easier

2. When you sell nearly everything to nearly everyone you might get easily 1000-1500 GPT along with instant cash but you probably will also buy tech for about -500 GPT and similar cash in addition, and make your game most likely harder on higher difficulties, when authority bonuses for conquests and ideologies for science and production will kick in

3. When you sell a lot but more carefully you will create a less static game that might get harder for a calculated high risk, high reward opportunity (those who were behind might become new leaders in tech competition, CS competition, and start conquering). You will get about 500-1000 GPT plus cash, also probably spending half as much for your own buying. There are few things to consider here you neeed to be mindful of:
- Progress competitors also get a lot of culture when you sell them a tech, easy to overlook when you think you're ahead in both
- Authority competitors will use bought tech to get more production, gold and science to get more advanced larger armies and they bonuses for conquests are very powerful late game
- You can make a gamble of feeding Authority civs older economic techs for them to focus on researching more advanced military ones, while you research more economics techs, and count on buying those more advanced military ones from them - it can backfire if they start conquering a lot or if they turn on you before you buy something useful from them
- Statecraft civs can will get more powerful and they can oust you of the World Congress proposals when you play on lrge and huge maps easily
- Rationalism and especially later Order civs that were a bit behind before due to many cities penalty, can now grow substantially if they grabbed a lot of territory as many big population and production cities will benefit them now much more than before, while penalty for tech and policies is now overcome many times over for them
- Don't overinvest in things that do not net you tangible benefits, nor spend too much of the time on processes. Using this money is mighty beneficial in investing in windmills, factories/coaling stations, public schools and military academies. Along with many buildings you lack from before. You should have 12-15 settled/anexed cities by mid-Industrial, no matter your policies, and those new buildings are -4/5 gold in every city x your cities number. Don't run into spiral of building everything for Progress and Industry 40/50 culture, you might swell you buildings maintenance by another -200 GPT per turn, along with -400 you need for Industrial buildings, -200 GPT for older buildings you need to get, and probably new -200 GPT in increased scaling, new units, navy and more workers for railroads maintenance, in addition to everything you pay already and money needed if you want to buy some techs (another -400) and new railroad maintenance. In a span of 20-30 turns! There are actually not many ways to get a lot of money at this stage, trade routes sparse and needed for internal cities development, stock exchanges and corporations far, far away
- Beware of larger and surprising enemy navies they wouldn't be advanced enough to get that fast without your tech selling!
- World Congress resolutions like Scholars in Residence, the one giving +15 or even +30% to either food and science or production and culture (the second one is more dangerous) will make AIs much more powerful coupled with bought tech and make your lead/second place threatened

I enjoy writing this summaries and strategy guides fromt time to time, if they are of any benefit to you, I'm sorry for being chaotic in writing oftentimes.
 
I always disable tech trading
Click to expand...
I sometimes forget, and from these happy accidents I have concluded the effect on gameplay is indeed large.

They are useful to make less turns to finish a game
Click to expand...
This is probably the most significant effect, as it simply reduces the amount of science needed to enter the endgame for anyone who engages.

On the more detailed analysis I think you want to go more basic: Tech Trading allows you to convert Gold into Science. This is already possible through the Bank effect at 15%. How much more efficient is Tech Trading at standard rates (AI offers for techs vary widely it feels?) considering investing Gold also gives Production? This is the fundamental question to have a handle on, I think, otherwise it's hard to tell how much a tech is really "worth" at a particular moment, before considerations about if its an economic tech or a military tech, what the foreign leader's focusses are, and so on.
much better format
Click to expand...
Yes I found the second post easier to read. The first is fairly impenetrable.
 
Overpowered, depending on how you use. It made my Babylon games trivial, since selling techs means the investment bonus on Babylon's UA is always in use.

I had a game in which I befriended Austria, whose AI is among the most loyal, and kept selling and buying techs from her. We effectively had double the science output of everyone else, to the point of being two eras ahead the rest of the world. And yes, Austria has a strong late game, but I went for cultural, which is faster than diplomatic, and hence won the game.

Nowadays, I prefer to disable this option. Too exploitable.
 
When was the last time you tried tech trading?

I started playing VP in times of defense (was it?) unhappiness and when keep growth was the king of strategies, and Gazebo was making new version posts. I had a bit of disabling tech trading and that was the consesnsus back then I think. Since return to more regularly playing VP I had discovered them as Hokath by accident (also events before but I think they are now disabled). And basically I have killed myself a few times or made game much harder and sometimes even paradoxically longer (not in turn but real time) as now AIs that would get behind in earlier eras gets neutered forever. There is much more competition with it on, the more you abuse it. I think I like them on newest few version specifically when AIs are really harder to bring down and outteching is simply not an option. I still need to try more games without tech trading turned on.
I play with some modmods that give AIs things like +1 yield for every religion present in the city, or very powerful 10% of production converted in science in each city every turn. They might distort some things, but usually not too much.
My inprudent use of tech trading might have been contributing issue to me recently losing a Brazil and Siam games. The Milae mod incorporated into the VP made deity AIs with an actual come back potential which with recent hardcoded high evaluations for religions and early foundings upped a difficulty a lot in a dynamic positive way. I think people assume or play that good they are always a tech leader, it isn't the case in my experience most of the time, and even if you among the top, the other ones are not more than half or full era behind, never two full eras

Legen said:
We effectively had double the science output of everyone else, to the point of being two eras ahead the rest of the world
Click to expand...
What difficulty, seems you and that AI were crazy good. I am only usually able to sell to authority civs and some second or third performing progress if they are several in the game. Even if I am usually able to be first in production until the very end, my production is divided by fighting two, three AIs while I have 50% production than any of them, not two, three times larger than or even parity with all of them combined. Low supply and its reduction from war weariness is becoming very pressing late game. I generally think production is the core yields by meta now, it definitely used to be culture last few years. I many times feel after getting few most important ideology tenets my benefits from prioritising culture very much are reduced by 90% and now I am left with gaping hole.
Check some of my screenshots, lead in policies and an influc of gold is balanced by much more aggresive and adcanced AI
Also they can and do buy a tech, then declare after ten turns.
I like the fact that tech trading may still derail/overthrow you while with it off authority civs perform very badly which was also evidenced by Vern's informative analysis. With it off a lor of game was already decided in a time leading to industrial. With it on you are constantly challenged and new threats might arrive, as authority lacks science but scales much much better than progress and tradition, two city takings may start their march through half continent or even becoming tech leader (in my france culture won victory, I never was one, I got parity with Siam around modern, then I got eclisped by first Portugal, then Sweden by even larger margin). There is only so much things at any given moment you can do with gold, and you get much more techs from spies and much more gold from modern and on merchants. By late modern you get your previous lucrative GPT annulled many times over, and tech costs are reduced to your one turn gold yield (in total, not per turn). GMerchants are like 30 turns. And good luck selling them to anyone but your vassals who probably don't have money for some time, as your friends are one tech ahead/behind you and the rest of the world are your enemies.

Sorry for so many ramblings, I enjoyed my last dozen of VP games and I am pleasently surprised by fine tuning of AIs and current balance to the point of wanting to share and hear people's thoughts. I've lost and conceded both games shortly thereafter I just didn't make more screenshots. I had a very good position gained at point prior, I would just snowball harder and harder as they would have no way of challenging me with armies and techs (so also yields) from two eras earlier. Them advancing in tech from my selling at earlier points gave them enough power in being a threat militarily to me to divert tons of my gold and production from making wonders and buildings and processes into units, units, and units which were barely or failing to hold many attacks of similar armies from a few sides plus navy. If I had enough of production for scores of diplomats even the decolonization wouldn't be a problem. Now I couldn't divert production to them, there's 5 turns gold cooldown, and most of routes are kept closed by wars,

Spoiler :

1752517616428.png
1752517790651.png

1752518362494.png

1752518474945.png

1752518548847.png

1752518569058.png

🤡
 
Last edited:
Jeddite said:
My inprudent use of tech trading might have been contributing issue to me recently losing a Brazil and Siam games. The Milae mod incorporated into the VP made deity AIs with an actual come back potential which with recent hardcoded high evaluations for religions and early foundings upped a difficulty a lot in a dynamic positive way.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, what is Milae mod incorporated into the VP?
 
pochesun said:
Excuse me, what is Milae mod incorporated into the VP?
Click to expand...
M

Thread 'Alternative Difficulty Mod'

v14 is here so you can get rekd on patch 3.2!
Download New Version:
CivFanatic Link: https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/alternative-difficulty-for-vp.28828/
MegaShare Link: https://mega.nz/folder/AksEwJ7C#2Zc7ev3-oy724wd_icrD8g

Mod to change the way difficulty is done in VP.
A/B/C changed to be a 10 turn trigger giving mostly gold.
Rest of the AI bonuses are done as cost reductions to science/policy etc costs and larger cost reductions to units/buildings. Full changes are explained in the readme.

Compared to current Deity, AIs should have a much smoother power increase...
  • Like

It was an attempt of making more smooth and harder difficulty, mostly on deity initially, but in principle applied with extreme success for all difficulties and various mechanism. It was very popular, and was systematically integrated into base VP, and is responsible in part by much more natural feeling of AIs in the VP. It incorporated succesfully eliminating things knows as ABC instant bonuses for the AIs which were being tested and a goal by the main VP team at that time, instead giving AIs more scaling power and production discounts iirc to stay relevant in later parts of the game, among other things. Together with fine tuning of AI behavior and production choices by recursive, ilteroi, and others it created much more vibrant, and less vanilla style (full of upfront bonuses making early game dull while being fragile to military pressure or more efficient long term planning) gameplay. It was ofc more complex and may have not been directly fused to VP (altough I clearly remember devs and milae mentioning his tables in dll or something being put by him from his mod into the VP) and it required fine tuning with other things. It may have made the VP a bit easier on standard size (due to reducing phenomonon known as carpets of units) but considerably more hard on larger maps, where les units and more scalling meant AI could take each other cities, consolidate, get policy bonuses more often
 
Last edited:
Jeddite said:
M

Thread 'Alternative Difficulty Mod'

v14 is here so you can get rekd on patch 3.2!
Download New Version:
CivFanatic Link: https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/alternative-difficulty-for-vp.28828/
MegaShare Link: https://mega.nz/folder/AksEwJ7C#2Zc7ev3-oy724wd_icrD8g

Mod to change the way difficulty is done in VP.
A/B/C changed to be a 10 turn trigger giving mostly gold.
Rest of the AI bonuses are done as cost reductions to science/policy etc costs and larger cost reductions to units/buildings. Full changes are explained in the readme.

Compared to current Deity, AIs should have a much smoother power increase...
  • Like

It was an attempt of making more smooth and harder difficulty, mostly on deity initially, but in principle applied with extreme success for all difficulties and various mechanism. It was very popular, and was systematically integrated into base VP, and is responsible in part by much more natural feeling of AIs in the VP. It incorporated succesfully eliminating things knows as ABC instant bonuses for the AIs which were being tested and a goal by the main VP team at that time, instead giving AIs more scaling power and production discounts iirc to stay relevant in later parts of the game, among other things. Together with fine tuning of AI behavior and production choices by recursive, ilteroi, and others it created much more vibrant, and less vanilla style (full of upfront bonuses making early game dull while being fragile to military pressure or more efficient long term planning) gameplay. It was ofc more complex and may have not been directly fused to VP (altough I clearly remember devs and milae mentioning his tables in dll or something being put by him from his mod into the VP) and it required fine tuning with other things. It may have made the VP a bit easier on standard size (due to reducing phenomonon known as carpets of units) but considerably more hard on larger maps, where les units and more scalling meant AI could take each other cities, consolidate, get policy bonuses more often
Click to expand...
Thx for the thorough explanation :)
As far as i understand its a part of current VP (integrated into base VP)?
 
@pochesun I don't know the details so it will be prudent to wait until any of the main devs like Recursive to comment if they ever stumble across this thread and my rumblings (or rather praises). IIRC the devs were also testing changing ABC bonuses mechanism on their own at that time, Milae's work, initially aimed at improving his experience and upping the difficulty on deity, succesfully tested a coherent approach in replacing how AI difficulty works and accelerated the process, which results were either directly transfered from his mod into base VP, or replicated from scratch in similar or same manner they worked in his mod. The mod was thus discountinued as the core changes are now in VP. On the details which parts, mechanism, files, code, went where, I do not have knowledge.
 
I turn tech trading off, but do allow sales of tech that have been personally researched. If I'm going strong science (I like Babylon) later in the game I will sell techs to people down the ladder from me, but I'm choosy and don't usually offer the top tier / newest ones. I like to keep a couple ahead of the pack. I have also discovered (and this works for trading in general) that if an AI requests a specific tech/item... you don't have to just flat out refuse it. You can deselect it and choose to switch to something else and adjust the values accordingly via transparent diplomacy. Also don't assume what they offer is all they will pay, if they have spare $$ per turn I keep inching the number up until it tips, then move back a notch or two. I have found AI will frequently give you 10+ more than they offer, assuming they have it to give, else it comes back "impossible".
 
Gold to science ratio is extremely low. That's why i never play with tech trading. It should be closer to 3/1, so a 10k science tech would cost 30k gold when bought form a neutral civ.
 
Jeddite said:
@pochesun I don't know the details so it will be prudent to wait until any of the main devs like Recursive to comment if they ever stumble across this thread and my rumblings (or rather praises). IIRC the devs were also testing changing ABC bonuses mechanism on their own at that time, Milae's work, initially aimed at improving his experience and upping the difficulty on deity, succesfully tested a coherent approach in replacing how AI difficulty works and accelerated the process, which results were either directly transfered from his mod into base VP, or replicated from scratch in similar or same manner they worked in his mod. The mod was thus discountinued as the core changes are now in VP. On the details which parts, mechanism, files, code, went where, I do not have knowledge.
Click to expand...
Damn I haven't been on the forum for a while and just randomly came across you shouting me out, it was nice to see so thanks:)

But yea the mechanics are in VP now as modifiers which are updated in the HandicapInfos table.
There's less instant yield bonuses for AIs now and more cost reductions, which can scale with era so the AI bonuses are less heavily weighted to the early game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
what are your average years/turn numbers of reaching industrial and modern era?
Replies
0
Views
333
tramwajg
T
A
It's modern era and World Congress haven't been found, not a bug
Replies
0
Views
484
anastazjasz
A
J
Difficulty and happiness: are those only my feelings?
Replies
15
Views
1K
looorg
L
H
Science bug?
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
ellamvik
E
T
Rationalism vs. Industry
Replies
11
Views
1K
GoreBush
G
Back
Top Bottom