|
Author
|
|
Topic: A list of data |  |
|
Caesar the Great
b.02-15-99
|
 |
posted April 23, 1999 18:46
   | 
 |
 |  |
This is something I have wanted to do for a while but I never found the time. Yestarday I found the time (3 hours). In this message I have complied a list of all the beakers needed for each discovery on diety. I did this by building 1 city with only 1 trade going to science. Then I used the cheat menu and got 1 discovery at a time and using the tax rate menu to see how many beakers were needed (because I was only producing 1 per turn). Okay here goes nothing
1. 12
2. 26
3. 45
4. 60
5. 75
6. 102
7. 126
8. 144
9. 180
10. 210
11. 231
12. 264
13. 299
14. 350
15. 390
16. 432
17. 459
18. 540
19. 589
20. 820
21. 903
22. 946
23. 989
24. 1080
25. 1125
26. 1170
27. 1242
28. 1288
29. 1334
30. 1440
31. 1488
32. 1536
33. 1680
34. 1700
35. 1760
36. 1872
37. 1942
38. 1976
39. 2028
40. 2080
41. 2132
42. 2310
43. 2365
44. 2420
45. 2520
46. 2576
47. 2632
48. 2784
49. 2842
50. 2900
51. 3060
52. 3120
53. 3180
54. 3294
55. 3355
56. 3416
57. 3591
58. 3654
59. 3717
60. 3900
61. 3965
62. 4030
63. 4158
64. 4224
65. 4290
66. 4422
67. 4489
68. 4556
69. 4830
70. 4900
71. 4970
72. 5112
73. 5183
74. 5254
75. 5400
76. 5472
77. 5544
78. 5850
79. 5925
80. 6000
81. 6156
82. 6232
83. 6308
84. 6552
85. 6630
86. 6708
87. 6786
88. 6864
89. 6942
90. 7290
This accounts for all the techs on the tech tree (everything up to future tech2). I verified this and there are a few stats. To research ALL techs on diety you must be producing approx 2832 beakers per turn. No matter in which way you research the techs you will always get the same numbers (trust me). The first number is when you research it (first, second, third, fourth). The second is the number of beakers need to research the tech. I hope somebody somewhere finds this useful (I'm sure I won't any time soon) |
Nakin Tames
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 23, 1999 19:20
|
|
| |
CTG,
WOW great. Thanks for all the work.
It is interesting. That's a lot of beakers.
Nakin |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 23, 1999 20:12
|
|
| |
I think I started doing this about 10 times... thanks a lot, I know it was a pain in the ole' arse. This brings up again my strategy of not trading for any tech I don't absolutely need and not demanding tribute until I have gotten some of the really crucial techs out of the way. Researching Demo as tech 15 instead of tech 20 makes a big difference to my game. A lot of folks seem to think otherwise, but if just avoiding one tech can save you twenty percent of the cost of your next advance, why not do it? Not being an MP player I can't say for certain, but I wouldn't share techs with an ally unless you both really needed something that you couldn't trade units or cities for. While I'm on this soapbox I might as well add that I hate the GL and a fun way to slow down the AI civs is to give them techs that don't really help them: their beaker cost goes up and they like you more! |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 23, 1999 20:21
|
|
| |
CtG - did you start with any techs? I have some back of the envelope numbers that look substantially different from your results:
10, 18, 24, 36, 48, 56, 72, 80, 99, 120, 144... HELP. Can you check some old saved games to verify those, I'll do the same. Does anyone else have any numbers to share? |
Caesar the Great
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 23, 1999 20:35
|
|
| |
No I didn't start with any techs. Are you sure that you played on diety those numbers I think are from king or emporer (forgot which) I checked these numbers twice. First all the techs. And then again to tech 30 all the numbers matched. And make sure you are only producing one beaker of science in your city because if you divide the numbers won't come out perfect. |
Caesar the Great
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 23, 1999 20:38
|
|
| |
I just checked your numbers are from emporer. Do it on diety and yours should match mine. |
Flavor Dave
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 24, 1999 00:15
|
|
| |
CTG--I appreciate the work, but I wonder if it's correct. The increase in the number of beakers is so erratic!! For example, from tech 2 to 3, it goes up 19, while from 3 to 4, it goes up 15--in percentage terms, there is a drastically lower increase for tech 4. From tech 71 to 72, it goes up a whopping 142 beakers--but from 72 to 73, it only goes up 71 beakers, half as much. You can find similar anomolies all over the chart. This doesn't make sense. |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 24, 1999 13:23
|
|
| |
I just tried it a different way and came up with different numbers again. I've counted the number of beakers for the first couple of advances physically on the screen in games before and your numbers seem high. I tried an approach that set science 0% and then checked the trade advisor to see how many beakers were required. (I know the logic of a series of zeros adding up to something is bizarre, but I think the results are consistent with game play.) I also pulled up an old saved game at random and checked on the 45th advance, and it required 1845 beakers, which I verified by moving the science % around to make sure the calculation was correct. Let's look into this some more. |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 24, 1999 14:21
|
|
| |
Okay, before my mother-in-law gets here from the airport...I ran a couple of additional tests and kept coming up with these results, which were unaffected by how many techs a civ started with, and didn't seem to be impacted by the order in which techs were researched.
Settings were Small Map /diety (CtG I'm professionally hurt that you would think otherwise)  .../7civ /white russians /raging /version 2.42 tech:beakers
1st:10
2nd:18
3rd:27
4th:36
5th:45
6th:66
7th:84
8th:96
9th:108
10th:130 Let's see if we can resolve the different results that CtG & I are coming up with, then maybe a pattern can be derived and it may turn out that different techs affect the beaker costs, and an optimal path for space flight can be determined... |
Ming
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 24, 1999 18:35
|
|
| |
I wonder if the difference is due to the amount of science other civs have. I always was under the impression that it was the total number of sciences out there, not just your own. I'm probably wrong, because I have never tested my theory. |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 24, 1999 19:14
|
|
| |
This will duplicate some info from my earlier post...sorry.
Map size may matter, as well as level, and other civ discoveries. I ran two tests on a small map (small /deity /7 /raging /standard /Russians) and came up with the following:Bronze to start/CBury,Bronze,Horse to start. 1 Curr/Potry 10
2 Alpha/Alpha 18
3 Writ/Writ 27
4 CBury/Curcy 36
5 CLaw/CLaw 45
6 Myst/Lit 66
7 Trade/Rep 84
8 Lit/Trade 96
9 Repub/? 108
10 Philo/? 130
11 Banking/? 143
12 Meds/? 168
Similar start except large map: Bronze,Cbury,Iron,Warcode to start. 1 Alpha 12
2 Writ 26
3 Potry 39
4 Curcy 60
5 CLaw 75
6 Lit 90
7 Rep 105
8 Trade128
9 Bank 144
10 Myst 168
11 Phil 187
12 Med 216
[This message has been edited by Sten Sture (edited April 24, 1999).] |
Theben
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 26, 1999 06:08
|
|
| |
I always suspected that map size was a relevant factor in tech discovery rate. Thanks for clearing that much up. |
Sieve Too
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 26, 1999 09:22
|
|
| |
Hmm. What happened between techs 19 and 20? To get tech 19, you only needed 49 more than than tech 18. To get tech 20, you need 231 more than 19. Strange.At one time, I heard a tale that after A.D. 0, it started taking significantly longer to get techs than before A.D 0. Anyone remember this? Since the numbers don't agree, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some random factor thrown in somewhere. After all, we've already seen this in combat where 0 def Diplomats somehow defeat their attackers. |
My Wife Hates CIV
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 26, 1999 10:10
|
|
| |
Is it just me? Everytime I set my science to 0 it seems the AI slows down just as much. |
Theben
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 26, 1999 17:57
|
|
| |
Sieve Too,
The rule you refer to was in civI. Techs required x2 science after 1.a.d. It was discarded with civII as everyone's tactics changed to-get as much tech as possible before 1 a.d. while building temples, marketplaces, courthouses & then go into "we luv" mode after 1 a.d. for several turns. |
Caesar the Great
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 27, 1999 22:01
|
|
| |
My findings are from a large world, city with 1 trade, and 7 civs. I did this in the year 4000BC might make a difference. I tried it on a small map and I got the numbers you were coming up with. And I did the discoveries 'till 20th and there was a huge jump between 19 and 20 than 18 to 19 not as big as my previous findings but never the less a much higher increase. I guess this shows what factors change techs. 1 more thing. Ming I will test your theory if I find some time between school and CTP. And Theben I will test your theory about 0 AD again if I find some time. |
geofelt
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 27, 1999 22:18
|
|
| |
I think the ai is programmed to try to match your science rate. If I am in fundamentalism, the rivals don't seem to discover too quickly. Also, if you get too good, they won't trade with you. |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted May 13, 1999 14:21
|
|
| |
Per Mingko's request....By the way I have been keeping a log of advances available, what I chose, and the beaker cost for smilo's database. If anyone else is doing something similar let me know. |
mingko
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted May 13, 1999 14:41
|
|
| |
Thanks Sten. I remember that the thread is started by Caesar yet I cannot find the thread using the search function in this forum.
I found that my figure (large world, diety level) is not exactly the same as Caesar's one. The differences are
33: 1650 instead of 1680
35: 1750 instead of 1760
37: 1924 instead of 1942
I am not as patient as Caesar. As a cheater, I enable cheat mode, then Edit King, Set Research Progress. |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted May 13, 1999 15:08
|
|
| |
I am a little bit obsessed with this question in the game...sorry.I have been checking actual results using the trade advisor to determine how many beakers are required and I haven't yet come up with CtG's numbers. Is is Mac vs PC, or Civ version??? I would rest easier if others would randomly check a game and post (just one data point) their data. It would only take a couple of minutes, please oh please! We know that the map size and level makes a big difference. I'm not sure about # of AI and aggregate techs researched, but I haven't seen differences that lead me to that conclusion. The beaker formula appears to be a derivative of (a+1)*(b+1), but it has some strange steps that a simple financial analyst caint figer out. "Help, help, I'm being repressed!" - Holy Grail [This message has been edited by Sten Sture (edited May 13, 1999).] |
Xin Yu
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted June 09, 1999 02:45
|
|
| |
I think I got the answer. a) beginning techs have no effect on number of beakers needed for each additional tech, they are pure gifts.
b) map size matters.
c) generally, the beakers needed for a tech=A*B, where A is 1 for the first tech, 2 for the second, and increases by 1 for each additional tech (as mentioned before, beginning techs do not count), B is 10 for the first tech, 11 for the second, .... However, B will be justified according to your position in the tech race. If you are far behind another civ, then B will cease to increase; on the other hand, if you are far ahead, B will jump. |
catullus
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted June 09, 1999 05:28
|
|
| |
Nice observation, Xin.
Cost of tech #A (after initial advances are subtracted) is always an integer value B times A.
We know that map size and level counts. We also know that the science leader(s) get(s) a handicap.
Your suggestion says B=A+10+modifications. I ran some regression analysis, and it looked more like we have something like
B=INT(r*A + C + M),
where r is a real value less than 1 (dependent on map/level), C is the constant for map/level, and M is a modifier for tech lead (and other). But it's not that simple, either. From advance #21, we have a series like this for beakers needed for next advance:
N=(x*A,x*A,x*A,y*A,y*A,y*A,z*A,...), where x<=y<=z. So for every third advance the number B (x,y and z above) is recalculated. B_new is never more than B_old+3, most often B_old+1, sometimes equal B_old (series of numbers added to B every three turns:221222031221221131131203). Unless the AIs were given free advances too, (better check that) I see no reason for these fluctuations. And what happened at advance #19 to 20, where B jumps from 31 to 41? Just a way to ensure that early advances come more quickly? And why is B recalculated every turn before that? Oh, well C.
|
GP
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted June 09, 1999 13:42
|
|
| |
Xin Yu, the manual (maybe the srtat guide) states that larger maps require more science. Also states that if you are way ahead, the AI will be given cheats for military techs. |
Sonderermittler
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted June 09, 1999 18:18
|
|
| |
I´ve just found out that beakers can be wasted. Actually I play some experiment games. If I get some new results I will post them here.I am playing a one city game. It´s 2400BC. I am detecting science #4(law code) and I have collected 47 beakers. The city produces 5 beakers. The following turn I detected law code. There were no further beakers added to science #5, so it seems that 52 beakers were demanded to get the science.
Reload to 2400BC. I put down the science barometer that way the city produces only 1 beaker. Surprising result: I got the science as well. What happened to the 4 beakers? If the ´detecting´ city produces more beakers than needed to finish a science, all additional beakers of this city will get lost. All beakers that are produced by cities, which are checked up after detecting (but in the same turn), will be added to the following science. |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted November 03, 1999 15:18
|
|
| |
There have been some questions about this stuff lately and the thread was pretty far back, so... bump  |
Campo
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted November 05, 1999 07:50
|
|
| |
Does the science "penalty" for more discoveries imply that I shouldn't seek out techs from GH's so aggressively? I always create a few early units solely to explore huts, and I've been pleased to get new techs. But since I can't control what I get, is it really detrimental by slowing my own discovery chain? |
Steve Clark
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted November 05, 1999 10:04
|
|
| |
Campo: I think part of the answer is being addressed in the other topic, 'Old Question, New Answers'. |
Caesar the Great
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted November 10, 1999 15:02
|
|
| |
I finally came back to this thread. Map size does have an affect. I got different results on a smaller map, I forgot exactly what it was, I did this over a month ago. I haven't tested to see if starting techs affects the research rate. I will also test if you get techs before building a city your research rate is affected. This info might help Paul take a few years off his unofficial OCC record I still can beleive sub 1800 AC landing. I'm gonna download one of those map and cheat a little (without cheat menu) and see if I can get a better time of course I will, cheating is the only way to get a head
[This message has been edited by Caesar the Great (edited November 10, 1999).] |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted January 07, 2000 13:21
|
|
| |
"I didn't get a hurumphf out of that guy" Mel Brooks, Blazing Saddles
|
SlowThinker
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 17, 2001 18:25
|
|
| |
{advances}
{beakers count}
{}{SlowThinker}{end1}------------------------------
This is a post with keywords. See The Great Library: a hierarchical structure" thread.
This thread has got to the top of the forum because of this post. It may be a very old thread. |
Rufus T. Firefly
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted April 18, 2001 03:49
|
|
| |
these numbers are just plain wrong. See discussion here.------------------
Dig trenches, with our men being killed off like flies? There isn't time to dig trenches. We'll have to buy them ready made. Here, run out and get some trenches.
-- Rufus T. Firefly, the original rush-builder | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums-archives
