Man, he was quiet for so long...now that SD said about undoing the change, he talks again.

Perhaps the increasing costs of tech was a GOOD feature.

Which is quite odd, seeing as he's complaining about the current state of things.

Doogles - Occasionally, he comes up with something worthwhile, and people agree with him. He then assumes that everyone agrees with everything else he says.

Uranium - You're the one asserting that everyone agrees with you, so the burden of proof lies with you. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't ASSUME everyone agrees with you based on a few highly unrepresentative topics. As you said, these forums aren't that busy, yet there are thousands of players - how can you be so absolutely sure you speak for most of them?

Also, assuming a topic he started that went many pages was represented in many people backing him. A hot topic of discussion isn't always filled with people agreeing.

In the new patch, inflation is still in but toned way down. It's something like 1/4th of what it was before.

The new patch has made things much more agreeable.

Is this the 'official' patch or the 1.92 with the mouse zoom posted today.

Gigolojones: Thanks for the help with installing custom ships! You seem to bee all over the forums today.

Why not a system who needs some points of research (a few percent), for each technology completed (and owned by trade, invasion, etc.), a sort of cost for knowledge maintain.
Each technology owned, decreases slowly the research capacity.

The player must invest in additional laboratories to maintain its research capacity at the same level.

Example:

Research capacity: 1000 points research.

Research cost of technology: 1000 points research.
Cost of maintaining technology: 10 points research (1% in this case).

Research time is therefore 1 week.

Once the technology is completed, it costs 10 points research to maintain research knowledge.


The research capacity becomes: 1000 - 10 = 990 points research.


A tag is added to the XML file in order to provide values more or less important for modding.

Example:

Culture ID="InterGov"
DisplayName Interstellar Governments /DisplayName
Cost 200 /Cost
KnowledgeCost 2 /KnowledgeCost

Culture ID="InterGov"
DisplayName Interstellar Governments /DisplayName
Cost 200 /Cost
KnowledgeCost 10 /KnowledgeCost


Just an idea with my bad English. 

I just completed a tech-bug free game... wohoo, perhaps this new patch solved the problem...or I'm just lucky

I am torn as to whether this weekend is the weekend to really tear into this. Is the tech bug dead then or should I wait it out a bit more?

Geekdom....live it, love it, learn it!!!!

From other reports, it looks like the formula is far more fair at this point. I only hope the inflation still hits hard when not trading techs, because it was actually pretty sweet in that game.

Either way, looks like Uranium has one less thing to complain about.... Poor little guy.

What patch? I only see 1.91.021 which has been out since release.

What patch? I only see 1.91.021 which has been out since release.

Check this link



https://forums.galciv2.com/?aid=314852

Kevin

I haven't had any real play time in ages, but the posts around here leave me thinking that the research cost changes are not a bug, just a feature that might still need a bit of fine-tuning.

Has anyone working on a Gigantic or Immense map in an earlier version tried the 1.92 alpha? What I'm most curious about is how the late game on planet-rich maps will work out. It seems like adding some research inflation and removing unique techs from the trading system could both add some real variety to the late game, regardless of your victory goal.

I have mentioned before without any feedback about the simple solution of adding a negative morale bonus to each tech building. This would prevent people from making huge tech planets ( without careful management ) and moderate tech advancement with a simple change that would not require a lot of programming. It also accuratly reflects reality as the majority of people do complain when large amount of funding are put into research or science ( look at NASA ) .

Just an idea am willing to listen to reasons why it would or would not work.

Things are back to the way they were before TA.

What most people (including myself, originally) don't realize is that this inflation has always been in the game. It just went unnoticed because it was A) pretty tame and obscured by not being able to see the actual costs of techs. The inflation was pumped full of steroids in the original release, then returned back to previous levels in the newest patch.



Hm, it would solve the problem of me never, ever building more than one morale building per planet, even if the planet has a quality of 25 or something insane like that, and since the AI manages its morale pretty well it wouldn't be an AI raper.

The only think I have to note is that the research buildings would need a small PERCENTAGE penalty to morale, not a subtractive one like that which is granted by population, taxes, etc. Reason being, morale bonuses work on the base morale (that is, what you're left with after penalties are subtracted from 100) so, if research buildings straight up subtracted morale, they could quickly drag base morale down to 0, which would lock it at 0 making it completely impossible to raise.

No.

People might complain about NASA, yet people beg for money to go to (insert random anatomy location) cancer research all the time. People suppot research they see as beneficial - and if a horde of Drengin are headed toward their planet, they'll get behind any research that will stop the invaders.

Actually people do want a cure for cancer but if you ask them for the tax increase to increase spending on research for it they complain and private industry will not do reserch unless they see the possibility of profit at the end so many forms of cancer are ignored.

As to the hoard of Drengin unfortunatly history shows that there is always an enemy at the gates so to speak and if there isnt one then they create one.

That's an interesting notion, but my first big bump is story-based. I almost always choose the Technologist party--if research buildings affected morale, shouldn't they *boost* for Technologists? Research buildings for them are kind of like churches for a theocracy.

Gw Swicord I see the point you are trying to make but research affects morale because the average person does not understand or does not want to wait for the long term benifits taht come from it.

So they have negative morale for the general population and do not give positive moral except for a tiny percentage of the population ( ie scientists and scholars ) .

Also churches and research buildings really do not serve the same role , sorry .

A closer analogy would be we can have a University but it also has to have a Football team or the city will not support it ( ie moral building ) .

IDMopman, my guess is that you don't put much importance on the "party" business during game setup (I have an uncontrollable role-playing streak). If I'm playing as Technologists and maintain a majority in parliament, by definition "the average person" is a Technologist.

The church thing was perhaps a rather loose analogy, but I don't think it is that far a stretch to compare those institution types in terms of how they might shape popular opinion in a culture, especially one that is democratically governed by people committed to research.

Very true GW I did not take into account the roleplaying aspect and stand corrected about that.

If possible a morale bonus for that political party as applied to tech centers would be appropriate but I am uncertain as to how difficult it would be to implemant.

I tend to use historical and therefore "human" examples of social patterns and this was why I dissented from your view.

Hmm... the party in control doesn't reflect the average person's beliefs. Look at the democrats and republicans in the U.S. and tell me how many average people that you personally know that aren't actually able to agree with some of the points from both sides. And that's not even getting into the fact that liking a certain party doesn't mean being the epitome of what they represent. I prefer democrats to republicans, but I am hardly a hard-core liberal.

And that's just with a two-party system, where GalCiv's is much more diverse.

Just because the technologists are the dominant political party doesn't mean all the people are scientists and love to spend their free time doing research. That means the people feel the technologists are doing a good job running the government.

And, what, when morale dips and the Federalists take over, the people are suddenly angered by technology and want to instead all become merchants? I just can't see a logical explanation that could tie the people's values so strongly to a political affiliation that they'll drop the moment it isn't working out.

That's actually another part of why I was nattering on above about the parties in GC2. Forgive a bit of civics ranting from a former instructor, but here in the US we don't have a "real" party system. We have personality-driven politics wearing partisan drag.

IMO, the only major gap in the otherwise amazing genius of our Constitution is that the framers deluded themselves into believing they could work without institutional parties. Basically, because we have single-member, winner-take-all congressional districts, we are structurally prevented from having parties with either strong internal cohesion or broad and deep connections between member values and leadership poliices.

So, in my silly imaginary GC2-land, having a Technologist government doesn't mean that "the people" all love research. It just means that research is the most popular civic goal, at least until the government falls. That "the people" thing is probably the other greatest flaw of US democracy--many of us too often think that (or at least talk as if) 300 million folks can *all* agree on something other than the fact that we don't want ongoing violent revolution or authoritarian oppression. Well, even that last isn't strictly true; we have citizens who think they're in the vanguard of a Leninist proletariat, are actively working to get us all involved in race wars, want us governed by a specific set of theologians, etc.