Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Scientist Generation

  1. #1
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,206

    Scientist Generation

    If the base is going to be nice and low, which I don't mind particularly compared to how easy the previous iteration of science was.; Perhaps there could be a mechanic where it rises over the course of an Age.

    Many games have an element that cause 'technologies' to become cheaper over time, this is meant to reflect the idea that knowledge begets knowledge, and each discovery can be used to make the next.

    Right now generation appears to be 1% per tick. What if it increased by 0.5% every Jan1 after YR0 ... start of YR10 you would be up to 6% per tick, base.

  2. #2
    Forum Addict smercjd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oviedo, FL
    Posts
    1,148
    Quote Originally Posted by RattleHead View Post
    If the base is going to be nice and low, which I don't mind particularly compared to how easy the previous iteration of science was.; Perhaps there could be a mechanic where it rises over the course of an Age.

    Many games have an element that cause 'technologies' to become cheaper over time, this is meant to reflect the idea that knowledge begets knowledge, and each discovery can be used to make the next.

    Right now generation appears to be 1% per tick. What if it increased by 0.5% every Jan1 after YR0 ... start of YR10 you would be up to 6% per tick, base.
    I like this idea. I would like it more if it were more dependent on how much you've already trained in that time...
    For example: a person who has put the effort in to train more scientists, would reap more benefits.

    Say person A trains nothing extra. That person can experience the base growthline - let's bring it down to 0.25% (instead of your suggested 0.5%)
    That person, if they never train any extra - would end with a 3.5% base growth by YR10.

    Say person B trains 25% extra scientists per year. This person would gain 0.5% base growth - ending with the 6% base at YR10.

    Sort of a reward for putting extra into science. The bonuses seem pretty low anyway. Each scientist provides 2,400 books per day (Utopian month). At 2,400 into alchemy, that's only about 2.5% bonus income and there are diminishing effects.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    35
    i like and dislike this idea. i would much rather have a ritual made in place of increasing the flat rate.

    also maybe boost rev a bit. instead of 2% make it 4% per tick?

    and i haven't run labs but im sure they will have a great effect even at 10%

  4. #4
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,206
    That suggested buff to rev seems a bit crazy, since everyone has access anyways. Why not just buff the flat rate.

    I will concede Labs are quite strong, a Ritual would make sense also... buffing the base rate over time, by whatever %, would also help those who join once the age is already underway, without hurting those who started from BoA. For whatever that is worth

  5. #5
    Forum Addict Bo To's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Personally I find labs weak. Lets say you run 15% labs which gives 50% more generation(with reve 1.8%/tick). You need 56 ticks to create a new scientist. Without labs(but with reve) you will get a new scientist in 77 ticks. So overall you will have 21 * 100 = 2100 extra books.

    Now lets say during the 56 ticks instead of labs you had schools. You were buffing only 1 scientist: 24*100 + 32*200 = 2200 extra books. So with 2+ scientists in 1 category you will get significantly more books from schools than from labs. I'm tacking the BoA starting scientists and their level. Latter schools will be significantly better than labs.

    If my cals above are wrong pls tell me because I don't run anything atm(experimenting to see what I will have without any).

    I'm suggesting to change the labs effect from multiplicative to additive with a base of 0.2% raw progress and max of 5%(doesn't stack with rev).

  6. #6
    Forum Addict smercjd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oviedo, FL
    Posts
    1,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Bo To View Post
    Personally I find labs weak. Lets say you run 15% labs which gives 50% more generation(with reve 1.8%/tick). You need 56 ticks to create a new scientist. Without labs(but with reve) you will get a new scientist in 77 ticks. So overall you will have 21 * 100 = 2100 extra books.

    Now lets say during the 56 ticks instead of labs you had schools. You were buffing only 1 scientist: 24*100 + 32*200 = 2200 extra books. So with 2+ scientists in 1 category you will get significantly more books from schools than from labs. I'm tacking the BoA starting scientists and their level. Latter schools will be significantly better than labs.

    If my cals above are wrong pls tell me because I don't run anything atm(experimenting to see what I will have without any).

    I'm suggesting to change the labs effect from multiplicative to additive with a base of 0.2% raw progress and max of 5%(doesn't stack with rev).
    True, but that's if your new scientist remains a "recruit" the entire time. The value of a new scientist is that they grow to novice and eventually professor...which I am not sure yet how many more books that provides...but just from recruit to novice it goes from 100 to 200.

    It seems to me that as it currently stands -- labs are better early age to generate more scientists, and then later in the age, schools since your scientists are professors and you have more of them.

    The rate of a new scientist never increases (another reason labs are better earlier), but the rate of how many books you get increases significantly making schools so much better later.

  7. #7
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    208
    I'm currently running 25% labs and it gives me about +75% scientist generation with 95% BE thanks to being a halfer. I thought of building schools but books can be stolen and burned, and scientists are there forever.

  8. #8
    Forum Addict smercjd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oviedo, FL
    Posts
    1,148
    Quote Originally Posted by smercjd View Post
    True, but that's if your new scientist remains a "recruit" the entire time. The value of a new scientist is that they grow to novice and eventually professor...which I am not sure yet how many more books that provides...but just from recruit to novice it goes from 100 to 200.

    It seems to me that as it currently stands -- labs are better early age to generate more scientists, and then later in the age, schools since your scientists are professors and you have more of them.

    The rate of a new scientist never increases (another reason labs are better earlier), but the rate of how many books you get increases significantly making schools so much better later.
    There's a hidden reason to have schools. Scientists grow in level faster that way...Recruit -> Novice -> Adept(?) -> Professor...because now, rather than a set amount of time - it's based on how many books they have learne.d

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •