Economy and Research treaties » Forum Post by Ian560

MarvinKosh

Join Date 08/2005

+87

If you're receiving an Economic Treaty, you basically get an extra income based on how well the treaty partner's economy is doing. If you're receiving a Research Treaty, you get extra tech points based on how many tech points your treaty partner is generating. Obviously if you're giving a treaty, your partner gets the same sort of benefits.

It's a way of gaining co-operative benefits from other races.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thanks Marvin Kosh!

Successfully updated karma reason!

The research and economic treaties give the receiving race an amount equal to 10% of the giving race's output in research points and BCs, respectively.

Note, the race giving the treaty does NOT lose that 10%. The receiving race gets that amount w/o penalty to the giving race.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting LTjim,

reply 3

The research and economic treaties give the receiving race an amount equal to 10% of the giving race's output in research points and BCs, respectively.

Note, the race giving the treaty does NOT lose that 10%. The receiving race gets that amount w/o penalty to the giving race.

Note: The research treaty only grants research from base* research. This means that racial bonuses for the race in question don't matter (and neither, I believe, does difficulty). This essentially makes research treaties almost useless, particularly given the AI's questionable building decisions.

Presumably it would grant from the effective value of base research if the AI were funding military/social and focusing on research, but to be honest I haven't tested that particular quirk.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Philocthetes

Join Date 10/2003

+153

Quoting Sole Soul,

reply 4

... This essentially makes research treaties almost useless ...

Can you tell us anything about the math behind the research treaty's diplomatic value?

Does the direction of the treaty matter for diplo, or do relations improve at the same rate on both sides of a treaty? Is it worse to cancel a treaty that you gave/sold than it is to attack someone who gave/sold a treaty to you?

Successfully updated karma reason!

qrtxian

Join Date 03/2010

+30

Quoting GW Swicord,

reply 5

Is it worse to cancel a treaty that you gave/sold than it is to attack someone who gave/sold a treaty to you?

To the best of my knowledge, you can't cancel a treaty except by going to war with your treaty partner, which results in a big diplomatic penalty with every other race for the aggressor (" - - They don't trust us", or something like that). So the only way to really break a treaty is to provoke the race you have it with into declaring war.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Philocthetes

Join Date 10/2003

+153

Quoting qrtxian,

reply 6

To the best of my knowledge, you can't cancel a treaty except by going to war with your treaty partner, which results in a big diplomatic penalty with every other race for the aggressor (" - - They don't trust us", or something like that). So the only way to really break a treaty is to provoke the race you have it with into declaring war.

Doh! I've not been playing much in the past year; I guess I was confusing the treaties with alliances. I've rarely wanted to break either because I tend to highly value good relations even if I'm not trying for an alliance win.

Still worth fishing for math insights from folks like Sole Soul, though. The UI is famously terse to a fault when it comes to making the details clear, and then there's that problem where one person's "intuitive" is another person's "inscrutable."

Successfully updated karma reason!

As I understand it, you get the relations penalty only if you attack someone to whom you have given a treaty-if you have one of theirs, you ought to be fine. There are those among us who never give out their treaties for precisely this reason.

For what it's worth, I can't remember the last time I was in such a situation, because I'm more concerned about the functional rather than the diplomatic aspects of said treaties.

You are of course correct that treaties do increase diplomatic relations, and no, I'm not aware of the direction mattering. Hence the "almost" preceding the useless

As for how much the treaty will cost, that's another matter entirely, and I don't exactly have numbers for that...

Successfully updated karma reason!