While I do find it strong too, I like the fact that it is not related to the strength of your empire (or so do I hope), as it is a way to boost players having difficulties in that regard, rather than giving a boost to already genius nerds.
It is also a soft way to convert influence to science.

That said I'm really curious of the way it is calculated too.

Yes, I though it's a really big output for the early game. But I didn't see it increase in the late game.

So I wonder how is it calculate.

Do the science output cumulate with Client State bonus as well ?

RedSirus wrote:

@Cure_off, you make excellent points about this being a nice way to supplement empires that are "science-poor", and that it's a nice way to convert influence into science (it's nice turning more than just production into more production!), but it just feels too powerful at the moment, much like the influence bonus from Embassies.  This is a new "killer route" that's just more optimal than others.  There isn't strong competition from the other two early treaties, either: Most independent peoples don't even have resources to trade for!  If IPs always/mostly spawned on territories with >2 resources, the trade deal might be more competitive.

I haven't had much time with the DLC for now and was mostly playing beginnings of games due to MP issues...
I don't have an opinion on later stages, although I'd be in favor of an increased amount of science with any sound parameters that would involve the passing of time.
I don't know yet, if it is too powerful or not. IP are weak enough to be conquered but it might apply more to MP than solo games.
The embassy bonuses however feel too strong. I have some ideas of tweaks (might open a new thread if no one did): reduce cost and scaling bonuses (simply with era +3 influence per district & +5 stability should do the trick)
Treaties obviously need some balance too, I'm sure it'll be improved in the next patches.

Cure_off wrote:
The embassy bonuses however feel too strong. I have some ideas of tweaks (might open a new thread if no one did): reduce cost and scaling bonuses (simply with era +3 influence per district & +5 stability should do the trick)

Strong agree.  I’ve suggested +2 or +3 influence per era per adjacency in a few places, but not its own thread. We’re on the same page.  Right now an easy +30 or more on an Era I building is way too high and risks overwhelming neighbours with your culture right off the bat

Done.

From what I've seen in my games, this value is based on what the IP produces in science, and it doesn't scale much with the ages, since the most I got was 135 IP from a territory that I donated with three strategic resources already built in the Revolution Industrial.

Some investigation this morning.  Game Speed: Fast.  Harappans -> Maryans

• My Empire generating 141 Science
• Two Science Collaboration Deals netting another 141 (which I think is only exactly my empire's output by chance?  75 from Hagmatana, 66 from Tlatilco

When I make Hagmatana a client state...  the +75 Science is definitely counted twice, once from Science Collaboration and once from Client State.  As already proven by @Elphealer two days ago.

When instead I Assimilate them into my empire...  I lose the +75 from Scientific Collaboration (or 150 from Collaboration+Client State), and instead get the city's actual science added to my "Science From City".

The science from city is, a bit surprisingly, only 13.

Verdict: I'm not against "Science Collaboration" and "Client State" netting more science (and money and influence, by the way!) though treaties than owning the city itself.  It gives us good reasons to keep Independent Peoples at arms reach and interact with them peacefully, and it forces us to balance their potential Money/Science/Influence benefits to our empire as a whole vs. the potential of adding them to our empires and possibly making them even stronger.

However, the math behind these numbers is unclear, and it might be nice to have some of the help text suggesting what each option is good for or where the M/S/I from the treaties is actually calculated.

Proposal: Perhaps the "Assimilate" treaty should show the FIMSI output of the city we're about to assimilate.

Here's a save file for testing, if anyone would like to do their own experiments: I've gotten +100 Patronage with Hagmatana, and as the Mauryans I've got enough influence to swap between each treaty several times if you'd like to see how the numbers change between the various treaties:

Mauryans Turn 52 - Pre-Assimilation.ctr

The gain should not be tied to your own empires production, otherwise it makes less sense to invest there and just go straight merchant/science culture instead. What I think needs to change is, adding some more incentives for specific types (incl. may rebalance the base gain):

- add a modifier if you are the affinity (more money if you are merchant culture, more science if you are scientist, more influence if you are aesthete)

- add a permanent accumulating modifier after you made the client state treaty. The increase is tied to the gain per turn. While investing is still important for keeping the treaties active, there is beyond that no benefit to do so. With this you could gain a soft conversion which accumulates each turn. obviously, the bribing with money should not increase the money gain. So maybe add the following to the mix:

-- influence -> increases money modifier

-- money --> increases science modifier

-- envoy --> increases influence modifier

Income from IP treaties should scale with eras imo so it's less overpowered early on and not so mediocre later. 

Jean-Luc wrote:

Income from IP treaties should scale with eras imo so it's less overpowered early on and not so mediocre later. 

From what I've seen it does scale with the era of the IP. I had a science treaty for +55 in era 1 that didn't change when I went to era 2, but a couple of turns after I did, the IP went up an era, and the science went to ~75. As for the actual numbers, it seems very strong early but it doesn't seem to scale into the late game well. Seems the influence costs of treaties scale with a base of 50*Era*(2^TreatyTier)*Affinity (Ancient = 1, Intro is Tier 0, Assimilate is Tier 3) and multiplied by up to another 2 based on affinity. [2-Affinity as a decimal] So the science treaty with a 1% affinity IP in Era 1 is 199 influence for ~55 science/turn. I like the idea that peaceful IP might have a slight buff to science treaty over violent IP which should have better mercenaries to rent.

Unless you're referring to the profit sharing treaty which I haven't used yet, since it usually only gives less money than a level 2 bribe and cultural exchange is quite nice if below 50% affinity because it will save you influence to do that and get to 100% affinity before doing client state.

The poor scaling is made up for in my mind by the fact you can double it with city state, and mid game you can possibly have 2 city-states, maybe more with an aesthete culture early. But I think the science starts too high and the money too low. I kind of like the later eras for the science with it feeling more reasonable each era I go. Only played games to early modern so far, so maybe it doesn't scale enough.

I don't think any patronage should affect the science/money/influence numbers since it makes it too optimal to patronize at the highest level, always. 

From my experience with IP, I'm sure that at least the money is not in relation to your own, because of the 4 IP that I had contact with, only those that had resources gave more than 30 money, even in the contemporary era. I think science follows its own metric, because the different independent peoples in my game give almost identical science returns, and although in the first ages it seems like a lot, it doesn't scale by the thousands, unlike what a big city produces in the last ages.

End of the Medieval Era, I have three IPs with Scientific Collaboration and two of them are Client States (for double), and it is seriously strong.  That's 439 from Independent People (it says "from Science") and only 276 from my actual empire.

(20 from alliance not because it's a good tenet, but because I'm trying to get out of an "ending turn" bug and so I'm playing the last five turns as differently as I can).

Additionally, I just Liberated one of my cities into an Independent People and immediately signed a Science Collaboration deal with them, for an impressive +439 science.  So the science/money/influence granted by these treaties is tied to how strong the IP is in terms of tiles and infrastructure, and is very powerful for good, liberated cities.

Would I normally do this? I don't know.  I don't have to worry about science for a long time, as long as I keep this city safe, and I can assimilate it again later.