Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
All that said, I did find this vague sentence in the SOtS Codex: If this is actually correct, I haven't a clue which techs they are talking about. Maybe someone else can fill us in on that?
It seems all the disease related techs too, since I almost always have one or two of them cause a planet to get infected, and never boost them. But I believe I've heard people say that the speed at which you research something affects the chance of it going poorly too... and I never research diseases until there is nothing else to research, or I need an antidote from an AI attack.
If I have a game where I feel like it's worth the risk - I'll boost moderately on the first turn of research, and then not after that (I don't want to reset the counter if I succeeded initially).
And as folks have noted - some techs can go very wrong :D
yeah the chance per turn of a dangerous tech having an accident is based on how fast its being researched, but when you go faster it takes less turns. The math is designed to be roughly the same chances per research (aka if you research plague over 3 turns or 40 turns, the chance of dropping a vial during plague are about the same)