posted 05-17-99 10:54 PM ET            

My problems are basically three-fold: The tech tree is too linear, there are unnecessary dependencies, and it is too predictable.

My solution is that we need a superior tech tree system. The first step is that there need to be more technologies, some of which might be "redundant" from a game perspective. For example, we need a technology that allows us to build a 1-2-1 unit. One technology that could give you that is some sort of metal tech, which allows for better armor. Or, alternatively, you could develop superior tactics that takes advantage of the terrain, so you can defend better with worse armor. The two technologies are very different, and would likely have different prerequisites, etc., but this allows for two separate paths to a 1-2-1 unit, which is rather vital to the game. With the old civ-esque system, if you needed a particular class of unit, you needed to develop a particular technology. This leads to virtually every civ developing virtually every technology, which makes for a very cookie-cutter existence.

Wouldn't it be a more interesting game in which two civs could achieve high productivity, one by focusing on the "mechanical" such as machine tools and assembly lines, while another civ could achieve the same result via "human factors" approach, such as highly motivated workers, or a "work ethic" that convinces the citizens to contribute more time to output and less time to consumption?

With this framework, a variety of other cool things can happen. First, you can have the tech tree reflect the current state of the civ. You could have "iron working" be more likely to be discovered by a civilization that has large mineral deposits, while that same advance would be rare in a low-resource island-chain civ. These advantages and disadvantages wouldn't need to be set in stone like the racial advantages in MOO -- things like "mineral rich" or "requires lots of sea-travel for intra-civ commerce" are completely related to the map, and are EXACTLY the kinds of things that have affected tech development historically. Things like which techs have been researched in the past could also be used, because the general "trend" of a civilization affects its development as well.

Second, there can be multiple paths to the same tech. In my first game of Civ, when I saw "Mysticism" I said to myself "bah! My society is atheist-intellectual super-state, we don't need all that superstitious stuff!". Unfortunately, these super-intellectuals never figured out that you could navigate by looking at the stars, because in Sid Meier's and Brian Reynold's rulebook, you can only do that if you attach mystical significance to them. (I forget the exact chain, but the religious techs are vital). The Civ tech tree is completely dominated by what DID happen, not what COULD have happened. We all want to play the game because we want to see what COULD have happened if WE had been in charge. Limiting the tech tree like this is somewhat arbitrary, and more freedom can lead to a more fun game.

I've already established that there should be multiple paths to every tech, but... not all those paths should exist every game! Randomization in the tech tree would be a good thing. As it stands now, it is too easy to construct strategies which turn on acquiring a certain series of techs in a certain order. I think it would be more fun if there was a sense of wonder and discovery every time I played, and it makes it more realistic too (I know, I know, in fun vs. realistic, fun wins ) because no leaders in 4000 BC said "wise man, study this because it will get me gunpowder in 5000 years instead of 5500".

In summary: More techs, but they don't all need to have unique effects. More possible paths to each tech. Randomize whether a particular path exists when each new game starts.

posted 05-17-99 11:25 PM ET         

What I'd rather see in a tech tree is a true tree, with branches.

Here's an example,

The Mongolians research Gunpowder.

After discovering Gunpowder they can begin to push towards "Gunpowder" techs. Such technologies would allow the development of Gunpowder-related tools. Such as, well, Guns

The way it would work is that after the main breakthrough (in this case, Gunpowder) all gunpowder-technologies would fall into different categories and would be independant. So you could, par se, research a "Builder" gunpowder tech and skip getting Guns.

Then the Gunpowder tech itself would open up access to new "main" technologies. Such as Conscription.

In this way, the familier and balanced linear tree still exists, but now allows for players to orient their research towards certain goals.

posted 05-18-99 12:35 AM ET            

I think that the first step is to change the way the research system works. Right now when you research something all of your empire's research goes to one tech, and the research isn't associated with a specific advance, just with research in general. What could happen is to store research points for each tech, and when that tech's research queue is filled, you get the advance. Using research points in this fashion opens up a whole new set of play options for research.

The first thing it allows is parallel research. Research in real life is not linear, and it shouldn't be in the game either. I'm thinking of a system where you can select a few techs (not sure how you would limit or catagorize what you can select at once, though) and split your research points among them, but which combination you choose can impact how fast you get it. For instance (since I'm not being very clear tonight) say you chose to research Calculus, Physics, and Democracy. Because Calculus and Physics are related to each other, and you are actively researching both (so that discoveries from one can be applied to the other, instead of researching one and then the other in the linear system) you get a bonus to the research points applied to each tech. So, if you research two related techs at the same time, you get the both faster than if you researched them each individually. Also, this system could allow for a way to build cumulative advances toward a certain goal, which would allow some of the flexibility in prerequisites that Octopus was talking about. Say you want to end up researching some fictional government, Bellism. If you want to reach it through the linear tech tree (which still exists) the prereqs are Computers and High Speed Networking (Bellism is a technocracy.) These two techs together get you over a certain 'prerequisite threshold'--below that threshold, you can't directly research it. So, say each of those techs give you half the necessary prereq points. On the other hand, if you research Democracy, Communism, Fascism, and Capacitors, even though you don't have the technical abilty to build a technocracy, you have the base components necessary (capacitors) and the experience in government to start research into your technocracy as a concept. So, the real prereq is capacitors, and there's a number of other techs that give you different amounts of these 'prereq points' that add up and eventually allow you to research the tech itself. The way I've described it it sounds a lot more complex than it would have to be, since the points would be structured through tech catagories, and the interaction between those catagories would be fairly simple.

This sort of point system also allows a few other interesting play concepts. I've seen a lot of call ever since Civ for some kind of reverse engineering ability, so if you capture or destroy a unit in the field you can gain tech or unit components or whatever. In this point system, you could get a certain number of tech points for every unit you capture, and to a lesser extent, destroy. (Using CivII's tech tree now) say you destroy a musketeer. Even though you don't have gunpowder yet, you get a small number of research points applied to your gunpowder 'account.' If you defeat enough of them (I mean a lot, for play balance reasons), you get gunpowder for free. It also applies a larger number of credits to a musketeer unit advance account, which leads me to the next topic...

posted 05-18-99 12:56 AM ET            

The tech tree was broken up into 7 (?) major areas, like Planetology, Construction, Force Fields, etc. You could allocate your research points to each area with slider bars. Every turn, you added the research points from the "current allocation", but you also "earned interest" from all research points currently invested in a certain tech field. The effect of this was that you could "rush" development of a certain tech field by allocating a greater proportion of the empire's research production to it, but you were best off in the long run by following a "balanced" approach, because the interest effect would carry you along better.

posted 05-18-99 03:30 AM ET            

First, thanks for taking the initiative. I just sent you an e-mail in which I agree I need to help set a little more structure. This is just starting, so please bear with me. It will all become easier in the next few days.

Second, you in no way need MY sanction. Actually, I need YOUR sanction to ask you to work really hard, keep this list updated, and send it to me so I can put it all together for Brian. Of course, you will absolutely be given credit (as will anybody who posts ideas).

posted 05-18-99 04:34 AM ET         

For example, in X-COM, the player can capture and study alien artifacts, thus allowing them to build the same thing. My thought was this: wouldn't it be nice if I could incorporate alien technology into my own research, thus creating my own unique technology?

Therefore, I think it would be very nice if each faction/country can pursue it's own tech tree, perhaps each with some unique technology that it has developed.

posted 05-18-99 01:55 PM ET            

Advances in painting, sculpture, literature, music have been as vital to our progress and identification as a Civilization as military and technical advances. It would be nice if, somehow, the game could reflect that.

I'm not sure of where this fits in with gameplay vs. realism, but it would enhance the culture-building aspects which so often fade before the empire-building and conquest aspects of the game.

Currently, CivII has 2 WoW's relating to the arts -- Shakespeare and JSB's Cathedral, both of which come about <1500. Leaves us with 500 years of nothing but industrialism and technology when the Renaissance and Age of Reason were advancing arts and philosophy.
[Just brainstorming here for some WoW's]
"Guernica": doubles effectiveness of police stations when at war
"finnegan's wake": +25% science to cities with libraries
Okay, maybe those are lame, but it's been a while since I laid down CivII in favor of SMAC. Gimme some time to think about it. but you get the point.

posted 05-18-99 03:16 PM ET            

As I've been saying at Apolyton, we'll be working the kinks out of this cross-forum stuff soon.

posted 05-19-99 02:55 AM ET            

This thread has been summarized at http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum6/HTML/000511.html (it was at the end when I posted it, but there may have been some new posts since...)

It appears that the consensus is that we should have our Civ III suggestions centered at Apolyton.