{The List} - Technology

[Comrade Raoul]

I haven't had time to read all the thread through, so this might have been mentioned before, but I think a system loosley based on the way tech is done in paradox's Victoria would work quite well.

Essentially, you research theoretical stuff (for example, "impressionism", psychoanalysis") but gettting these techs doesn't actually give you anything - what happens is, a short time after you get the theoretical tech, it's practical applications appear as "inventions" (ie practical techs) which give you units etc.

This could work pretty much the same in Civ - for example you could research "Basic Agriculture" as a tech, then sometime (randomly) in the next 5 turns you get the invention "water channels" which allows you to irrigate., Or you research "Architecture" and sometime randomly in the next 5 turns you get the invention "vaulting" which allows you to build cathedrals.

Each tech could have multiple inventions, and this would even allow for civ-specific inventions (ie. if england gets monotheism, they could get the "catholicism" invention whilst the arabs would get the "islam" invention.) You could also put extra inventions in with multiple tech requirements which would sleep till you get both (this could allow for all kinds of fun, with tech choices early on maybe determining the nature of later inventions? Also, you could for example have protestantism as another invention from monotheism, but it doesn't appear until you get another later tech like mercantilism).

Even in it's simplest form I think this invention system could really work, and it would be up to firaxis how specific the inventions were... for example, "bolt action" could just give you a bolt action rifle invention, or you could get (randomly, or by civ) specific models of bolt action rifle as inventions. this could maybe then affect the stats of your riflemen.

[coreman]

Hmm... it sort of works like that for non-Psilons in Masters of Orion, except it's random on what set of techs a given discovery you get (so you have to steal/buy/trade for the others).

And, in MOO3, it almost works that way too, excep the steps are different. Research->Discovery->Implementation.

[The diplomat]

I don't know if this has been mentionned or not but what about the idea of making some techs "either or". A player would choose between two techs and the tech they don't choose would be gone, ie not researchable. This would force the player to make some key decisions knowing that when you pick a tech, you would forfeit the other choice.

[Naokaukodem]

Techs should be totally random, so we would have the surprise in a first time, and would have to adapt in a second. It is what i call fun. We could always try to have an influence on the tech discovering, but i won't give any way for it as i don't have in mind historically how some king or other ruler could have influence the tech discovering. Maybe just like in SMAC with technology domains to point at them.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Naokaukodem
Techs should be totally random

I don't like this. It reduces the freedom of choice for the player. Creating a good research strategy is part of the fun and challenge of Civ (and SMAC, where I don't use the blind research feature).

[The Rusty Gamer]

In the editor, we should be able to define where the randomness in a tech tree is. For instance, we might say there is a 50% chance of tech A, 30% of tech B, and 20% of tech C appearing on the tree.

I definitely believe in creating either/or situations but simply allowing any kind of prerequsite for a tech, perhaps using some kind of programming language to create an equation.

If you wanted to create an either/or tech situation, for instance between tech A and Tech B, then you could have the prerequisite for tech A to include "NOT Tech B" and the prerequisite for tech B to include "NOT tech A".

You could really create sophisticated tech trees where certain techs only appear on the tree in certain circumstances during the game.

I think this kind of prerequisite should be used for buildings, units etc as well. You could create either/or situations for buildings. For instance, you can build either a granary or a barracks in a particular city but not both.

[Naokaukodem]

Originally posted by Maniac


I don't like this. It reduces the freedom of choice for the player. Creating a good research strategy is part of the fun and challenge of Civ (and SMAC, where I don't use the blind research feature).

Well, what do you call exactly a good research strategy? You usually just research what you need, or what you think you will need.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Naokaukodem
Well, what do you call exactly a good research strategy? You usually just research what you need, or what you think you will need.

Yes. If the game is well-designed, like SMAC was, it will offer many possible play strategies and thus will require different research strategies to achieve that goal. Depending on the game situation or the civilization you play you'd need to devise a different strategy.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Personally, I don't subscribe to the 'totally random' idea but, at the same time, I would like to see a move AWAY from the direct research of technologies which exist in civ3!
Instead I would like to see a system in which the player can allocate his/her research resources (beakers), to different FIELDS-on a % basis.
So, as an example, if you had 500 beakers, you could assign 20% of them to Commercial technologies, 30% to industrial technologies and 10% to military technologies-just to name a few! This will dictate the rate at which you accumulate the neccessary beakers to obtain techs.
Other factors which will effect the rate at which beakers will accumulate for certain techs would be your Civ Characteristics, the type (and quantity) of resources you possess, how many of the prerequisites for a tech you possess, and knowledge of specific techs via espionage!

This system would form the basis of a more 'semi-blind' research method, one which would leave the player with some degree of control over his research strategies, whilst removing the somewhat unrealistic 'bee-lining' strategy often used in the current system!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[Max Sinister]

A system where you could tell your scientists that they shall improve existing techs, but can't influence which _new_ inventions they make, would be more realistic, that's sure.

However, I can't tell a realistic example where humans invented one tech and thus became unable to invent a specific another one.

[Robert]

Right now a civilization can be behind on research.
In worst case scenario (I remember from one of my first civ (I) games) a spearman will meat a tank.

Pherhaps it would be a better idea if there's a main-path on tech-research that everyone must take. But there's a 2nd research level as well. On that level you can research some techs more deeply, and develop better weapons. Not like a musketeer is better then a spearman, but more like a faster musketeer, a stronger muskteer.

That way a civilization will never be very behind, but some civilizations can be more advanced. Like The Netherlands and the USA are more or less on the same level in research. Though the USA has better weapons though. (Of course that's a matter of money as well.)

I thought of the idea when I read how cIV will included multiple researchpaths to the same goal etc.

It shouldn't be implemented though like a very fast researcher can research quickly to space ships with ignoring all the side paths.
In fact the side-paths should work seperated from the normal-research tree. Or pherhaps better,
in cIIIv there is already a minimum time research needs to finish. (4 turns)

Say that a large civilization can finish the research of a certain techin 4 turns easily. In fact it even has research-power left-over. These left-overs can be used for in-depth research.

Of course one should be able to do in-depth research as well if it can't reach the 4-turns limit.
For that reason there should be a new %-bar (like money, luxery and research) that determines how much research power goes to main-research projects, and in-dept research projects. (where main-research projects keep their 4-turn (or something) minimum)

[The Rusty Gamer]

And research should never end. There must be a way to allow practical research to continue ad-infinitum.

Has anyone seen the way research was used in Capitalism? Some kind of research of that nature for improving unit attack or defense and so on. It never has to end. You could choose the target increase - for instance you might decide to increase the attack strength of a unit by 1 and you are told (based on how much you are currently putting into research) that it will take 20 turns, however instead you might want an attack increase of 3 but this will tie up researchers for 40 turns (takes longer but a bigger return on investment) and so on.