Eras in Civ4?

[LDiCesare]

But what does your hybrid system provide?
Different graphics? Civ 2 ToT has that.
What else? There's been no proposal. The only thing I can think of is RoN-like: If you qualify for an area, you can research it, and it will let you build new units or reduce the research cost of the associated techs. This could make sense, but you would have to research the era the way you research techs.

About anachronims:
Let me point it again:
ERAS CAUSE ANACHRONISMS

Examples:
-India has never developped Monotheism. Are they stuck in the Middle Ages?
-Incas had better than Middle Ages Astronomy and no iron age. There's no way civ3 can model this.

Anachronisms can be avoided by a good tech tree. The era system is just a way to hold the tech leader down and let other civs catch up a bit, to prevent the player from choosing the tech they want. In one word, it limits the player's options without providing anything.
Ditch it.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by LDiCesare
About anachronims:
Let me point it again:
ERAS CAUSE ANACHRONISMS

Wrong. The correct phrasing would be:

CIV3 STYLE ERAS CAUSE ANACHRONISMS[/quote]

You are stuck in believing that eras are doomed to be the rigid frame they were in Civ3. Well, we're talking about Civ4, and we can hope they'll learn from Civ3's mistakes.

[Fosse]

Originally posted by Spiffor
You are stuck in believing that eras are doomed to be the rigid frame they were in Civ3. Well, we're talking about Civ4, and we can hope they'll learn from Civ3's mistakes.

I agree with this statement, but the idea of eras is a poor one to Laurent and me. Unless it is shown that people mean something besides "a system that forbids you to research early techs in one age until you've finished all of the 'requierd' ones in the previous," I will be against them. This hasn't been done yet on this forum.

They bludgeon any finesse out of the technology game, giving us several inferior tech trees in the place of one better one.

The "hybrid" system that's been mentioned seems to be simply some graphics on the tech tree, which I can hardly oppose as it really isn't "eras." It keeps the concept of different eras to be strictly a mood, and leaves them out of tech requirements entirely. This means a good tech tree with reasonable prerequesites is still needed, so it's fine by me.


Because a good tech tree can be made without eras, putting them in will only serve to dumb down the tech tree.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Wrong. The correct phrasing would be:

CIV3 STYLE ERAS CAUSE ANACHRONISMS

You are stuck in believing that eras are doomed to be the rigid frame they were in Civ3. Well, we're talking about Civ4, and we can hope they'll learn from Civ3's mistakes.

Plus, eras make the science advisor screen much cleaner.

[LDiCesare]

Noone has explained what an hybrid system was.
In Clash, when you advance in tech, the graphics of a unit can change (e.g. the Siege Engine unit will turn from a ballista graphics to a trebuchet and then a mangonel as siege tech increases). In Civ(1) when you research certain tech, your advisor graphics and city view graphics change. So you don't need eras to change graphics. If you call a tech 'Middle Age', you can have all the effects you want.

So what should be the effect of eras?
-Preventing people from researching techs (civ3): I think it's bad.
-Changing graphics: Techs can do the same.
-What else?

If you want to promote a hybrid system, please fill in the 'what else' clause. Please suggest things that can't be done by a civ2/ctp2-like tech system. I'd like to see how an era can do things a tech can't. You could very well represent Renaissance as a tech. Middle Ages doesn't make as much sense, though.

Here's a suggestion (again): Use eras as Meta techs. Discovering an era would let you have lower costs in the corresponding era tech. This would show the 'synergy' between techs that are not related, thus penalising beelining without hardly preventing them.

What else couldn't be accomplished through techs?

[Fosse]

Originally posted by LDiCesare
So what should be the effect of eras?
-Preventing people from researching techs (civ3): I think it's bad.
-Changing graphics: Techs can do the same.
-What else?

Well put.

[Jaguar]

Civ3 used the era system for a little more than just changing graphics and restricting research. The scientific bonus, the barbarian hordes, and music changes come to mind.

The only real complaint there is against eras is their restricting of research, and I think it is a valid one. Industrious civs should be able to get to Engineering before Polytheism. Warlike civs should be able to get Nationalism before Theory of Gravity. Maybe it shouldn't be possible to get to Espionage before Printing Press, but the player should definitely have more leeway.

[Flinx]

Eras in Civ4? I vote no.

I voted no, "but only because their wasn't a "hybrid" option"

[joncha]

Originally posted by LDiCesare
Here's a suggestion (again): Use eras as Meta techs. Discovering an era would let you have lower costs in the corresponding era tech. This would show the 'synergy' between techs that are not related, thus penalising beelining without hardly preventing them.

I think this is a great idea. It would promote the sense of a Renaissance/Golden Age/Revolution/Paradigm Shift that comes with a new era, without having the straigh-jacket feeling that comes with mandatory (but unrelated) techs. This idea could also allow for a more fluid transition between eras... say 90% of techs in the previous era triggers the change (20 techs/per era... research 18 to get the new era bonuses).

This will make for a more realistic portrayal of the "combined and uneven development" that exists out here in the real world: its more than possible (in fact, historically its the way things tend to happen) to have societies with industrial or modern technology and/or ideas and not be industrial or modern societies.

jon.

[LDiCesare]

I forgot one role for the eras:
To show a nicer tech tree.
This can be achieved by organising the techs into groups (eras) wihtout requiring the same 'get all techs before you can continue' thing.

[Kuciwalker]

True. C3 is the first civ game I know of to actually show the tech tree.

[Dauphin]

I agree with LDiCesare. I am not against eras per se, I just don't see the need for them.

I wouldn't mind the implementation of a soft restriction (i.e higher costs) on tech research from an 'era'* to which you have not advanced, rather than the hard restriction currently in place in Civ3.

*You don't need eras just a vague definition of what is considered more advanced than your tech level.

[Fosse]

Not completely related... Having the whole tech tree available to look at as part of the game always was jolting to me. It never sat well.

Thinking about it in a role-play or realism point of view... you would research what is available to you now, rather than in order to get something 1000 years from now.

I know, I know... we would all plan ahead in previous games, and someone would make an Excel file with the tree, etc. Besides, I'm a little off topic. *sigh*

Happy New Year's.

[mrmitchell]

I'm sorry, but I had not choice but to vote "Yes", because my little puny mind cannot simply take so many techs as a whole. I'm sure that most of the purchasing population is the same.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Fosse
Not completely related... Having the whole tech tree available to look at as part of the game always was jolting to me. It never sat well.

Thinking about it in a role-play or realism point of view... you would research what is available to you now, rather than in order to get something 1000 years from now.

I agree, its certainly not realistic, and it won't ever be unless it is possible to make a randomised or unique tech tree for each game. But then not knowing what your research will lead to would screw around too much with the playability of the game IMO.