Did they take the element of risk out researching techs in Civ3?

[Steve Clark]

Great thoughts, guys, something I have to think about some more and of course, to see how it'll work in a week or two.

There is another side to the equation and that is what we expect out of playing a civ game. In all strategy games, there seems to be two extreme camps (and plenty in between). There are those that wants the game to be so hard that it becomes a challenge to lose and those that wants to win ALL of the time, even at a harder level. There have been games in which all I wanted to do was to win as quickly as possible at emperor/deity. I used every trick in the book to do so without cheating. There was nothing wrong with that because at that time, I was looking for a fun diversion for a weekend (just building barracks and sending out hordes of Knights).

So my point is that is perhaps should be an option (or I'm sure someone will figure out an edit) because I want the game to be so flexible that you can choose how you want to play without having it force you into a set way of playing.

[Colonel Kraken]

Re: Did they take the element of risk out researching techs in Civ3?

Originally posted by Steve Clark
In the Avault thread, we got off on a tangent when I brought the concern that Civ3 will force me research all/most? techs before I can "go" to the next age. I had thought with fewer techs, the decision of which one to research next would become more critical, thus affecting strategic gameplay. But it now sounds like that I got to research all/most? of the techs in the ancient age (for example) before I can get the ones that I want in the middle age

I don't know how this matches up with what you're thinking as far as researching each eras' techs, but here it talks about not having to research anywhere near all of the techs in, at least, the Middle Ages. It says you can skip eight techs. I think that's a lot of techs to be able to skip.

I believe it's essential to be required to have more than just a cursory knowledge of each era to expect to be able to advance to the next. Reading the above link makes it obvious that a pick and choose strategy is still at least a somewhat viable option.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
So my point is that is perhaps should be an option (or I'm sure someone will figure out an edit) because I want the game to be so flexible that you can choose how you want to play without having it force you into a set way of playing.

Unfortunately, it would take a long time to program a complex AI that would adapt to what the player is doing. And since Firaxis won't release any source code, don't look for something like that in a Sid Meier title. I'm working on an AI now, but since I am in school and not working for a game company, I'm not getting paid. And that means it will be about 2-3 years before I'll pitch it to a company.

[Blaupanzer]

Re: Re: Did they take the element of risk out researching techs in Civ3?

Originally posted by Colonel Kraken

... it talks about not having to research anywhere near all of the techs in, at least, the Middle Ages. It says you can skip eight techs. I think that's a lot of techs to be able to skip. I believe it's essential to be required to have more than just a cursory knowledge of each era to expect to be able to advance to the next. Reading the above link makes it obvious that a pick and choose strategy is still at least a somewhat viable option.

Wish you were right, Col seamonster, but all that's going on appears to be that some techs are "required," and some are not. In the Middle Ages, 8 are "optional." This is actually a disappointing change, since it returns to the 'history is inevitable' philosophy that Sid so successfully debunked by example in the earlier games. I think this is in there to overcome the success of the OCC (one city challenge) strategy which undermined the spirit of Sid's vision.

[Colonel Kraken]

Re: Re: Re: Did they take the element of risk out researching techs in Civ3?

Originally posted by Blaupanzer


Wish you were right, Col seamonster

Quite right: Kraken = seamonster. (I actually took the name from a unit in CtP II. I'm not very original ).

but all that's going on appears to be that some techs are "required," and some are not.

Obviously, some techs must be required. You cannot have motorized transport before discovering the wheel. The fact that "some techs are 'required'" is an obvious extrapolation of history and reality and not merely

the 'history is inevitable' philosophy

Perhaps I am not understanding your point entirely.

[old dog]

We'll have to see how it all plays out, but the idea of requiring certain techs to move on to the next era sounds like it would lead to interesting gameplay... especially if the non-required techs offer useful advantages.

Do I rush on into future eras or pick up something on the side?

Truth is, though, this is not that much different from the usual prerequisites for a tech. In order to begin any of the techs on the left hand side of the screen in an era, you need certain techs on the right hand side of the previous screen.

[Lorizael]

Breaking the game into eras is a very good idea if you spend a lot of time in each era. From what I've read about the strategies for eras, each era will almost be like a mini-game within the overall game. This way during the Middle Ages, you civ can be scientifically advanced, and in the Modern Age, you civ was very focused on military.

The whole, history is inevitable thing isn't always true. That's why I had an idea (not really my idea) for hard and soft pre-reqs.

Hard pre-reqs you need to get a certain advance whereas soft pre-reqs will help you get a tech easier, but are not required.

What I always disliked though was a Civilization that had Genetic Engineering before it had Gunpowder (not sure if this is an exageration). I just think that there is a certain level of intelligence needed to discover Genetic Engineering, and that you would have figured out saltpeter and the like by the time you figured out DNA.

[Jaguar]

I trust in firaxis. I think this will be ok.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by FireDragon
I trust in firaxis. I think this will be ok.

Wow FireDragon, you're spamming all over the place. Wanna contribute anything useful to the board???

[geoman47]

I like the idea of this because WHEN multiplayer comes out, I would like to be able to play more than just bloodlust or conquest type games.

Bloodlust can be fun, but if you make it too easy to pick only military techs, it becomes the only way to win against human players that don't think like AI.

The beauty of this game is not just killing, although that has its time and place.