Openciv3 - Realism, Scope, Abstraction and Adjusting them

[John Markenham]

I like the idea of being able to pick the starting tech advances, but what if you could choose the ending ones also. For example you could only use medieval advances. This could creates some interesting scenarios, and you could reenact certain wars if you wanted to. I also like the option to choose the amount of turns etc..., since I wouldn't like your idea of making one year turns throughout, it would be just a tad boring the first 1000 turns waiting to discover one thing.
What if when your tribe dies the cities become ruins that contain some stuff they had in them, and that is how ruins are created.

[amjayee]

Thanks for support, Mark! And nice you agree, Elmo.

Things presented by Mark have been discussed earlier, just dig up the appropriate threads. For example supplying would be made with a trade route - kind of thing.

And about earliest turns being tedious and stuff; your assumption is based on civ2 system, but as havs been said many times, this will not be civ2! The system will be something totally different. For example the discovery thing will not work like in civ2 (meaning tech tree and stuff). Once again, dig up the old threads, we have been discussing an amazing amount of topics and ideas before! But the ruin idea is nice, and will be most propably there.

[ElmoTheElk]

Yes, but while we have provinces of people who are just living there and joins your civ, these people now live in anarchy (not joined a civ).

[Nath]

Dark Ages

There was some mention earlier in the forum of implementing Dark Ages. The only historically accurate way I can think of to do this is for players to have a chance of acquiring technology from their neighbours.
For example, Civilization A invents the wheel. Civilization B, nearby, might see A's wheels and there's maybe one in three chance that they'll start building wheels of their own. Thus if there's a technology slowdown in a region, there'll be a slowdown in surrounding regions, too.
Technology should also be acquired when cities/regions are captured.

[ElmoTheElk]

I absolutly agree. The tech model was far from realistic in civ2 and sequels. And it can be much more fun too!

- Like you said: Tech can be aquired by neighbour civs, also becouse of war situatuions (conquering regions)
- Tech can be civ-unique. Different civs can have the same tech but use it differently. So the sience of 'steel' is the same, but civ A can make canons with it while civ B only use it for bridge building.
- Sience have to be used and kept up or it will get forgotten (of course it cannot when something 'better or newer' has replaced it already).

That about tech. I also read something (don't know what it was, a meeting log or something) where the idea of having a different year system. In the real world, the year, like it now is 2001, isn't the same everywhere. And since you play your own civ, why are we counting from the birth of Crist? Let's have you own, where you are in turn 300 which equels 300 after ElmoTheElk or something. Just a little cool detail.

Also give a little reread to this post. It's worth it..

Elmo

[Darkstar]

Science and Technology...

You do know that technologies come and go, right? Sometimes, we "rediscover" a forgotten technology. Sometimes we don't. Examples of forgotten technology:
Damaskis (sp) Steel/Metallurgy
Celtic Agricultural Technology/Techniques

Damaskis Steel is some of the finest steel there ever was. But the how and related technology to it was LOST. We cannot even reproduce it, today. Even though we can make INCREDIBLE metallurgic material.

The ancient people of England, the Celts, were able to sustain the agricultural fertility and production of modern bread basket America. The HOW of this, or the Technology, was lost. And they did that before the Dark Ages!

There are PLENTY of examples of lost technologies around. For instance, the technique used by the Egytians to build the pyramids. Was it pure stone masonry and muscle? Was it a form of "concrete"?

The Romans "invented" concrete. But this was lost to the world long before the Dark Ages. Concrete is a very useful and important construction technology.

The Greeks had the Steam Engine. They just didn't have a NEED to use it though. Imagine that...

Actually, many ancient people believed "invisible spirits" caused illness. They just didn't know the exact way to keep the invisible spirits away. However, the more we study our ancient ancestors, the more we discover they actually KNEW a good bit about doing things. For instance, many ancient cultures, at 8000 BC, actually practiced brain surgery. Tattooing was used as an EFFECTIVE method to alleviate arthritis. They understood insulation, anti-biotics (penecilin), and all manner of things we think of as "modern". Very FEW things are truly "modern".

It takes a certain level of practice for a technology to STAY. Otherwise, it's forgotten. In some cases, it's easy to recover that technology, due to good retention and storage. In others (Convoy system to protect shipping from submarines), it's simply "rediscovered" completely independantly again. It's the NEED that drives us to find new ways.

Mankind's very FIRST invention? Most likely the sling... made by a mother looking for a way to carry her child in a different. Needle and sewing wasn't to far behind skinning... you NEED a way to put them together to make more effective sheltering clothes. Shelter construction itself probably led to clothing (imo). But who knows? Need causes the looking around for an answer... Without NEED, the Greeks did not use their steam engines. Without NEED, the naval turret, quite capable of being put together, didn't come about until the American Civil War (Or War of Northern Aggression, if you are a Old Family Southern ). Once the turret was used in combat, that was the end of all the OLD naval combat ships. One small engagement... and nothing but noise. But that was it.

Necessity is the mother of all invention.

The question becomes... how do you model what a society NEEDS?

With the rise and fall of technology built in the game, you won't go 4000 turns without a discover. Instead, you'll go 10 to 20 years... and have a refinement (improved fire making, level 1, +10% populationi survival rate). The more people you have that NEED something, the more likely (ie, the more "research points") you will gain towards something. But that means you have to track the "need" and "using"... when the "using" falls below a certain point, the technology is lost. Examples of lost technology? Refined fire making and tracking are two lost technologies to America. Most people can't get a fire going without paper and gasoline. And certainly wouldn't be able to follow a lost dog through their backyard. So what? Well, it presents an excellant example... when modern ecologists needed to locate animals in the wild, how did they find them? They are relearning one of the most ancient of technologies on the planet... tracking. But in the meantime, they make use of the air gun, radio trackers, tranquilizers (chemistry), aerial and satellite survey.

[VetLegion]

The question becomes... how do you model what a society NEEDS?

should we? it gets really complex if you do it.

[ElmoTheElk]

Well, of course technology needs a NEED from the people. But a goverment can influene it, right? So we might try to mind a compromis then. I really won't like it if I am unable to dicover my own techs in GGS! That was..., no, that IS the most fun part of civ!

Elmo

[Nath]

I'm fairly sure this has been discussed, but just in case: you shouldn't be able to choose what exactly to research, only the general direction.

[Darkstar]

Picking Techs...

Just to let you know...
Fun with Tech in Civ...

Ok, for me, tech picking wasn't fun after I had played it enough to learn the tech. Why? Always the same. I had a shopping list for the techs I wanted. I had a batting order for how to get them. I only varied the batting order slightly, depending on the PARTICULARS of a game. Tech picking was just BORING.

Now, SMAC and MoO (The Original, not 2)... they were fun. ALWAYS. Why? Because they made me adjust my game plan to suit the techs I had. With them, I couldn't PLAN on getting Tech X in a certain amount of turns. Heck, MoO made me sweat what tech to pursue next, with it's tech system. Because what it offered next might not be there to be pursued AGAIN the next time. THAT was cool and fun... even if it had me cursing my luck to have BOTH of my "lynch pin" techs offered at the same time. I cursed... because next time, one would NOT be there at next tech. Made a huge difference...

SMAC? After playing it long enough, I could GUIDE it so what I wanted would be my next discovery... or maybe after a "wild card" sidestep... in blind research mode. In pick it yourself? Just a shopping list of techs, and the batting order to get them the quickest... once again. Ordered tech picking is just more "micro-management" to me. At least Reach for the Stars let me just pick a research queue so I didn't have to bother with it very often in the game...

I understand not everyone would want such a thing, but you should think about it... realistically, we've been "researching" many things, some for over 50 years, and we STILL don't "have" it. Research is weird that way.

Just a village idiot's opinions...

[The Joker]

I agree with you. Nothing more to say there.

But what do you have to say about the map? Are you interested in helping us create a cool spherical map?

[amjayee]

I agree you shouldn't be able to pick the excact techs to discover. Why? It's unrealistic, and also, you will be discovering several techs at the same time. Also, there will propably be some 1000 techs, so you would be bored to death if you have to pick all of them yourself. Just some general guidance in my opinion.

And Darkstar, you don't need to keep calling yourself the new village idiot. We already recognize you. But seriously, your comments are not any more insane than anyone else's.

[ElmoTheElk]

Yeah, only the general direction is enough. What about this proposal? (See picture)
Don't know yet what the advisor is for...

Elmo

[Nath]

The concept of 'advisors' seems to me to be unneccesary, like leaders. All civilizations don't have an Einstein each. I suggest that even if there is an advisor, he shouldn't have any particular name.

[ElmoTheElk]

Hum, well, that's why I said I don't know the functionality of the leaders/advisors yet. Altough IF we include them in the game, they dont have to be realistic I think. I see this feature as 100% gameplay focused, so unrealistic systems not uncommon here.

Besides, just to be sure: The direction of reseach you choose (see the pic I included in the previous post) is just a direction. You still develop techs of different catogories. It's just where the focus is now. (You develop multiple techs at onces, as Amjayee explains).

Elmo