A New Tech Tree Mechanic for Civilization 5

We've radically changed the mechanic, so I've started a new thread here. I'm leaving the originals intact for reference/historical purposes.

A New Tech Tree Mechanic for Civilization 5

Last updated: 6/7/07

This thread was inspired by this thread by dh_epic

The philosophy of the system was best expressed by Mxzs here

[index to be created]

Objective
The goal of this thread is to provide a new Tech Tree system for Civilization 5. The following characteristics must be incorporated:

• The complexity of the system (as seen by the Player) must not be substantially greater than the current (Civ 4) Tech Tree.
• The system must be set up in such a way that historical idiosyncracies, such as early inventions (Steam Turbine in 1st Century AD, DaVinci) as well as Dark Ages are possible but do not imbalance the game.
• The system must allow research on multiple techs at the same time to simulate real-world behavior of discovery.
• The system must contain an underlying Tech Tree so that players will have the option not to use the new system (since the new system is different enough that it may turn off old fans of the game, hurting sales of Civilization 5).

Note on the Discussion
While the system being developed herein is for Civilization 5, it is necessary that Civilization 4 be the game that is referenced in detailing it (since I have yet to develop my future predictive powers to such an extent). Therefore references to Civilization Traits, Civics, Specific Techs, Promotions, etc., are based on how Civilization 4 currently uses them.

Note on Numbers
I am neither a modder nor a game developer. As a result, I am incapable of applying numbers to situations in the discussion. Therefore, you'll frequently see "X%" or "requires Y lightbulbs" or "modifier is SUM(Xc/Yc), where Xc is the number of citizens in a city and Yc is the distance of the city from the Capital". I apologize if you hate algebra, but I see no way around it at this juncture in the system's development; playtesting will be required to determine what most of the numbers should be.

Gameplay Options
The following options will be provided to the player at the start screen

• Classic Tech Tree -- turns off this system and uses original system
• Modern Era Tech Tree -- Once a Modern Era Tech is Adopted, the game reverts to the Classic Tech Tree for the remainder of the game. This option is available for those who want a more stable Space Race (see below for more info) Also considering the possibility of the adoption of Computers allowing you to choose which Tech is being examined in each branch
• Automated Tech Advisor -- when a Tech is discovered, the Tech Advisor will give options for pursuing the Tech further; this will minimize micromanagement of the techs for those who do not wish to do so. Those who do not want the assistance (i.e. prefer to micromanage) can turn off the Advisor. (Note that if the Advisor is on, micromanagement is still available to the player)
• Always War -- In Always War games, any War modifiers do not exist

The Core System
There are two main changes to the Tech Tree as seen in Civilization 4. They are:

• Techs are now categorized by which Branch of the Tech Tree they are in
• Techs now have 4 stages: Unknown/Abandoned, Discovered, Adopted, Embraced. Each of these stages has different effects on your Civilization

This is the Tech Tree (without Prereqs/Influencers) for the first 3 ages.

Tech Tree Branches
There are six branches that make up the tech tree. They are:

• Manufacturing
• Economics
• Discovery
• Civilization
• Philosophy
• Government

The following is a list of the branches and their techs for the first 3 ages


The branches are used only for the Discovery of a Tech; after a Tech is discovered, the branch of the tree that the Tech is found on (or any Trait modifiers for that branch) has no impact on Adoption/Abandonment/Embracement.

Each Civilization Trait has a predisposition towards one of the six branches. The predisposition causes a Trait Modifier for discovery calculations (see below). Here is the list of Trait dispositions:

Forthcoming(?) -- May drop Trait Modifiers for Discovery Calculations, still contemplating.

The Four Stages of Techs

• Unknown/Abandoned: In the case of the former, the Tech has never been known to the Civilization. In the case of the latter, the Tech has been discovered (or even adopted!) but is no longer in use by the Civilization. An Abandoned Tech can not be rediscovered until all other Civs have adopted/embraced it.
• Discovered: A Discovered Tech is one that is now known to your Civilization, but which can not be used.
• Adopted: Once a Tech is Adopted, any benefits the Tech provides (buildings, units, civics, etc.) are now available to your Civilization. However, an Adopted Tech can not be traded to another Civ, and the possibility exists that you will lose the Tech.
• Embraced: Once a Tech is Embraced, your Civilization has incorporated the Tech into its definition of itself and can never lose it.

Note on Tech Trading: A Tech can only be traded by a Civ if it is Embraced. The receiving Civ treats the Tech as if it is Adopted.

Gameplay Mechanics: Discovery

Prerequisites/Influencers
Techs can have Prerequisites and Influencers.
Prerequisites must be Adopted before the Tech can be Discovered. If a Prerequisite is Abandoned, dependent Techs receive a Abandoned Prereq modifier.
Influencers do not have to be Adopted or even Discovered, however, doing so will make it more likely to discover and easier to adopt.
Because of the existence of Influencers, Techs will no longer have funnelled prereqs. For example: Guilds (Economics) requires Machinery (Manufacturing) as an Influencer. Since Metal Casting (Manufacturing) is a Prerequisite for Machinery, it is also considered an Influencer for Guilds.
If the Classic Tech Tree is turned on, all Influencers are considered Prerequisites for gameplay purposes.

Discovery of a Tech

Discussion has been moved to this thread

Once a Tech is discovered, you'll receive a notification from the Tech Advisor that it has been. If the Automated Tech Advisor is turned on, you'll receive the following options (see below for more info on abandonment and adoption):

• I have no time for such nonsense! (abandonment of the Tech; no lightbulbs are allotted to the Tech -- see After a Tech is Discovered below)
• While it's not what we need, keep an eye on it. (enough lightbulbs are allotted to the Tech so that it moves slowly towards adoption; a change in situation can cause it to become abandoned, though)
• This sounds promising, let's work on it (more lightbulbs are allotted towards it, adoption happens quicker and abandonment before adoption is highly unlikely)
• We must stop at nothing to master this! (most lightbulbs are allotted towards it, adoption happens quickly however it may result in the abandonment of other techs)

Note that if you select "This sounds promising" too often, a point may be reached where that option is greyed out because there aren't enough lightbulbs to work towards adoption with all the techs. For "We must stop at nothing", it works on a LIFO system.

If Automated Tech Advisor is not turned on, a default value roughly equivalent to "Keep an Eye on It" is given to the newly discovered tech.

Gameplay Mechanics: After Discovery

After a Tech is Discovered

The move towards Adoption/Embrace uses the Research Lightbulbs already designed in the game.

Once a Tech is Discovered, it is now visible on the Active Techs screen. Each Active Tech will have a slider to determine the amount of lightbulbs per turn to put into the Tech (there will also be 4 buttons on the line that correspond to the options from the Automated Tech Advisor). Other information presented will be Lightbulbs needed to Adopt (for example, Above X for Y Turns; X is based on the Tech itself (earlier age techs will have a lower value), Y is based on Difficulty Level and Game Speed), or if Adopted, to Embrace (the X and Y will be greater for Embrace over Adopt). Also noted will be total lightbulbs invested and the net gain/loss per turn of lightbulbs (mouseover will show individual modifiers affecting the per turn lightbulb generation).

If Abandonment is selected when given the option by the Automated Tech Advisor, zero lightbulbs will be put into the Tech. However, there will be a minimum of 5 turns before it is lost (to give you a chance to change your mind). If the ATA is not turned on, setting it to zero (and presuming negative lightbulbs per turn as a result) will cause it to be abandoned the next turn. Abandonment always occurs at 0 if lightbulbs were previously invested in the Tech. Once a Tech is Adopted, dropping below the Adoption level does not abandon the Tech (only 0 lightbulbs). Once a Tech is Embraced, a Tech can never be Abandoned (and no longer consumes lightbulbs).

Please note that the more active techs you have, the fewer lightbulbs can be allotted to each. However, this makes for some fun micromanagement. If you're finding yourself squeezed in lightbulbs, you can either mad dash to Embrace for a Tech to free up the lightbulbs it's currently consuming, or you can let an adopted tech fall towards abandonment while getting other techs adopted and then 'rescuing' it before it hits zero.

Modifiers for Adoption/Embrace
Outside of Research Allotment, the following will affect your efforts to Adopt or Embrace a Tech:

• War. War makes it harder to adopt/embrace a non-Military Tech. Military Techs receive no bonus from War. This modifier does not exist in Always War games.
• Diplomacy. Open Borders with a Civ that has already adopted the Tech will have a positive effect on the move towards Adoption. Friendly/Pleased relations with a Civ that has already embraced the Tech will have a greater positive effect towards Adoption and a positive effect towards Embrace. Effects of Open Borders and Friendly/Pleased are cumulative.
• Permanent Alliances/Vassals. You can only demand an "Embraced" Tech from a Permanent Ally or a Vassal. When you receive it, it is considered Adopted.
• Civics. Civics will definitely effect how the Adoption/Embrace occurs:
  
  Spoiler :

  
  Effects of Civics
  Mercantilism: Receive no Diplomacy modifiers towards Adoption/Embrace
  Bureaucracy: Techs can not be abandoned while in a Bureaucracy, even if they hit 0 in lightbulbs; and Tech adoption takes twice as long (Above X for 2Y turns) -- this represents the red tape of a bureaucracy
  
  
• Running Tech-specific Civics. If you run the Civic associated with an adopted tech, it will provide a positive effect each turn you are running it towards Embrace. This does not occur for Government Civics if you possess the Pyramids and they have not expired.
• Builds. Once a Tech is adopted and its benefits are gained (see below), a build of a Unit or Building that is gained specifically from the Tech will cause a 'burst' of lightbulbs towards Embrace. The more you take advantage of the Tech, the more ingrained it becomes. Note that the effect also works for Techs that had 'obsoleted by' Units. In other words, if Sailing and Astronomy are both Adopted, building a Galleon will burst lightbulbs for both techs.
• Dependent Techs. If the tech is a prerequisite (hard or soft) for another discovered tech, X% of the lightbulbs given to that tech will also be given to the prereq tech. If a soft prereq for the tech is not discovered, a penalty occurs. If a prereq for the tech is abandoned, a serious per-turn penalty is incurred. Note that Dependent Techs penalty/bonuses are cumulative; using the example from the pre-req section above, since Machinery and Metal Casting are both soft prereqs for Guilds, not discovering either will incur two dependent tech penalties when attempting to adopt Guilds.
• Anarchy. In periods of Anarchy, the "If you don't use it, you lose it" lightbulb penalty increases.
• Difficulty Level. The higher the difficulty level, the greater the per-turn "If you don't use it, you lose it" lightbulb penalty

Effects of Adoption
Once a tech is adopted, all units/buildings/civics/wonders made available from the tech are now available to your Civ. In addition, Wonders do not expire until the Tech is adopted (so you may want to delay adopting a tech until such time as you're ready to stop using the Wonder).

For all intents and purposes, Adopting a Civ is equated to researching the Tech in the current game with the following exceptions (previously mentioned):

• A tech can not be traded until embraced
• A tech can still end up abandoned

Effects of Abandonment after Adoption
If the number of lightbulbs invested in an adopted Tech drops to 0, the Tech is considered Abandoned. This has the following effects:

• Any buildings/units/Wonders made available by the Tech can no longer be built. Any In Production do not complete (hammers are lost); instead you are made to switch builds ("can no longer continue building").
• Any units made available by the Tech can no longer heal (unable to resupply the unit), and a Great General can not be attached to them.
• Any buildings/Wonders no longer provide their effect. Conversely, no maintenance costs are required either.
• If you are running a Civic made available by an abandoned Tech, you immediately go into Anarchy and need to switch the Civic. If it's been less than 5 turns since your last revolution, you automatically go after 5 turns are up. Note: This scenario is highly unlikely except for at the highest difficulty levels (and even then I'd think you'd have to deliberately try to create this situation for it to occur)
• If it is a hard prereq for a Tech you have not yet Discovered, you will be unable to Discover that Tech until you've adopted it again

Now, once you have adopted any Tech in the same age as the abandoned Tech (excluding the abandoned tech; let's say you adopted Iron Working and you then "entered the Classical Age" but then abandon it before adopting any other Classical Age techs...you have left the Classical Age), you can start attempting to adopt the abandoned Tech again (remains as a option on the Tech Research screen). If you're in the Classical Age when you abandon Steam Power, for example, you can not put lightbulbs into it until you reach the Industrial Age.

If after a Tech is abandoned you are able to Adopt it again, the following occurs:

• The Dependent Tech penalty (see Modifiers for Adoption/Embrace above) disappears
• Buildings resume their functions; you do not have to build them again
• Units can heal
• Civics will again be available to revolt to

Embracing a Tech

When a Tech has been Embraced, you will no longer need to dedicate lightbulbs to it as you can never abandon it again. In addition, you are now able to trade it (presuming Trading of Techs is available).

Other Effects

Great Persons
In the new system, Great Persons have a much more influential effect when you choose to research a Technology:

• The Tech that can be researched is whatever is currently being "examined" in the branch pool for the associated Great Person (see list below), even if it has no discovery points
• The Tech that is researched is immediately Embraced due to the influence of the Great Person
• Great Spies can now research Techs, but Great Generals can not

Here is the association branch for each Great Person:
Great Artist -- Philosophy
Great Engineer -- Manufacturing
Great Explorer -- Discovery
Great Merchant -- Economics
Great Prophet -- Philosophy
Great Scientist -- Civilization
Great Spy -- Government

Huts
Any Tech "popped" from a Hut is considered Adopted.

Starting Techs
The default starting techs for a Civ (possibly modified if the system is enacted) are considered Adopted and are at the halfway point towards Embrace.

Modern Era Tech Tree
This section may be replaced by option for Computers to allow directed research
When this option is enabled, the successful Adoption of a Modern Age tech causes the game to revert to the Classic Tech Tree for the remainder of the game. This option is provided for those who want a more stable space race, or who believe that in our own Modern Era Civilizations are better suited to fully focus on tech research. The effects of the reversion are as follows (note that the effects apply to all Civs once they enter the Modern Age):

• Any Adopted Tech is automatically considered Embraced
• Any Discovered Tech that is not Adopted is considered partially researched by the amount of lightbulbs it currently has
• Any Abandoned/Unknown Tech is considered unresearched
• All Soft prereqs become Hard prereqs. Violations currently in place are ignored (although since Soft prereqs are no longer funnelled (see prereq section above), it will be hard to research many modern age technologies without going back and researching older ones currently ignored; i.e. Ecology now has Astronomy as a Soft Prereq and thus in the reverted tree, Astronomy has become a Hard Prereq).

Resources
Resources become visible upon DISCOVERY, not Adoption, and even if you abandon the Tech you don't lose visibility. This is because I want the Discovery of Techs to have some strategic value. If you discover Iron Working and find out there is no Iron nearby, you might want to delay adopting it and put the lightbulbs in more immediate need techs.
Worker Improvements are available as of Adoption. However, if you Abandon the Tech, the Improvements remain and continue to confer their benefits (your society may have forgotten how to build a Watermill, but I'm sure the Millers still know how to run one); you just can't build new ones. The exception is resources: if you lose Iron Working, you'll still get the hammer bonus for a mine on iron, but you will no longer have access to Iron in your cities.

Things to update in the original posts

• Nothing right now

ChrTh said:

[*]Unknown/Abandoned: In the case of the former, the Tech has never been known to the Civilization. In the case of the latter, the Tech has been discovered (or even adopted!) but is no longer in use by the Civilization. An Abandoned Tech can not be rediscovered until all other Civs have adopted/embraced it.[/list]

Click to expand...

I don't see why abandoned != discovered (instead of unknown). No research goes towards eventual adoption, but nevertheless the theory is known and could be "picked up" at any time. Perhaps there is a cumulative 0.5% chance per turn that the tech becomes genuinely unknown (this would represent significant time passing and the knowledge passing into obscurity).

Also, I would be wary of a player accidentally putting 0 lightbulbs into a tech, resulting in an irrevocable abandoned state. This would be extremely frustrating. Because of this, I would recommend against that idea. Better would be to allow the civ to pick it up again at any time.

I'm not sure why you have those stiff penalties built into the system in the first place? What do they accomplish? Why have the abandoned concept at all?

Otherwise, this looks really promising. Reminds me of SMAC. It might be insightful to compare/contrast to the SMAC system.

Speaking of, there are some other concerns. There might be possible gameplay or logical/story imbalances possible if players are allowed to "max out" 1-2 branches, without even paying lip service to the others. Something to consider.

Wodan

Whew! That's quite something. There are a lot of details to mull over and consider. There's a lot of good stuff in there.

Before we get down into details, however, I'd like to hear your answers to some general questions.

Your objective is to provide a new Tech Tree for Civ5. You then put four constraints on its design. Three of these are basically negative (can't be complex; can't unbalance game play; need not be turned on). Only one constraint is positive: Players should be able to research more than one tech at a time.

My first question is this: Why would a new tech tree for Civ5 be a major drawing point? True, the tech tree has changed as the game has evolved, but those changes have never been a compelling feature of the upgrade. (Quite often, those changes have been disorienting.) Moreover, changes in tech trees are basically the stuff of mods. Even the idea of "parallel" trees is a mod-like idea. (Way back when Civ2 was the latest thing, I built a scenario that had four parallel but mutually exclusive tech trees, which is an idea even more radical than you're playing with here.) A game that features parallel tech trees strikes me as the stuff for an expansion pack, not for an evolution of the game.

My second question: Why is the idea of being able to research more than one tech at a time a compelling one? It seems to me that it's the "research" equivalent of the idea that a city should be able to build more than one unit at a time. So you research for eight turns, at the end of which you get two techs simultaneously, whereas in Civ 4 you spent four turns to get one tech and another four turns to get the second. It seems to me one of those "six of one" vs. "half dozen of the other" situations.

Third: Why do you need separate tech trees in order to "weight" research toward Military, Philosophical, or Scientific directions? Back in Civ2 (I'm not sure if it is the same in 3 or 4) the techs were assigned these sorts of categories without being separated into separate trees. You could do the same thing here without changing the actual tech tree structure. In fact, shorn of the idea of "new tech trees," this part of the idea sounds like a return to Civ2. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, I guess.)

Fourth: Is the Discover-Adopt-Embrace concept an intrinsic part of the idea for a new tech tree? Is the idea of a new tech tree an intrinsic part of the Discover-Adopt-Embrace concept? I ask because it seems to me that they have nothing to do with each other. Today anyone could build a mod with parallel tech trees without using the DAE concept, and the DAE concept (even with all the steps you describe) could be applied with little change to the tech tree that exists in Civ4.

I don't mean this to sound brutal, but I am going someplace with these questions: It's the DAE idea that is interesting in your proposal, not the tech tree stuff. You've devoted a lot of time and thought to the DAE stuff, and it sounds extremely promising. That's what you should be concentrating on. I think bringing in the tech tree stuff just brings in an unnecessary layer of complexity and runs the risk of distracting you and commentators.

Hey Gang, some good stuff so far. I'll craft specific responses shortly.
Four quick things before that, though:

1) The Un-Abandonment Mechanism is broken; what if two Civs abandon a Tech? ... I believe the solution is as follows:
When the lightbulbs in a tech hits 0, the tech is abandoned (you lose any benefits as described above). Now, once you have adopted any Tech in the same age as the abandoned Tech (excluding the abandoned tech; let's say you adopted Iron Working and you then "entered the Classical Age" but then abandon it before adopting any other Classical Age techs...you have left the Classical Age), you can start attempting to adopt the abandoned Tech again. The reason I want to do this is because I don't want those who discovered, say, Steam Power in the Classical Age, to put no lightbulbs into it until they reach the Middle Ages (or whenever the opportunity presents itself). Discovering a tech is a privilege, not a right, and I want the gameplay to reflect trying to seize opportunities, not just idling along.

2) I totally forgot to include Resources/Improvements. Here's what I'll be adding to the post:
Resources become visible upon DISCOVERY, not Adoption, and even if you abandon the Tech you don't lose visibility. This is because I want the Discovery of Techs to have some strategic value. If you discover Iron Working and find out there is no Iron nearby, you might want to delay adopting it and put the lightbulbs in more immediate need techs.
Worker Improvements are available as of Adoption. However, if you Abandon the Tech, the Improvements remain and continue to confer their benefits (your society may have forgotten how to build a Watermill, but I'm sure the Millers still know how to run one); you just can't build new ones. The exception is resources: if you lose Iron Working, you'll still get the hammer bonus for a mine on iron, but you will no longer have access to Iron in your cities.

3) The mechanic obviously allows for the following situation:
Your war is going badly. You've lost some outlying cities and war weariness is going up. You want to cut your losses, but you have a problem: you're spiralling towards a Dark Age. Several techs are coming close to abandonment, and you haven't successfully adopted a tech in a hundred years. What do you do?
Well, first you make peace. Then, you adopt Bureaucracy. The Bureaucracy Civic has the following effects:

• Techs can not be abandoned while in a Bureaucracy, even if they hit 0 in lightbulbs
• Tech adoption takes twice as long (Above X for 2Y turns) -- this represents the red tape of a bureaucracy

I like it because it gives you a chance to get your empire in order without worrying about techs so much. It might take awhile before you start adopting new techs, but at least you won't any (more)

4) What about Anarchy? Should we have a mechanism in place that if your Civ goes into Anarchy, you have a % chance of abandoning a discovered tech, or maybe just increase the "If you don't use it, you lose it" lightbulb penalty? I think I prefer the latter.

Wodan said:

I don't see why abandoned != discovered (instead of unknown). No research goes towards eventual adoption, but nevertheless the theory is known and could be "picked up" at any time. Perhaps there is a cumulative 0.5% chance per turn that the tech becomes genuinely unknown (this would represent significant time passing and the knowledge passing into obscurity).

Also, I would be wary of a player accidentally putting 0 lightbulbs into a tech, resulting in an irrevocable abandoned state. This would be extremely frustrating. Because of this, I would recommend against that idea. Better would be to allow the civ to pick it up again at any time.

Click to expand...

Second point first: the Automated Tech Advisor is designed to prevent that situation from happening; the only way you could accidentally put 0 lightbulbs in a tech is if the ATA is turned off and you're just not paying attention.

That said, the change in re-adoption that I've made in my previous post should address this issue for you for the most part. The only time abandonment will be serious is if you get lucky and discover a more advanced tech, because then you'll have missed an opportunity for several hundred years.

I'm not sure why you have those stiff penalties built into the system in the first place? What do they accomplish? Why have the abandoned concept at all?

Click to expand...

I wanted to add historical flavor without imbalancing the game. Dark ages happen. Techs are lost or ignored. The Myceneans Greeks lose writing, and humanity spends two millenia trying to decipher Linear B.

That said, the abandonment phase should be rare on levels below Monarch. The player should not have to worry constantly if they're keeping up with their tech lightbulb allotment. What is more likely is that they discover a more advanced tech and don't do anything with it (or mold their entire game around it!) Even on Monarch or Emperor Tech abandonment shouldn't be an issue unless you spend too much time at war.

Otherwise, this looks really promising. Reminds me of SMAC. It might be insightful to compare/contrast to the SMAC system.

Click to expand...

SMAC was definitely one of the 'vague notions' that inspired this system. It's been years since I played it, but I do recall that you didn't have full control over tech tree research.

Speaking of, there are some other concerns. There might be possible gameplay or logical/story imbalances possible if players are allowed to "max out" 1-2 branches, without even paying lip service to the others. Something to consider.

Wodan

Click to expand...

The discovery point allotment should prevent this from happening. First, no matter what, you only have a 50% chance of allotting points to a specific branch; on average only every other tech you discover will be from the desired branch pool. In addition, the deeper you go into the pool, the longer it takes to discover and subsequently the longer it takes to adopt. If you discover two advanced techs, you might not have enough lightbulbs to adopt both (or adopt one without sacrificing the other). Finally, there are some hard prereqs in the system, just not as many as before. Eventually you won't be able to take anything else out of the pool before dipping into other branch pools.

Also, Civ 4 did a great job of balancing. Focusing on military and ignoring currency & cottages can kill you in the early game. Ditto here: focusing on one branch will likely prevent you from winning the game.

BTW, one other advantage of the system: Bye-bye slingshots!

Mxzs said:

Whew! That's quite something. There are a lot of details to mull over and consider. There's a lot of good stuff in there.

Before we get down into details, however, I'd like to hear your answers to some general questions.

Your objective is to provide a new Tech Tree for Civ5. You then put four constraints on its design. Three of these are basically negative (can't be complex; can't unbalance game play; need not be turned on). Only one constraint is positive: Players should be able to research more than one tech at a time.

Click to expand...

While they are phrased negatively, from my perspective they are positive. The goal is to produce a popular historical game, not a niche historical simulation. If my goal was the latter, those three options wouldn't exist. However, since it's the former, I have to make sure I don't build a model so overly complicated (or requires so much micromanagement) that it does the opposite and turns people off. Ditto the Classic Tech Tree: there's a huge built in fan base, and there are many players who love their slingshots and their strategies. This system throws wrenches into both, and they might not like that.

My first question is this: Why would a new tech tree for Civ5 be a major drawing point? True, the tech tree has changed as the game has evolved, but those changes have never been a compelling feature of the upgrade. (Quite often, those changes have been disorienting.) Moreover, changes in tech trees are basically the stuff of mods. Even the idea of "parallel" trees is a mod-like idea. (Way back when Civ2 was the latest thing, I built a scenario that had four parallel but mutually exclusive tech trees, which is an idea even more radical than you're playing with here.) A game that features parallel tech trees strikes me as the stuff for an expansion pack, not for an evolution of the game.

Click to expand...

This is a question for dh_epic's thread, not this one. While it would be nice that this system ends up being a "back of the box" seller, the goal is to build the system first. Then we'll worry about marketability.

My second question: Why is the idea of being able to research more than one tech at a time a compelling one? It seems to me that it's the "research" equivalent of the idea that a city should be able to build more than one unit at a time. So you research for eight turns, at the end of which you get two techs simultaneously, whereas in Civ 4 you spent four turns to get one tech and another four turns to get the second. It seems to me one of those "six of one" vs. "half dozen of the other" situations.

Click to expand...

The parallel research isn't one of the selling points of this system, imo, or at least, it's not my intention for it to be one. The problem with the current system is that there is no strategy involved within the tech research: you figure out what tech you want next and say 'Go!'. This system doesn't work that way. One, you don't have a lot of control over what Techs you discover. You may reallllly want Iron Working, but you get Bronze Working instead. Do you still keep focus on that branch in the hopes of getting Iron Working, or do you work towards something else since you have Copper nearby? (Dammit, I forgot something in the Research section ... I'll get to it in a second) Two, because of the modifiers, and because of changing game situations, it's not the same thing as split research. You might start off on a path where you'll adopt two techs in 8 turns, and then all of a sudden you discover a valuable tech you really need, and you end up not adopting those two techs for another 100 turns! It adds flavor, it adds strategy, and I really don't see it as six of one/half dozen of the other.

Third: Why do you need separate tech trees in order to "weight" research toward Military, Philosophical, or Scientific directions? Back in Civ2 (I'm not sure if it is the same in 3 or 4) the techs were assigned these sorts of categories without being separated into separate trees. You could do the same thing here without changing the actual tech tree structure. In fact, shorn of the idea of "new tech trees," this part of the idea sounds like a return to Civ2. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, I guess.)

Click to expand...

There is only one tech tree; that hasn't changed. In fact, the only difference between the current Civ 4 tech tree and this one is that some hard prereqs (for example Bronze Working -> Iron Working) has been replaced by soft prereqs (can discover/adopt Iron Working before Bronze Working, although it is harder without the latter), making the tree less rigid. The separation of the the tree into virtual branches is really for gameplay reasons; it allows some focus by the player, and it allows other game elements (Civ Traits, Great Persons) to interact with the Tech Tree.

Fourth: Is the Discover-Adopt-Embrace concept an intrinsic part of the idea for a new tech tree? Is the idea of a new tech tree an intrinsic part of the Discover-Adopt-Embrace concept? I ask because it seems to me that they have nothing to do with each other. Today anyone could build a mod with parallel tech trees without using the DAE concept, and the DAE concept (even with all the steps you describe) could be applied with little change to the tech tree that exists in Civ4.

I don't mean this to sound brutal, but I am going someplace with these questions: It's the DAE idea that is interesting in your proposal, not the tech tree stuff. You've devoted a lot of time and thought to the DAE stuff, and it sounds extremely promising. That's what you should be concentrating on. I think bringing in the tech tree stuff just brings in an unnecessary layer of complexity and runs the risk of distracting you and commentators.

Click to expand...

I may be misunderstanding what you're saying, so take the following comment for what it's worth. Unless you create a system where there is no prereqs, there is always a Tech Tree of some sort. In this situation, though, I've placed the Tech Tree in the background; it exists as a virtual construct for the AI in determining if all hard prereqs are met before allowing a tech to be discovered (or even 'examined'), and if there are any soft prereqs that have not been met, penalizing DAE ability appropriately. That's it. While the player may get a Tech Tree screen so they can see what their overall progress looks like, they can't do anything with it (unless they choose the Modern Age Tech Tree option). There is no clicking on Fusion and seeing the 80 techs you need to research before you can get it.

Now, is the Civ 4 Tech Tree perfect for the DAE? NO. Some techs exist merely as prereqs. You'd have to do a little shuffling to balance the six branches. And some Techs open up too much. But I'm not concerned about that here. The beauty of the DAE system imo is, playtested appropriately, it can work for any game with knowledge advancement. So while I have focused on Civ-specific issues (Great Persons, Civics), they are not the core of the system. And while I have some imagination, trying to describe the system without a frame of reference is beyond my powers

ChrTh said:

Why would a new tech tree for Civ5 be a major drawing point? This is a question for dh_epic's thread, not this one. While it would be nice that this system ends up being a "back of the box" seller, the goal is to build the system first. Then we'll worry about marketability.

Click to expand...

Okay, I wasn't sure what kind of discussion you wanted here.

ChrTh said:

The parallel research isn't one of the selling points of this system, imo, or at least, it's not my intention for it to be one.

There is only one tech tree; that hasn't changed.

In this situation, though, I've placed the Tech Tree in the background.

Click to expand...

Well, I concentrated so hard on "tech tree" questions because your first post in the thread describes your proposal completely in "tech tree terms." In fact, you headline it with "The goal of this thread is to provide a new Tech Tree system for Civilization 5." It's more accurate, I think, to say the goal is to provide a new model for research. I don't mean to cavil over terms ("tech tree" vs. "research"), but I wanted to be sure I understood you clearly—especially since "changes to the tech tree" is a persistent suggestion for the game.

EDIT: I want to be sure that I do understand you, so let me make the following stab at characterizing the project:

It seems to me that with this Discovery-Adoption-Embracing concept you are taking up and working out the implications of the following observation: Most inventions are combinations of earlier inventions; these later inventions attain a permanent existence only when their disparate parts are unified in a context in which the unified whole has an obvious and permanent utility.

Example: Ironclad warships. These require cannon, steam engines, and sophisticated metal-working and ship-building techniques. They appear and thrive in maritime cultures that have an interest in attaining or contending for mastery of the sea lanes. As a matter of contingent fact, this complete set of conditions did not appear until the mid-19th century in the Atlantic theater. (Earlier attempts (like this one) at ironclads lacked key elements, and so the technology didn't "take.")

This large claim, in turn, can be broken down into three smaller claims:

1. Most inventions can consist of more or less discrete components.

2. A civilization must acquire and hang onto these discrete components before it can realize more advanced inventions.

3. A civilization must see the need for developing and keeping the inventions that result from combining discrete components.

Civilization (from 1 through 4) actually does model these observations. It does so by arranging technologies into a rigid framework of "early" knowledge and the "later" knowledge that depends upon it, so that the early inventions (both physical and conceptual) gradually coalesce into the more and more useful inventions that appear later in the game. As for applicability and sustainability: SMC counts upon the player recognizing the utility of the earlier knowledge for the creation of later inventions. Hence, it assumes that the tech will be sustained by the player's civilization until such time as it can be fruitfully applied.

Now, where Civ1-4 made the "sustainability" choice for the player, you want to put the onus on the player. If he's not smart enough to retain and apply the earlier knowledge, then he doesn't deserve to keep it.

Is this a fair description?

* * * * *

Can you explain "adoption" a little more clearly? I must be missing something, but I've read and reread that post, and I don't see anything about how you move from "adoption" to "embracing." I only see "When a Tech has been embraced ..." But how does that work? And why do you want a difference between "adoption" and being "embraced"? What's the reasoning behind having these two different concepts?

Mxzs said:

Can you explain "adoption" a little more clearly? I must be missing something, but I've read and reread that post, and I don't see anything about how you move from "adoption" to "embracing." I only see "When a Tech has been embraced ..." But how does that work? And why do you want a difference between "adoption" and being "embraced"? What's the reasoning behind having these two different concepts?

Click to expand...

Moving from adoption to embracing is the same mechanism as moving from discovery to adoption, i.e., you continue putting lightbulbs into the tech until it is embraced (if that is your choice).

I'll use an example.

To Adopt Iron Working, you need to have 100 lightbulbs in it for 10 turns. You start with 0 lightbulbs, put 15 lightbulbs into it from your pool of lightbulbs being generated, and the modifiers are -5 lightbulbs, so you are netting 10 lightbulbs a turn into Iron Working.

So, at turn 10, you have reached the 'adopt' threshold of 100 lightbulbs. If you maintain 100 lightbulbs for 10 turns, your Civ adopts Iron Working and can start mining for Iron. Now, since you've hit the threshold, you can reduce the amount of lightbulbs being put into Iron Working; you can go down as far as 5, so that you're net is 0. Of course, this very risky because if the modifiers change so that you're -1, you lose any turns put into adopting (since it must be consecutive turns). But let's say you keep putting 15 lightbulbs into it (and no modifiers change). So, on turn 20, this is the situation:
You adopt Iron Working because you have been above 100 lightbulbs for 10 turns, and you currently have 200 lightbulbs invested in it.

Now, you have a couple choices here. Since it's adopted, you could remove all lightbulbs from Iron Working, and then you'd have 40 turns before it would be abandoned. You could only put 5 lightbulbs in it to maintain adoption, so you'd have an extra 10 lightbulbs to use on other techs. Or, since you've already built up 200 lightbulbs, you might want to go for Embrace, which in this example is 300 lightbulbs for 15 turns.

So, for the next 10 turns you continue to put 15 lightbulbs in until you reach 300. You are now at the Embrace threshold. You drop your lightbulbs per turn invested to 6 or 7, and keep an eye on it each turn (just to make sure you don't go below 300). After 15 more turns, Iron Working is Embraced. Since Iron Working is Embraced, you will never lose it, so you can put all of those per-turn lightbulbs into another Tech.

And that's the main reason for Embracing a Tech (and why a Great Person is very valuable in this system): so you no longer have to commit lightbulbs to the tech (oh, and you can trade it, but that's a lesser concern) because you will never abandon it. Lightbulbs invested could drop to 0, and it means nothing (in fact, once a tech is embraced, invested lightbulbs are no longer tracked).

So there's a trade-off with the Adopt -> Embrace mechanism. If you pursue Embrace vigorously, it will take longer to Adopt other techs. On the other hand, if you ignore Embracing, at some point you may have too many techs you're keeping afloat that makes it harder to Adopt new ones.

Or if you're a daredevil, you can keep Adopting, remove all lightbulbs and let it plummet towards zero, and then "rescue" it. Now that sounds like a fun Succession Game variant ...

Now I know it looks a little complicated, but the Automated Tech Advisor will actually handle most of that (in fact, if you indicate you want it Adopted/Embraced, the ATA will make sure that once it's over the threshold it will stay above the threshold -- presuming there aren't too many techs simultaneously above the threshold and adverse conditions don't strike.

One final note: in the example I used a negative modifier because the Civ had not discovered/adopted Bronze Working yet, and no other neighbors had Iron Working. In reality, especially with the earlier techs and at lower difficulty levels, you may have a positive lightbulb modifier ... in which case you don't have to invest *any* of your research in the tech, and it'll slowly get adopted anyway!

This is a sort of continuation of the above post, but I wanted to use it discuss modifiers.

In the example, I gave a -5 lightbulb modifier to adopting/embracing Iron Working. The -1 is based on difficulty level (here, it's Noble or easier) and it simulates the "if you don't do nothing, you're going to lose it" effect. -4 came from the fact that you don't have Bronze Working discovered. No other modifiers are in effect, but over the length of the example, 30 turns elapsed. Here are some things that could happen on the road to adoption:

One, you discover bronze working. Buh-bye -4 penalty!
Two, you discover metal casting. Now you'll be getting a bonus, as X% of lightbulbs committed to metal casting go to iron working as well (and to bronze working!).
Three, one of your neighbors adopts Iron Working before you, and you have Open Borders, so you get a lightbulb bonus.

At this point, it's feasible that all you have to do is put lightbulbs into metal casting, and iron working will adopt on its own!

After you adopt it, other things could happen. Every iron mine you build gives you a burst of lightbulbs towards embrace. Also, every iron resource you have hooked up will add a per-turn lightbulb bonus (first one gives a greater bonus than each subsequent one). Build a spearman (requires iron), and you get another burst towards embrace. And so on.

Also don't forget: soft pre-reqs are cumulative now. Guilds has Machinery as a soft prereq, and Metal Casting as a soft prereq, and thus Iron Working as a soft prereq, and thus Bronze Working as a soft prereq. Therefore, when you're working on Guilds, all these other techs are getting lightbulb bonuses.

The upshot is that techs in previous ages will adopt/embrace even if you don't care about them (barring high difficulty/frequent warfare). So my example in the last post made it look like embracing Iron Working was going to be a chore; in reality, it probably ends up being something that happens without you even trying.

Simply put, it's too much. This will never make it into civ, because it's not simple enough.

alms66 said:

Simply put, it's too much. This will never make it into civ, because it's not simple enough.

Click to expand...

Are you talking front end or back end?

ChrTh said:

Are you talking front end or back end?

Click to expand...

If 'Tech Tree Branches' doesn't immediately get this idea ignored by Firaxis, The 'Four Stages of Technology' will. That's where I stopped reading. Don't get me wrong, it's not that it's too complex for me, or that I don't want to see things like this in future versions of civ, I simply don't want to waste my time on something I know will never make it into civ - that just gets my hopes up, that the next version will be better. That's probably why civ3 and then civ4 were such major disappointments for me. I kept hoping it would get more complex, but now I realize it never will (not out of the box anyway ).
Remember, Firaxis' first run at religion included 'levels' of religion in a city, and ultimately they reduced the complexity until the religion was either there or not. That's the way the tree works now, you either have the tech or you don't - it can't be any more simple, and you're trying to go the other way, so this idea will be ignored for sure.

alms66 said:

If 'Tech Tree Branches' doesn't immediately get this idea ignored by Firaxis, The 'Four Stages of Technology' will. That's where I stopped reading. Don't get me wrong, it's not that it's too complex for me, or that I don't want to see things like this in future versions of civ, I simply don't want to waste my time on something I know will never make it into civ - that just gets my hopes up, that the next version will be better. That's probably why civ3 and then civ4 were such major disappointments for me. I kept hoping it would get more complex, but now I realize it never will (not out of the box anyway ).
Remember, Firaxis' first run at religion included 'levels' of religion in a city, and ultimately they reduced the complexity until the religion was either there or not. That's the way the tree works now, you either have the tech or you don't - it can't be any more simple, and you're trying to go the other way, so this idea will be ignored for sure.

Click to expand...

Don't worry, this is purely an intellectual exercise. I doubt Firaxis will even care that this thread exists. I'm just providing an alternative to the current system.

Remember: the current system hasn't changed much since Civ I. Some would argue that means the current system is perfect; I would argue the exact opposite: it's obsolete, because the rest of the gameplay has evolved so much.

What I personally would love is some way for there to be strategy within tech research outside of "what should I research next?". This system provides a way of adding another layer of strategy for the player that wants it (hence the Classic Tech Tree option), one in which simply dedicating lightbulbs to a tech isn't the end of strategy. If not this system, it could be another one. Just give me something else to do with technology besides setting all systems 'Go!'.

One thing I want to comment on regarding the Tech Tree Branch Pools:

They already exist in the game!

That's right, they do. It's the Research Tech option for Great Persons. Each Great Person has a listing of Techs they can research over the course of the game, and a linear mechanism for determining which one is currently available. The Branch Pools in my system would do something similar: each of the six branches would have a listing of Techs that can be 'examined' over the course of the game, but instead of a linear mechanism to determine which one becomes available, a percentage mechanism is used.

See? Firaxis doesn't have to reprogram anything to integrate the discovery section!

Okay, my head has almost stopped spinning ...

I really don’t have an organized way of presenting my questions, so I'm just going to hop around, between questions about detail, theory, and gameplay.

1. Would all techs have a basic negative modifier (before other modifiers come into play)? That is, if there were no modification from war, open borders, resources, etc., would there still be a penalty that requires the player to invest lightbulbs just to stay even? Related: Would you structure modifications in such a way that there will likely always be a net penalty applied to a tech? (That is, situations like you describe with Iron-working, where you might get it without investing any research at all, would be relatively rare?)

2. "You need to have 100 lighbulbs in it for 10 turns ... (since it must be consecutive turns)" Are lightbulbs and turns two different and independent investment conditions for adopting/embracing a tech? So, if I invested 9000 lightbulbs per turn in a tech, it would still take me at least 10 turns to secure it? On the other hand, if I made a net investment of 1 lightbulb per turn, it would take me at least 100 turns to secure it? (And since the turns must be consecutive, it might even take me 199 turns, if something bad happened on turn 99?) If these are independent conditions, why do you have them instead of Firaxis's much more elegant "lightbulb investment" model?

3. "And that's the main reason for Embracing a Tech: so you no longer have to commit lightbulbs to the tech [in order to keep from losing it.]". Ummmm... So that players will "embrace" a tech, you have made "adopted" techs susceptible to loss. But why make them susceptible to loss? "Embracing" sounds like a solution for which you have invented a problem. More fundamentally, it sounds like you're unsure whether you want techs to be permanent or not. You could have made all techs permanent upon adoption; you could have made all techs impermanent with no chance of being "embraced." Why do you propose a two-step first-it's-tenuous-and-then-it's-permanent model? What game purpose is served by this?

4. You note the many ways that bonuses could accrue (either positively or negatively). Wouldn't the player then be opening and closely studying the tech screen almost every single turn? Do you expect this or want it?

5. How many technologies might a player find himself tracking? There are the ones being adopted, the ones being embraced, and also the ones that have been abandoned (because these could be resurrected). Might a player who loses too many techs and concentrates on adopting rather than embracing find himself facing a tech screen that displays two or even three dozen techs in various stages of development or decay?

6. Are you suggesting a way of modeling a particular theory of how technology appears and evolves? Or are you more interested in trying integrate a lot of separate ideas you have had? That is, are you starting with a basic theory of the way technology advances and trying to develop a compelling, intuitive, and simple model for it? Or are you trying to find a system that will combine lots of ideas you've had over the years (dark ages! lost tech! parallel research! technological osmosis!)? If it's the latter, I don't know how someone could offer constructive suggestions; you could always meet such suggestions with "Oh, but that's a feature I've always wanted the game to have." That might not stop other people, but if it is your Erector set, I'd be very shy about telling you to screw it together in a different way.

EDIT: I finally figured out what's bugging me about the parameters you've put on this thread:

The system must contain an underlying Tech Tree so that players will have the option not to use the new system (since the new system is different enough that it may turn off old fans of the game, hurting sales of Civilization 5).

Don't worry, this is purely an intellectual exercise. I doubt Firaxis will even care that this thread exists. I'm just providing an alternative to the current system.

Click to expand...

If Firaxis's opinion doesn't matter, why insist that the new system has to be built so that it can "turned off" and the old one run instead? I keep wanting to develop and refine a lot of the tech-tree behavior you propose, but do so by scrapping or heavily modifying the underlying structure. But I can't do that because it would fall afoul of the above constraint. Moreover, the current Civ system is about as simple and intuitive as you can get, which means redesigns that work from that base risk needlessly complicating a very elegant system. This is a very frustrating condition for me ...