¨Civilization tree¨ and culture

[El Koeno]

One of the more interesting features I´ve seen is the so-called Civilization Tree. It seems it will be something more or less like civics. I´ve been wondering how this tree is progressed. I got kind of excited when I thought it might actually be through culture. Culture - IMO - has been a bit underrated in Civilization. War and tech have always been more important, but if you ask someone what it means to be civilized...

Also, if it is more or less like civics, it would be nice that these are no longer controlled by technology. It is kind of weird to have your scientist develop fission, and then switch to communism; it seems to me that communism is a social concept, not a scientific or technological one like fission.

Then I got another cool idea. In Civ 4 colonization the sons of liberty membership percentage can drop even if you´re producing liberty bells if I´m not mistaken. To keep membership on a high level, you need continuously high output of liberty bells. It would be cool if they implemented such a thing with culture. To keep you high on your civ tree, you need to maintain a high output of culture. So for example, if a golden age increases culture output, you could slide back when the golden age ends an culture drops again.

The cool thing would be that culture would get a more central role. And that backwards movement is possible. For instance the tech tree is simply one-way, and very linear. If can not maintain a high culture output (you don´t want to, you lose cities due to war (or conversely: you´ve overexpanded), your golden age ends etc.) you could move back.

Do you guys have any facts or thoughts to share on the concept of the civilization tree, or perhaps a different role for culture in the game?

 

[Shurdus]

Communism was not a civic in Civ IV... State property was, and it was unlockd by communism...

I agree, but I am hesitant to do so. I kinda liked the idea of the civics unlocked by certain techs. It made certain techs really important early on, while I remember those techs being of less value to nooby me in Civ II. Also I thought it was really logical and straightforward to me, that certain techs allowed more than just building certain wonders or training certain units. Some tehs unlocked civics. It worked like a charm.

I am unsure what to make of a civic tree. I kinda see this founding fathers system of Civ: Colonization in front of me, and it sends a chill down my spine. What was that game a disappointment, and the founding father system sucked.

Anyway, I am to hear further specifications before I can decide what I make of it.

 

[Ahriman]

IIRC (not 100% sure) in Colonization bells were your average bells per person, so you could only "backslide" if your population expanded too fast.

I don't see "losing" culture as being fun - though if a neighbor makes culture faster than you you will lose territory. So you don't need to "lose" culture to get pushed back culturally.

As Shurdus says, we don't really know enough about Social Policies to really be able to comment.

Its entirely reasonable, in a game that is *all* about technology, for social policies to be enabled by technology - particularly when the technology tree explicitly includes social progress ("liberalism", "constitution", "philosophy") as well as actual practical technologies (metal casting, steam engine, refining).

 

[eleazzaar]

Also, if it is more or less like civics, it would be nice that these are no longer controlled by technology. It is kind of weird to have your scientist develop fission, and then switch to communism; it seems to me that communism is a social concept, not a scientific or technological one like fission.

There are a lot of "techs" in the tree that are at least partially in the "soft" social sciences zone rather than hard engineering -- not just civics-related techs. And it's really only recently that we have began to make a strong distinction between the two, previous centuries' scholars weren't nearly so specialized.

But more to the point of gameplay, it seems kind of redundant to add a "social tech tree-- if it was basically like the normal tech tree, but powered by culture.

But i wouldn't be surprised to find that you are right about culture being involved in this new thing that replaces civics. I'm quite curious to see what it turns out to be.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well I would like to see social technologies have a cultural cost to enact them, ie I research communism with science, but that just opens up the Option, I have to spend culture to actually enact it as part of my Civ Tree.

Making Culture more useful was something they did in Civ Rev (Culture was used to make Great People as well)
Culture could
1. Buy Tiles
2. "Buy" Great People/Golden Ages
3. Buy Civ/Social developments
4. Required to "maintain" certain social developments
5. Incite rebels in neighboring cities (by putting your culture on their tiles... the tile doesn't flip, the city that owns the tile generates partisans that attempt to take the city for you. and Vice Versa.)

Ideally I'd like to see

Culture<-> Science
and
Production <-> Gold

so that one was investing in Hearts v. Minds (buying things across your whole culture)
and the other in Buildings v. Units (Develop v. Military)

 

[El Koeno]

I am unsure what to make of a civic tree. I kinda see this founding fathers system of Civ: Colonization in front of me, and it sends a chill down my spine. What was that game a disappointment, and the founding father system sucked.

The founding father thing didn't work to well, I must agree. It isn't very intuitive, but a simple tree structure - like the tech tree, or how experience works in many RPG type games - would be very clear.

IIRC (not 100% sure) in Colonization bells were your average bells per person, so you could only "backslide" if your population expanded too fast.

I don't see "losing" culture as being fun - though if a neighbor makes culture faster than you you will lose territory. So you don't need to "lose" culture to get pushed back culturally.

As Shurdus says, we don't really know enough about Social Policies to really be able to comment.

Its entirely reasonable, in a game that is *all* about technology, for social policies to be enabled by technology - particularly when the technology tree explicitly includes social progress ("liberalism", "constitution", "philosophy") as well as actual practical technologies (metal casting, steam engine, refining).

I thought in Civ4 Colonization there was something about a logarithmic scale and population, and bell production per turn, that decided sons of liberty membership. I don't really remember though.

About backsliding not being "fun": I disagree personally, but I guess it's a very valid concern.

Your last point is exactly my criticism, which I hope this civ tree will deal with: civ has always been *all* about tech, while most people would associate the concept of civilization with more things, such as culture. If they're revamping the combat system like they're doing, there's no reason why they wouldn't try to revamp this aspect of the game. (Well, it has to be fun to play of course.)

Well I would like to see social technologies have a cultural cost to enact them, ie I research communism with science, but that just opens up the Option, I have to spend culture to actually enact it as part of my Civ Tree.

Making Culture more useful was something they did in Civ Rev (Culture was used to make Great People as well)
Culture could
1. Buy Tiles
2. "Buy" Great People/Golden Ages
3. Buy Civ/Social developments
4. Required to "maintain" certain social developments
5. Incite rebels in neighboring cities (by putting your culture on their tiles... the tile doesn't flip, the city that owns the tile generates partisans that attempt to take the city for you. and Vice Versa.)

Ideally I'd like to see

Culture<-> Science
and
Production <-> Gold

so that one was investing in Hearts v. Minds (buying things across your whole culture)
and the other in Buildings v. Units (Develop v. Military)

Hmmm... I've never played CivRev, but it seems they have been trying to give culture a more central place in the game. I think the "social developments" bit might be particularly interesting in this respect.