C2C : Game Speed

[Praetyre]

1) I intend to round dates. The ones I listed were either factual as I found them, or specific to the event I had listed. But for C2C purposes, rounding is fine. It's more of a target than anything since eras actually change by tech and not turns.

I figured as such. I was just checking to be sure, since it's good to have these design decisions down for the record.

2) I haven't yet matched up research with # of turns. And I don't think I'll be able to do a perfect job of that anyway, but I will attempt to realign as best as possible. But manipulating tech costs or requirements and eras doesn't fall into my area of control, so other modders would need to be appealed to do that.

I'll be happy to take that issue under my wing, though if anyone with a good enough computer would be willing to be a testing partner, I'd certainly be grateful. Mine certainly isn't an old hunk, but you never know when a second opinion might come in handy...

I suspect the intent was that Despotism accounts for those. A Monarch can be despotic. In my reworking of the Civics, I'm looking at breaking governments into 2 categories, where the combination provides a better description of what the government really is, and that is further flavored by additional Civics. All that is still on the drawing board though.

I had my suspicions Despotism might be this... I guess my mind was just thinking of modern day dictatorships like Saddam's Iraq or Idi Amin's Uganda... work that out, and Classical fits fine by me, though I'll obviously need to reslot some of the turn intervals and tech costs to account for a more even division between Ancient and Classical.

They'll probably look technically identical in the game speed file, since both fit nicely into 1-year-per-turn intervals, but I might split Ancient like I did Industrial, with one intervalic subera for the 6000-2000 BC period and another for the 1500-500 BC period. Currently, Ancient gets 500 and Classical 2500, but a straight 1250-1250 split would either need to push Classical's beginning forward to 500 BC or redistribute these extra 250 turns somewhere else (perhaps for an extra-long Renaissance or space era?), since I'm pretty keen on keeping to my myriad-eternity target.

The Renaissance was difficult not only because of a lack of a real ending event, but because it occurred in bursts across certain locales of the world and is really more of a global Golden Age occurring at the tail end of the Middle Ages than its own Historical Period. That being said, it is so significant, I can understand the argument for the Renaissance being its own Era. What SHOULD follow is the Age of Reason and then the Industrial Era after that. But that would require big changes. Maybe once the other modders reach that point in the timeline, it can be considered.

I'd consider the Age of Reason the equivalent to the last third of the Renaissance, after Scientific Method is discovered. I think the various biological sciences transitions the game very nicely into a Victorian setting, much like computers and rocketry kicking off Modern does for a Cold War setting. If the Prehistoric/Ancient/Classical eras are set-in-stone, I don't see why the mid-game would be much more malleable- there's enough consternation over the space era and alternative timelines as it is.

There is a lot of info on this one. Here is the first paragraph of the Wiki on it:

Spoiler :

Technological singularity refers to the hypothetical future emergence of greater-than-human intelligence through technological means. Since the capabilities of such an intelligence would be difficult for an unaided human mind to comprehend, the occurrence of a technological singularity is seen as an intellectual event horizon, beyond which the future becomes difficult to understand or predict. Nevertheless, proponents of the singularity typically anticipate such an event to precede an "intelligence explosion", wherein superintelligences design successive generations of increasingly powerful minds. The term was coined by science fiction writer Vernor Vinge, who argues that artificial intelligence, human biological enhancement or brain-computer interfaces could be possible causes of the singularity. The concept is popularized by futurists like Ray Kurzweil and it is expected by proponents to occur sometime in the 21st century, although estimates do vary.

By that standard, though, shouldn't we have the endgame before 2100? This sounds a bit too much like a no limits fallacy for my liking, though. Plus there's the obvious issue of extrapolating from a very small sample of data in civilizational terms.

I don't have an answer to that. But I agree that I'd like it to be optional too. My reference is to a book that takes place in that year.

Spoiler :

Rendezvous with Rama is a novel by Arthur C. Clarke first published in 1972. Set in the 22nd century, the story involves a 50-kilometre (31 mi) cylindrical alien starship that enters Earth's solar system. The story is told from the point of view of a group of human explorers, who intercept the ship in an attempt to unlock its mysteries.

This novel won both the Hugo and Nebula awards upon its release, and is widely regarded as one of the cornerstones in Clarke's bibliography. It is considered a science fiction classic, and is particularly seen as a key hard science fiction text.

I'm actually really tempted to suggest 2150, but that's my inner ME fan talking. Of course, past Transhuman, it's pretty arbitrary. You could make it end in the year 40,000 and I wouldn't be any the wiser.

I'm glad you told me that! It had all the settings in the XML so I thought it was!

You're welcome

 

[Thunderbrd]

I'll try to back some of this up and rethink other elements but here's my suggestion:

Prehistoric: 200,000BC (emergence of homo-sapien)- 6000 BC (emergence of sedentary culture - 1st settlements in India and Sumeria)

Ancient: 6000-2000 BC (2000 BC: Horses were tamed and used for transport., 2000 BC: Stonehenge is believed to have been completed., Beginning of the Middle Dynasty of Egypt)

Classical: 2000-0 AD
From a perspective of shifting timeline increments, this seems an easy marker. 500 AD certainly seems a good point to consider the end of the classical era, but not as symmetrical a joint upon which to hinge the shift of turn increments.

Medieval: 0-1500 AD

Renaissance: 1500-1750 AD

The Industrial Revolution was a period from the 18th to the 19th century where major changes in agriculture, manufacturing, mining, transportation, and technology had a profound effect on the social, economic and cultural conditions of the times.

and

Textiles – Cotton spinning using Richard Arkwright's water frame, James Hargreaves's Spinning Jenny, and Samuel Crompton's Spinning Mule (a combination of the Spinning Jenny and the Water Frame). This was patented in 1769 and so came out of patent in 1783. The end of the patent was rapidly followed by the erection of many cotton mills. Similar technology was subsequently applied to spinning worsted yarn for various textiles and flax for linen.
Steam power – The improved steam engine invented by James Watt and patented in 1775 was initially mainly used to power pumps for pumping water out of mines, but from the 1780s was applied to power other types of machines. This enabled rapid development of efficient semi-automated factories on a previously unimaginable scale in places where waterpower was not available.

Industrial 1750-1900 AD
1900 may seem an arbitrary moment to define but from the perspective of adjusting the time increments down to a narrow focus, it would be preferable to begin here due to wanting to draw out the WWs. These eras were some of the most intense strategic eras in all history and may go down as being the ultimate pinnacle of strategy in war due to the fact that it was basically as far as we achieved before the threat of nuclear war hovered over our heads keeping largescale warfare at bay. Thus, a real zoom in on this era would be more enjoyable from the player's perspective.

Modern Age: 1900-2000 AD
I know we're in what we ourselves would call a modern age (the very definition, no?) But at 2000 we have seen a notable decrease in the speed of progress. We all expected to be much further along now than we are. Widening exploration of technological applications of current and new inventions such as cell phones and computers, and massive global economic conspiracies have bound us up on many fronts of forward progress despite the momentum we had in the previous century, a momentum that took us from trains to space travel in under one century of progress.

Clearly, we've entered a new age at y2k and turn times begin to widen again.

Transhuman: 2000-2100 AD
The new age religious revolution has peaked in 2k and now becomes a real study of potential. We see, at the beginning of this era, the expansion of idealism which may result in real progress in areas of genetic and cybernetic research that will lead us into an era of self-crafted evolution - the Transhuman era has begun.

Galactic: 2100-2500AD
A final pinnacle of evolution is reached, a blend of soft and hard intelligence (human and ai). It opens the door for understanding the true unified field theory. This understanding unlocks wormhole travel through space and time. The Galactic age begins (and ends as humanity ascends beyond flesh and cybertronics.)

to get to the end of the game.

 

[Praetyre]

Ancient: 6000-2000 BC (2000 BC: Horses were tamed and used for transport., 2000 BC: Stonehenge is believed to have been completed., Beginning of the Middle Dynasty of Egypt)

Possibly, but remember that Iron Working is a Classical tech, and Philosophy and Democracy will be researched midway through the era. Though, I guess my proposal to split the era increment-wise might solve that issue.

Classical: 2000-0 AD
From a perspective of shifting timeline increments, this seems an easy marker. 500 AD certainly seems a good point to consider the end of the classical era, but not as symmetrical a joint upon which to hinge the shift of turn increments.

Turn 5000 is actually 1500 in my plan, funnily enough. I can appreciate the need for appropriately symmetrical dates, but the idea of Feudalism and Guilds in a time period that immediately makes me think "Rome at it's height" is a bit hard for me to swallow. It's easy to adjust, though, seeing as we're talking about years, not turns.

[Snip info on Industrial/Modern]

The fact Assembly Line and Marxism are second tier techs in Industrial gives me a really strong vibe it's meant to be the Victorian era, not the era in which George Washington lived, but I can see a case for pushing it forward to 1850, and maybe giving extra space to Renaissance taken from Classical.

My plan already gives a huge share to Industrial, by splitting it into a 1800-1900 period with 2 months-per-turn for 600 turns, and a second 1900-1950 600 turn period with 1-month-per-turn. You can't really get any more zoomed in than 1-month-per-turn outside of specialist scenarios, which are outside of the scope of what we're talking about here. Making these eras zoomed in was part of the reason I split Industrial, and particularily part of the reason I doubled it, since there's the Napoleonic Wars to cover.

Furthermore, when I think of the beginning of the 20th century, I don't think of radar, lasers, computers or mass media, outside of the steampunk-ideas (which will be seperate eras anyway). I agree that the line between transhuman and modern is somewhat hazy, and I initially had a shorter space era while doubling modern to have 1200 1-month-per-turn increments between 1950 and 2050, but the x78 techs can all be pretty neatly placed in the mid to late nineties. There's certainly been much stagnation in the "noughties" (particularily in the latter half when it comes to movies and video games, but that's getting off topic), but pretty much every x79 tech sees some degree of commercial or scientific use, be it cloning, biofuels or quantum teleportation.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I don't bear disagreement with much of what's said about the 'eras' themselves and the techs represented. This breakdown was more based on the idea of the turn increments.

6000-2000 = 3000 yrs
2000-0 = 2000 yrs
0-1500 = 1500 yrs
1500- 1750 - 250 yrs
1750-1900 - 250 yrs
1900-2000 - 100 yrs
2000-2100 - 100 yrs
2100-2500 - 400 yrs

There's just a nice symmetry that somewhat keeps pace with the rhythm of progress there isn't there?

 

[AIAndy]

I don't bear disagreement with much of what's said about the 'eras' themselves and the techs represented. This breakdown was more based on the idea of the turn increments.

6000-2000 = 3000 yrs
2000-0 = 2000 yrs
0-1500 = 1500 yrs
1500- 1750 - 250 yrs
1750-1900 - 250 yrs
1900-2000 - 100 yrs
2000-2100 - 100 yrs
2100-2500 - 400 yrs

There's just a nice symmetry that somewhat keeps pace with the rhythm of progress there isn't there?

Is that symmetry really important?
I would prefer keeping somewhat historically accurate than introducing symmetries that no one will see in the actual game.

Medieval era just doesn't fit until 500AD.
Industrial era definitely does not fit to the 18th century. The techs in it fit far more to mid 19th century as start point.

Don't forget that you are not forced to have any change of increment at the borders of the eras. These borders are only guidance points for the year/tech assignment.

 

[Praetyre]

Indeed. Both the Classical and Medieval eras have 1-year-per-turn intervals in my current timeplan, while late Industrial, Modern and Transhuman all have 1-month-per-turn. The only effect is in the game speed file itself, which, like symmetry, nobody's going to see.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Is that symmetry really important?
I would prefer keeping somewhat historically accurate than introducing symmetries that no one will see in the actual game.

Medieval era just doesn't fit until 500AD.
Industrial era definitely does not fit to the 18th century. The techs in it fit far more to mid 19th century as start point.

Don't forget that you are not forced to have any change of increment at the borders of the eras. These borders are only guidance points for the year/tech assignment.

But these increment shifts really have no connection to era whatsoever do they? Any connection there is entirely arbitrary, no?

Perhaps what we're struggling with would be better expressed by an expansion of the eras themselves if there is some kind of connection. I strongly desire to have a juncture at 0. That said, the era between 0 and 500 is most certainly NOT the Dark Ages - on that point I would very much agree. The industrial era covers far too much ground - as does the renaissance! There is no era to really highlight the 'bronze age' of Egyptian dominance... The more we go back to these points, the more I'm thinking we need to expand on our era brackets as a solution.

 

[EldrinFal]

But these increment shifts really have no connection to era whatsoever do they? Any connection there is entirely arbitrary, no?

Perhaps what we're struggling with would be better expressed by an expansion of the eras themselves if there is some kind of connection. I strongly desire to have a juncture at 0. That said, the era between 0 and 500 is most certainly NOT the Dark Ages - on that point I would very much agree. The industrial era covers far too much ground - as does the renaissance! There is no era to really highlight the 'bronze age' of Egyptian dominance... The more we go back to these points, the more I'm thinking we need to expand on our era brackets as a solution.

I wouldn't call the shifts "arbitrary." There is at least an attempt to bring them as close as we can to the tech discovery that corresponds to the era change (or an average turn number amongst the various techs that change the eras).

I agree with AIAndy's comment on symmetry. I don't think we need to end an era on 0 AD. Especially since we're trying to set up the C2C eras as concurrent with RL eras.

 

[Praetyre]

I think it might help if I listed my own current timeplan, and proposed revisions, for posterity and so I can more easily refer to it in future discussions on this subject.

This is my current timeplan;

Spoiler :

PREHISTORIC ERA
50,000-6000 BC
1000 Turns
44 Years (528 Months) Per Turn

ANCIENT ERA
6000-2000 BC
500 Turns
8 Years (96 Months) Per Turn

CLASSICAL ERA
2000 BC-500 AD
2500 Turns
1 Year (12 Months) Per Turn

MEDIEVAL ERA
500-1400
900 Turns
1 Year (12 Months) Per Turn

RENAISSANCE ERA
1400-1800
800 Turns
6 Months Per Turn

INDUSTRIAL ERA
1800-1950
EARLY
1800-1900
600 Turns
2 Months Per Turn
LATE
1900-1950
600 Turns
1 Month Per Turn

MODERN ERA
1950-2000
600 Turns
1 Month Per Turn

TRANSHUMAN ERA
2000-2050
600 Turns
1 Month Per Turn

GALACTIC ERA
2050-3000
1900 Turns
6 Months Per Turn

This is a proposed revision of that timeplan, in accordance with the suggestions of Thunderbrd, Koshling and others. Eternity is extended to 12,000 turns, since it's easier to shorten faster speeds intervals if you have the base number as one which can be divided into a year.

Spoiler :

PREHISTORIC ERA
200,000-6000 BC
2000 Turns
97 Years (1164 Months) Per Turn

ANCIENT ERA
6000-750 BC
EARLY
6000-2000 BC
500 Turns
8 Years (96 Months) Per Turn
LATE
2000-750 BC
1250 Turns
1 Year (12 Months) Per Turn

CLASSICAL ERA
750 BC-500 AD
1250 Turns
1 Year (12 Months) Per Turn

MEDIEVAL ERA
500-1500
1000 Turns
1 Year (12 Months) Per Turn

RENAISSANCE ERA
1500-1850
EARLY
1500-1800
1200 Turns
3 Months Per Turn
LATE
1800-1850
600 Turns
1 Month Per Turn

INDUSTRIAL ERA
1850-1950
1200 Turns
1 Month Per Turn

MODERN ERA
1950-2000
600 Turns
1 Month Per Turn

TRANSHUMAN ERA
2000-2100
1200 Turns
1 Month Per Turn

GALACTIC ERA
2100-2500
1200 Turns
3 Months Per Turn

 

[EldrinFal]

I think it might help if I listed my own current timeplan, and proposed revisions, for posterity and so I can more easily refer to it in future discussions on this subject.

Have you matched up the # of turns per era according to the tech research rate? Just wondering if you've run any actual test runs yet to see if your turn numbers match up.

When I ran my test to 900 turns, it became obvious that the abundance of animals had such a huge affect on how a nation's (under AI control) resources are spent, that I don't feel it's a great representation of a "TRUE" progression. I think Dancing Hoskuld has been working on animal spawns this weekend, but not sure how much progress he has made. Once the numbers are toned down, then I think the results will be more accurate.

 

[Praetyre]

I'm actually doing the opposite; matching the tech progression rate up with number of turns per era. That's a huge part of my private GEM scenario, if not the main part period.

 

[AIAndy]

I'm actually doing the opposite; matching the tech progression rate up with number of turns per era. That's a huge part of my private GEM scenario, if not the main part period.

Well, the number of turns in an era should be matched to the number of techs in an era so the tech progression stays somewhat constant.

 

[EldrinFal]

Update on this...

With recent AI changes, the game plays much more normally now (other than little burps here and there) so I've started another test game.

I only managed to get to about turn 750 tonight since I stop every 100-200 turns to check progress. Side Note: Kudos to the crash fixes, my game didn't CTD at all tonight.

Ok, so playing on Snail with a Huge map, it took the AI 675 turns to reach the Ancient Era. This was discovering most, but not all, Prehistoric techs along the way. Slider bar wise, the AI remained at 90-95% Science the entire time and kept a mostly consistent 5% espionage as well (not sure why though.)

By turn 750, the AI had just about gotten Caste System. The year is 1000 BC. Classic Era still a LONG ways off.

If anyone else can make note of when they reach new eras, that would be great. The Event Log (top left icon under Civilopedia icon) should have everything necessary.