Eras in civilization 7

[Evie]

, research does not mean STEM. This is not sn overly literal reading: it's a made up definition (and no, it's not something Civ 6 already does)

Beyond that, having played and been involved in fanbases and with creators of games that use event-based systems: I do not for one second accept the notion that associating social progress with events is any easier ormless controversial than a tech tree. Events must have triggers, and the determination of appropriate triggers will be every inch as controversial, every inch as questioned. The idea that this is somehow easier is not supported by actual games with event systems and the discussions surrounding them. So, I still do not see your alleged benefits, and I would still vastly prefer a research tree over an event based system if we must have only one (but really, we need not have only one).

Your explanation of the accumulated science change...essentially reduces the actual "accumulated science" part of the idea to a cosmetic change. Your overall proposal goes beyond that, but most of it consist of mechanisms that don't actually depend on the "accumulated science" change, and the core - accumulate science to research tech - remains unchanged, we just have an accumulated science metric added. We already have the means to use total research for era progression (via total number of tech known). We already have the means to accumulate research on multiple projects at once (and in fact it's already partly implemented thanks to Eurekas). That said, it being a cosmetic change works both ways, and I don't really see any reason to object to that.

I did misunderstsnd the term academies, but as you describe them now they are a cosmetic name for research queues. Again, not a meaningful gameplay change.

Overall, though, while you have many suggestions I think worth looking at for specific mechanics, the overall package deal you propose does not work for me.

 

[BuchiTaton]

, research does not mean STEM. This is not sn overly literal reading: it's a made up definition (and no, it's not something Civ 6 already does)

Here I was talking about the whole set of terms and icons for science/technologies branch in CIV6, NOT about the isolated real deffinition of "research". Still you are saying that I am "overly literal thinking" after bring back this from comments where the others do not had problems to see my points as suggestion and I didnt have problem to talk about these as options. The discussion was open to explore naming for concepts and also Boris just used Learning as a broader term instead of Research so I guess even if Research is also a proper term it still can imply certain kind of knowledge. But for you I am "overly literal thinking" and my "understanding of that word appear to be innacurate" when we were just exploring different names for a change from the current CIV model.
And here is were the current CIV6 model have Science + Research + Technology + Flask icons for a technological tree separated from the civic tree in-game. Here is were Firaxis have a STEM focused separation, I was talking about this tree. NOT proper real definition of research, NOT the real relation of Social Sciences, and since the current CIV6 have this separated approach, going back to put them together is an oportunity to use other terms like CIV changed terms before.

Beyond that, having played and been involved in fanbases and with creators of games that use event-based systems: I do not for one second accept the notion that associating social progress with events is any easier ormless controversial than a tech tree. Events must have triggers, and the determination of appropriate triggers will be every inch as controversial, every inch as questioned. The idea that this is somehow easier is not supported by actual games with event systems and the discussions surrounding them. So, I still do not see your alleged benefits, and I would still vastly prefer a research tree over an event based system if we must have only one (but really, we need not have only one).

CIV already have mutualy exclusive government and set of policies (also religious elements) that mean select some over others, because people are familiar to the idea that different ideologies are different solutions for the same problem. Meanwhile the average player is formed in the idea that the technological advance is mostly linear. And CIV is not the only game were you chose some social ideologies over others, meanwhile technological selection is mostly limited to in which order they are researched but these usually ended being all accumulated and applied.

That is were the "easier" part is, for most people an ideological related decision is easier to understand because ideologies are already a common field for the discussion of different alternatives. Technological decision are more specialized and "linear" at least from the knowledge of the average people, and the provided examples of technological alternatives are mostly early and enviromental dependant.

By the way from were the word "controversial" comes? I never pointed anything about controversies. Provide an example of such controversies.

Your explanation of the accumulated science change...essentially reduces the actual "accumulated science" part of the idea to a cosmetic change. Your overall proposal goes beyond that, but most of it consist of mechanisms that don't actually depend on the "accumulated science" change, and the core - accumulate science to research tech - remains unchanged, we just have an accumulated science metric added. We already have the means to use total research for era progression (via total number of tech known). We already have the means to accumulate research on multiple projects at once (and in fact it's already partly implemented thanks to Eurekas). That said, it being a cosmetic change works both ways, and I don't really see any reason to object to that.

I did misunderstsnd the term academies, but as you describe them now they are a cosmetic name for research queues. Again, not a meaningful gameplay change.

Technologies (and Civics) once completed unlock game elements like units, buildings, policies, etc. Meanwhile Academies would use the accumulating (turn yield) science into specific sets of bonuses, for example put your research queue to work in the academy of Agronomy to boost your food production and Sociology to get more stability, this apply only during the turns you put the research queue to do it. So for some turns you could pick between research a new technology, academies, varieties or expeditions. None of the laters are part of the technologies, they add to the global science accumulation but not for any particual technology(civic), they are not a classification of technologies they are selected instead of technology research for the number of turns the player need them (or the number of turn to be completed in the case of varieties).

Overall, though, while you have many suggestions I think worth looking at for specific mechanics, the overall package deal you propose does not work for me.

Fair.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Very interesting discussion overall.

I entirely agree that there should be only one advances/technology tree. And I like idea about using the term "knowledge" rather than "science", as well as speaking about "advances" or "innovations" instead of "technologies". If both philosophy and mathematics (as a pure abstract research field in its own right) emerged at the same time in Greece around the 6th century BCE, that is because they are based on very similar concepts. In both cases, the idea is to reason abstractly from premises (axioms), follow their logical implications and see where that leads to. As such, considering philosophical implications as part of a "social/civic" tree and mathematical implications as part of a separated "technology" tree cannot make sense. René Descartes was both a philosopher and a mathematician, and it's mostly out of a philosophical reasoning that he elaborated "Discourse on the method" which pretty much served as foundation of the scientific method.

Now I believe that there is a distinction nonetheless between the concept of "culture" and "knowledge", but certainly not as done in Civ6 which basically makes of culture a separated form of knowledge. I would rather say that culture is something more related to influence, something that was materialized since Civ3 with expanding borders. Knowledge is something universal, that can spread from a civilization to another, culture is specific to a civilization. If anything culture could be something helping your Empire to grow more unified or more influential towards your neighbours. Both can be somehow related, a library generates both culture and knowledge for instance, but they are intended to achieve very different goals.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Regarding the idea of splitting Techs and Civics, I was reminded of the way technological advancement works in Rise of Nations.

See, techs are researched not by Science but by Knowledge (represented by a book and not by a beaker). Techs are divided into four categories: Military, Economic, Civic and Scientific (!!). Military techs increase the unit limit, Civic techs increase the city limit, Economic techs increase the caravan limit, and Scientific techs (if I recall correctly) increase the rate of Knowledge acquisition.

These techs are researched at a Library. Each of these techs unlock more techs which are more limited in scope and researched at different buildings: for example, Taxation is a tech researched at a Temple which increases Wealth based on controlled territory, another tech is researched at a Barracks which increases damage by ranged units, another tech at a Lumber Mill which decreases construction costs, etc.

The Library techs are more closely related (in CivVI terms) to Civics rather than Technologies. They have names like 'Conscription', 'Levee en Masse', 'Coinage' etc. Some of these techs have their own bonuses apart from the generic one: for example, one of the Military techs allows you to convert your Citizens into Militia.

Age advancement is done through researching Ages, which need to you to have researched an certain number of techs from a certain category. For example, Age 4 (Gunpowder Age) will require you have researched 4 techs from each category. Advancing in an Age is what allows you to unlock advanced units and buildings (instead of individual technologies).

 

[Marla_Singer]

Regarding the idea of splitting Techs and Civics, I was reminded of the way technological advancement works in Rise of Nations.

See, techs are researched not by Science but by Knowledge (represented by a book and not by a beaker). Techs are divided into four categories: Military, Economic, Civic and Scientific (!!). Military techs increase the unit limit, Civic techs increase the city limit, Economic techs increase the caravan limit, and Scientific techs (if I recall correctly) increase the rate of Knowledge acquisition.

These techs are researched at a Library. Each of these techs unlock more techs which are more limited in scope and researched at different buildings: for example, Taxation is a tech researched at a Temple which increases Wealth based on controlled territory, another tech is researched at a Barracks which increases damage by ranged units, another tech at a Lumber Mill which decreases construction costs, etc.

The Library techs are more closely related (in CivVI terms) to Civics rather than Technologies. They have names like 'Conscription', 'Levee en Masse', 'Coinage' etc. Some of these techs have their own bonuses apart from the generic one: for example, one of the Military techs allows you to convert your Citizens into Militia.

Age advancement is done through researching Ages, which need to you to have researched an certain number of techs from a certain category. For example, Age 4 (Gunpowder Age) will require you have researched 4 techs from each category. Advancing in an Age is what allows you to unlock advanced units and buildings (instead of individual technologies).

Brian Reynolds is a great game designer (Civ2, Alpha Centauri and Colonization). I never played Rise of Nations but I can only assume that if he divided techs this way it was for good gameplay reasons. I know that it's a real-time strategy game that is meant to happen through the whole of History from Neolithic to Modern days, and all that in only a few hours. As such, I wonder if he hasn't done so to pace up research, allowing multiple research simultaneously? If you played the game you may tell me if that's indeed the case.

Civilization being a turn-based game, there's no such a rush to play fast. Fundamentally I find it counter-intuitive that you could build warplanes without having invented aviation first, which has both civil (airports) and military implications. So I don't believe that such a thing would fit in. What would be the advantages of doing things that way according to you?

 

[Evie]

Just as a minor correction, Buchi, I said that defining research to include STEM was not overly literal, but rather a wrong definition altogether.

For the rest, I'm not going to debate your plan with you further. I do not like it, nor would I want to play a game that used it, and you won't convince me to accept it, but by the same token you like it and I'm unlikely to convince you to drop it by listing arguments against it. So, I'm going to try and be more constructive by putting together my disparate ideas for the research/era system rather than keep fighting you about yours.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

I never played Rise of Nations but I can only assume that if he divided techs this way it was for good gameplay reasons. I know that it's a real-time strategy game that is meant to happen through the whole of History from Neolithic to Modern days, and all that in only a few hours. As such, I wonder if he hasn't done so to pace up research, allowing multiple research simultaneously? If you played the game you may tell me if that's indeed the case.

I guess that'd be the reason. A Library tech (one belonging to one of the four categories) can only be researched one at a time. Other techs, like unit upgrade/buff techs also can be researched one at a time per building type.

Civilization being a turn-based game, there's no such a rush to play fast. Fundamentally I find it counter-intuitive that you could build warplanes without having invented aviation first, which has both civil (airports) and military implications. So I don't believe that such a thing would fit in. What would be the advantages of doing things that way according to you?

I wasn't suggesting doing things that way, only mentioning how the talk about Techs/Civics split reminded me of it.

I don't have any clear ideas on how to go about with techs and civics in Civ7, but maybe you could have a single resource, Knowledge, which can be used to research both (or either, one at a time) techs and civics. Culture could instead be returned to representing a civ's cultural output and influence. (Maybe used to ease assimilation of foreign populations?). 'Civics'/Social Policies could also be isolated into their own systems.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

Personally, I think splitting the tech tree was a step in the right direction; not all progress can be made possible with the exact same kind of expertise or perspective. I do not, however, really approve of having the two trees completely isolated from each other, especially given one of the trees is substantially sparser than the other and thus easier to beeline in a way that kind of breaks the immersion. Technological and social progress are indeed intertwined, but I think one way to better abstract this relation, is to introduce two pretty radical changes to how the tech tree works:

1. Go all in with eurekas/inspirations. Rather than simply giving a progress boost, they should be hard requirements to make each advance available in the first place. On top of that, I feel each advance would need more than one requirement to fulfil; consider be how mission trees work in Europa Universalis IV.
2. Make research stackable. Do away with giving the player an an array of following advances right after finishing research, and instead have the research of each advance automatically start once the respective conditions are in place (see Point 1).

It should all add up to portray progress as the complex beast it is in real life, rather than the straight river the game series has so far portrayed it as. One could argue this would just take away the precious player agency that the game series' success has relied on, but I think that is a surface reading; the player still assumes a godlike role in the game in most other aspects of the game (deciding where to settle, deciding what to build, giving units orders that they always obey, change governments etc), and as such has the power to affect the material conditions of their civilization, at least partially.

Lastly, I'll echo what has been mentioned in this thread earlier and say that 'Civics Tree' is indeed a head-scratcher of a name. We already kind of have a name irl, for what Civ6 calls 'civics': social constructs. And as for why great works play an important role in the game for unlocking new modes of politics (rather than as some here have suggested would be more realistic, random events & decisions), that may or may not be something Ed Beach and his team have picked up from the book Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, which in detail goes into the role the arts and humanities have played in the history of modern nationalism & mythmaking. Art is after all how we humans express ourselves, how we shape our identities, including national identities

 

[BuchiTaton]

Something similar to CIV3's and CIV4's function for culture covers the role of arts as a way to exalt and propagate ideologies and values. Back then science was progress and culture was influence.
From my perspective this abstraction make more sense than spend a heavily artistic related culture into civic research. Also instead of tourism being THE measure to get a cultural victory, tourism is just a way to boost our cultural influence, that comes from specialized buildings, wonders, great works but also a new "cultural products" that are goods like Textiles, Ceramics, Records and Cousine, thsese link culture with the economic sectors of the production chain.
I mean both artisanal and mass produced goods like decorative pieces, music, cuisine and more recently movies, comics and videogames are a way people know and some times even are influenced to accept, apprecciate and imitate the cultures of others without the need of this goods to be "great pieces of art".

 

[Evie]

On this at least we agree.