Needs more Classical techs?

[ripple01]

Anyone else find the Classical era to be skimpy in the tech tree?

Just for fun, let's suggest some appropriate techs to flesh it out. Who knows, maybe Firaxis will pick up on our ideas for last-minute additions.

I'd like to see an Athletics tech. It could unlock the Arena (Colosseum) building and an Olympic Games world wonder.

Cheers,
ripple01

 

[GeoModder]

Given that the first tier of the Ancient era only has one tech, I more or less consider the Ancient -and Classical era's lumped together.

 

[Zhahz]

I haven't played the game yet so who knows?! Thinking about changing that which I haven't experienced yet seems illogical.

 

[Intellectus]

They should just kept it like in civilization 3.

 

[Calouste]

You could argue that Currency, Theology and Engineering are really more Classical than Medieaval techs, but I guess they had to draw the line somewhere.

I don't think there need to be more techs, there were too many techs in the Civ4 tech tree that you could either skip completely or just ignore for long periods of time. As a Creative leader in Civ4, sometimes the only reason to start researching the branch that starts with Mysticism eventually is because the whole thing is a prerequisite for Banking. Similarly, if you don't plan on building wonders, a lot of other things tend to have priority over everything that comes past Aesthetics.

 

[Tylerryan79]

I think the future era and classical both need more techs. Future only has 3, not including the last "Future Techs"

 

[Mercade]

I think the future era and classical both need more techs. Future only has 3, not including the last "Future Techs"

That's still three more techs in the future era than in Civ4.

All in all the Tech tree has 76 techs, while Civ4 (Vanilla) had 86. It's not a huge difference, although admittedly fewer than Civ4 had when it came out.

 

[King Jason]

That's still three more techs in the future era than in Civ4.

All in all the Tech tree has 76 techs, while Civ4 (Vanilla) had 86. It's not a huge difference, although admittedly fewer than Civ4 had when it came out.

You can trace that lack of techs back to the removal of religion, since there are a handful of techs that simply unlock a religion and/or also add a wonder...

Plus, "civics" are no longer directly tied to techs due to the social policy, which is cause for less techs as well... in fact, you can sort of consider the social policies "techs" in a way, that are not researched... but still it's as if you discover/unlock two new "techs" per era, since that's how the policy trees unlock: They're tied to era, and thus to research.

Since there are 10 of them... 76+10 = 86... Technically speaking... civ5 has the same, if not more, actually. If you want to factor in the progression through policies as well, albeit utilizing culture, not research.

It's more a matter of things being moved around and added to different systems, than outright removed. Even with the tree condensed as it is.. they still manage to have roughly the same amount of raw techs as civ4.. which is fantastic.

 

[GeoModder]

All in all the Tech tree has 76 techs, while Civ4 (Vanilla) had 86. It's not a huge difference, although admittedly fewer than Civ4 had when it came out.

Have you counted the techs in the tree? I come to 74 only...

 

[Calouste]

That's still three more techs in the future era than in Civ4.

All in all the Tech tree has 76 techs, while Civ4 (Vanilla) had 86. It's not a huge difference, although admittedly fewer than Civ4 had when it came out.

Civ4 had 20 different civics to discover (you started with 5 already), but Civ5 has 60 different Social Policy effects (10 branches that immediately give an effect and 5 policies in each branch)

 

[Mercade]

Have you counted the techs in the tree? I come to 74 only...

No, I didn't count the Civ5 tree. I read posts that counted to 74 and 76. Since the tech tree is undergoing some last minute revisions, let's agree it's average 75

Civ4 had 20 different civics to discover (you started with 5 already), but Civ5 has 60 different Social Policy effects (10 branches that immediately give an effect and 5 policies in each branch)

Right, which affirms my point that in terms of techs (and social polcies), Civ5 is at least equally rich as Civ4 was in terms of techs (and civics). There's no basis for claiming that Civ5 is light(er) on techs and needs more.

 

[bjbrains]

Definitely, they've really made each tech actually representative of either a technological advance or a large theoretical shift (philosophy, Theology, etc). Gone are the days of 'fluff techs' that aren't technologies in any sense of the term (like Monarchy and constitution), those are now cultural advances, which is what they really are.

 

[killmeplease]

many of technology links are NON SCENSE
e.g.
agriculture -> archery / mining
wheel -> maths
trapping -> civil service
currency -> chivalry
chivalry -> banking
physics -> printing press
printing press -> economics
navigation -> archaeology
accoustics -> scientific theory
economics -> military sciense
military sciense -> steam power
biology -> electricity
combutsion -> athomic theory
mass media -> computers
combutsion -> laser

did developers just thow techs onto the tree in random order?

 

[bjbrains]

Those are more for balance/gameplay than 'real links'. Quite the opposite of random (note that you start with agriculture, so those aren't really relevant.

 

[SevenSpirits]

Agriculture being a prerequisite for anything really does make sense. Agriculture is what allowed humans to settle down into large communities in the first place. But yeah, a lot of the later links make no sense whatsoever.

 

[Mercade]

Agriculture being a prerequisite for anything really does make sense. Agriculture is what allowed humans to settle down into large communities in the first place. But yeah, a lot of the later links make no sense whatsoever.

Perhaps not, but as BJB said, they're there for the game purpose, linking the different units and buildings together.

I'd like to challenge you to propose an alternative "sensible" suggestion to what would be a good precursor to Atomic Theory. And what could be good precursors and successors for Economics. Unless of course you want to challenge the relevance of those techs to begin with...

 

[Souron]

Atomic theory? I'd expect it to be tied to electricity, or the related radio and telegraph. Nuclear fission would need combustion though, because the processes of a nuclear generator are not entirely different from an internal combustion engine. But Fission without electricity seems unlikely to be realistic.

I think the precursors for economics are fine. The printing press made it easier to spread ideas, such as on the subject of economics. Otherwise those ideas may be had by one person, but would not benefit the nation.

Still I understand that balance may be an factor for some of the irregularities of the tree.

EDIT:
Another one I'll defend:
Chivalry -> Banking
The rise of banking is tied to the decline of feudalism, and the rise of towns. Now feudalism is out of the tech tree, so the closest you get is chivalry. Since banking is the product of the decline of things related to chivalry, it makes some sense to make it a product of it.

 

[o1derfull1]

I dont have a problem with the amount of techs, What I don't like is the ramp of speed of research.
Early ancient techs can take 30 turns to research. End game techs can take 6. Thats just silly.
I realise that tech cost more beakers the more advanced they get, but your ability to boost research and generate commerce far outpaces the increase in beakers needed as the game progress, esepecially once you hit free trade and banking.
When its time to upgrade macemen to musket men I dont bother, because in about 20 turns I'll have riflemen, and another 25 turns after that Infantry... so i just upgrade macemen to infantry, and never really build or use musketmen or riflemen. Thats too fast, and you dont get to savor the flavor of the different eras.

 

[SevenSpirits]

Perhaps not, but as BJB said, they're there for the game purpose, linking the different units and buildings together.

I'd like to challenge you to propose an alternative "sensible" suggestion to what would be a good precursor to Atomic Theory. And what could be good precursors and successors for Economics. Unless of course you want to challenge the relevance of those techs to begin with...

Hey, I didn't complain about them! I just agreed they don't make sense. That doesn't mean it's not a good idea for gameplay. I'm not in a position to know that for sure yet, but I'd certainly expect the tech tree to work well, seeing as the people who made it probably know what they're doing.

Edit: To answer your specific questions, I have no problems with Economics and Atomic Theory in that tree. Here are some examples of things I find nonsensical:

Trapping being necessary for Civil Service. Archery (representing composite bows, since bows and arrows existed long before agriculture) being necessary to Mathematics.

In general, it doesn't actually make sense in many cases for a tech to be NECESSARY for another tech. It's plausible that Archery can LEAD TO Mathematics, but not that it is required.

 

[AriochIV]

Since Science is now split off from Gold, and most Science-producing buildings and improvements aren't available until much later in the game, almost all your Science in the ancient/classical periods is going to come from your population, which starts out very small. So the small number of ancient/classical techs is offset by the fact that scientific progress is probably going to be very slow in the early going.