Playing a game with no currency?

[Scalfaro]

I'm curious (though unable to play at this time to test my curiosity) as to whether or not one can play a game without ever researching or buying the Currency technology.

In theory, this may apply to any other technology, but I chose Currency to make it specific, and because it seems to be a *very* important tech.

Unlike dead-end techs like Horseback Riding, Currency is a requirement for future techs. A lot, in fact. Specifically, Currency is required to research Code of Laws, which is a pre-req for Civil Service...and the list goes on. I know that if I do not research Currency, I will not be able to research a lot of techs. In fact, the vast majority of technologies stem from Currency. The most advanced tech I will be able to acquire (on my own) without researching Currency is Music, Theology, Guilds and Banking.

That said, I want to know if it's possible to *trade* for Code of Laws (and future technologies, for that matter) without having Currency. Ostensibly, I want to know if it's feasible to play a game without ever gaining the Currency technology, but still being able to advance otherwise. Or, if I'll be stuck waaaaay behind in technology for the rest of the game.

Thanks ahead for any help.

 

[Windsor]

You can get code of laws from priesthood and you need CoL *or* feudalism to get civil service. You can't trade for techs you can't research. So without currency you can't get banking.

You can get far in the tech-tree without currency. On the upper half you will not get replaceable parts, but on the lower end you can get way further.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

<edit>Unlike dead-end techs like Horseback Riding,<edit>

Silly question, and rather OT, but... Why do you consider Horseback Riding a dead end tech? It gives you some very powerful anti-siege units like Horse Archers, Knights, and Cavalry. With a little warring and the right promotions, these can be upgraded to very useful Helicopter Gunships, which are nice for taking out Artillery and Tanks in the modern era.

A mounted unit with Flanking is almost a necessity for defense against enemy siege stacks, and quite useful for the attack as well.

Just asking.

 

[JujuLautre]

Silly question, and rather OT, but... Why do you consider Horseback Riding a dead end tech?

Just asking.

Techs are usually called dead-end when then do not lead themselves to new techs. Horseback riding is one, as are archery, military tradition, communism or military science.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Techs are usually called dead-end when then do not lead themselves to new techs. Horseback riding is one, as are archery, military tradition, communism or military science.

Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't familiar with that train of thought, and I didn't quite understand why the OP would feel that way about a very useful tech. In that light, though, it makes sense.

 

[Scalfaro]

Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't familiar with that train of thought, and I didn't quite understand why the OP would feel that way about a very useful tech. In that light, though, it makes sense.

Exactly. I would never deny that Horseback Riding is a *very* useful tech. But if I were to play a game without it, it wouldn't be a requirement for any future technology, and wouldn't be particularly limiting. Especially if (as surprisingly often happens in my games) I manage not to get myself into a war until after I have Tanks or Modern Armour. In that case, the technology is ostensibly useless to me.

---

Upon further review, I was very clearly mistaken as to how limited I would be. I played an experimental game, and managed to be able to begin construction of the Manhattan Project. I took a peek at what I was missing out on, and the two that I was most upset about were Railroad and Rifling.

Then I formed a Permanent Alliance, failing to realise I would be sharing in their technological acheivements.

I think I'm the only world leader in history that accidentily discovered currency.

All in all, I don't see a reason why I won't win this game without currency. I am poised for a cultural victory, and am building the United Nations as a backup plan - There's only the Aztecs that aren't Friendly with me, and they're merely Cautious. I was lucky enough to befriend Julius Caesar early on, and I have almost my entire nation isolated behind his. If anyone wants to attack me, they have to go through Julius, or land on a very tiny strip of beach.

This will change soon, however, since my culture is beginning to engulf Roman cities (the city of Rome itself was the first to join my empire...which I found somewhat amusing) at an alarming rate.

Before I write an essay: I think I've managed to answer my own question. I will, of course, finish the game, just to be sure.

...then maybe I'll play another.

...and another..

 

[mechaerik]

I've won some conquest victories (on small maps) without ever reaching currency.

 

[The_Dwarf]

Easiely possible, currency is as overrated as financial is - I guess for the same reasons.
If you play very aggressive currency is really not a top notch tech at all.

 

[Xellos-_^]

Easiely possible, currency is as overrated as financial is - I guess for the same reasons.
If you play very aggressive currency is really not a top notch tech at all.

depends on the size and type of map and level. you could probably get away with it on a small size single landmass map type on the lower levels. but on huge maps with multiply continants on Noble+, i don't think so.

 

[mechaerik]

Easiely possible, currency is as overrated as financial is - I guess for the same reasons.
If you play very aggressive currency is really not a top notch tech at all.

Financial isn't over-rated at all. Settle on the coast and build the Colossus and you ave 4 on the water until astronomy. If you're playing a FIN leader with portugal, thats a money bag on the sea.