Social Progress System (new Tech System for WTP / Civ4Col) [ACCEPTED]

[raystuttgart]

To avoid any more misunderstandings:

This concept does not touch existing Founding Father System. I just reused some of its design patterns for this new concept.
It is a completely new and technically independent System of its own. (Separate XML config, separate DLL logic, separte visualization, separate, ...)

Foreword:

I have tried to combine the best out of "Civ4 BTS Techs" and "Civ4Col Founding Fathers" into one new feature design.

My goals were:

• allowing players to meaningfully impact according to their strategy
  
• preserving immersion and atmosphere of Civ4Col (so no modern "Research")
  
• preserving the functional capabilities of Techs (using CivEffects if @Nightinggale will implement it)
  
• giving players a known usability concept that they will easily understand
  
• deeply tie and blend it smoothly into existing game features of WTP
  
• create a game design that is also easy to understand for AI
• reduce effort and risk by using known design pattterns
• make it performant by not having to compute itself to death by constantly checking conditions
• ...

It took me lots of feature desigining and thinking, but I think I have achieved all of that at least conceptionally...

To simplify:

The main aspect this concept does is to replace 1 "single boring Yield" (Research) by more or less using all Yields and Game Mechanics ...
(Or to be more precise those that are not already used by Founding Fathers System.)

To keep it understandable and manageable in configuration I do so by using 12 "Social Progress Point Categories".
These 12 "Social Progress Point Categories" will basically form 12 in parallel researched Tech Trees.
Conditions / Dependencies / Prerequisites for single Social Progresses between the Tech Trees are possible though.

What makes this concept different?

Well, it has taken good design patterns from "Founding Fathers" and "Techs as in Civ4BTS".
There are still major differences to "Founding Fathers" or "Techs as in Civ4BTS"?

1. Social Progress is not exclusive. Any Nation can acquire a specifc Social Progress, no matter if other Nations already has it.
Actually I want to even add, that the more Nations already acquired, the easier it is to get for others.

2. A Social Progress can not be skipped. (I still need to figure out if the Tech Trees will be "linar" or "conditionally branched" or "blind randomize".)
But you can also not actively chose which one you "research", because your gameplay actions determine your path through your "Social Progress".

3. Social Progress should not just duplicate effects of "Founding Fathers" (e.g. free Units and Yield Production Bonusses)
Instead it should unlock !!! (Units, Promotions, Building Upgrades, Unit Actions, Game Features, ...)

4. Social Progress will use completely different Yields and Game Mechanics to generate Social Progress.
(Nothing used in Founding Fathers is used here again. No overlap.)

5. Since we will have 12 Social Progress Categories, we will basically have 12 in parallel researched Tech Trees !!!
(We can still decide if they should be linear or not. Some randomness in there is possible though and might be fun. Even blind might be intersting.)

---

Summary:

It will neither feel like a clone "Founding Fathers" nor feel like clone "Civ4 BTS Techs".
It will have similarities easy to understand by players but it will also feel new and unique.
It is going to be a wild combination using the best of both systems and still fitting to Civ4Col setting.

Is anything considering effect capabilities from old "WTP Tech concept" removed?

No this part of the concept is just the "generation of points, unlocking and structure".
Planned effect capabilities of Techs (using CivEffects) will be be a (sub-)concept of its own.

So these will get discussed, once this part is accepted:

• "What Social Progresses we actually have."
• "What Social Progresses actually do."
• "How Social Progresses are displayed".

Currently I just talk about these aspects:

• "How Social Progresses are unlocked / Social Progress Points generated."
  
• "How Social Progresses are tied into existing game mechanics."
• "How Social Progresses are structured in Categories / Social Progress Trees."

How will the Social Progress Trees be structured?

It is not decided yet.
These are the most realistic options.

1. linearly (like Founding Fathers)
   
2. branched conditional Tree (like Civ4BTS Techs)
3. randomized conditional Deck (Stellaris Style, not yet done by a Civ game to my knowledge)

My current opinion:

Spoiler :

Linear:
(Basically like currently in Founding Fathers.)

Lowest effort, no risk but also boring.
(Also feeling too much like a "Founding Father Clone".)

Branched Conditional Tree:
(Basically like currently in Civ4BTS.)

Well since we know how it works in Civ4BTS it is still reasonable effort.
For Civ4Col it is also something new because not yet existing ingame.

However:
This only really makes sense, if you select directly.

But in this case your "player actions" determine what you get, not just what you select.

• The more Buildings you build, the faster you will get "Building Techs".
• The more Improvements you build, the faster you will get "Imrpovement Techs".
• The more Ships you build, the faster you will get "Ships Techs".
• The more Plot Yields you produce, the faster you will get "Ploty Yield Techs".
• The more Social Yields (e.g. Health) you produce the faster you will get "Social Techs".
• ...

Randomized Conditional Deck:
(Basically "blind drawing" from partially randomized Deck.)

It would work perfectly with this, because game logic can match automatically what the player gets as Techs according to the players ingame actions.
(And to do so, we can configure all conditional rules- e.g. Dependencies / Prerequisites / Point Costs / ... -we want in XML.)

And it will:

• surprising / thus high replayability
• ensure that not all Nationgs get exactly the same Techs
• have the player again adjust his game play according to the new situation (due to the new "Tech" he got)

The effort to create it is actually not as big as some might think ...
(Being "blind draw" and most of it happening in DLL logic removes a lot of UI necessities ingame for selection and visualization.)

Categories of Founding Fathers (for Comparison):
(Again the system will work differently. Only structure and unlocking has similarities.)

• Founding Fathers haven 5 categories.
• Founding Fathers are unlocked by Yields and Game Mechanics.

old FF Points Categories currently are:
(used in Founding Father System)

• Trade (Trade Posts / Europe / Natives / Custom House)
  
• Religion (Missioning / Crosses / ...)
  
• Exploration (Exploration / First Contact / Goodies)
  
• Military (Combat / getting XP basically)
  
• Politics (just producing Liberty Bells) <--- Main Yield for Founding Father System

Categories of Social Progress (new Sytem):
(To understand structure and unlocking. Effects I will suggest, once this part is accepted.)

• Social Progress has 12 categories
• Social Prorgresses are unlocked by other Yields and other Game Mechanics.

SP Points Categories could be:
(used in technically different Social Progress System - different XML, different Screen, different ...)

• Construction (every time you finish a Building / Building Upgrade, producing Hammers)
  
• Infrastructure (Building Roads / Improvements)
• Agriculture and Nature (every Plot Yield produced like Stone, Lumber, Cotton, Sugar ...)
• Manufacturing (every manufactured Yield produced like Cigars, Cloth, Rum, ...)
  
• Ships and Navy (Building a Ship, Buying a Ship in Europe, producing Rope or Sailcloth)
• Land Battles and War (Buying Military Units in Europe, producing Guns or Blades or Cannons)
  
• Education (Trained from Natives, Education from Schools and Learning by Doing)
• Society (producing Cuture, Health and Happiness and LbD Become Free)
• Domestic (Domestic Market Sales and Population Growth)
• Triangle Trade (every trip between continents, every Slave bought in Africa)
• Foreign Relations (basically all kind of Diplomacy with other Europeans, Kings or Pope)
  
• Progress (just producing "Knowledge" - aka "Research") <--- Main Yield for Social Progress System

Social Progresses and Eras (changes in Era System)

Social Progress needs to be used to trigger Era Changes !
And Era Changes might can also trigger changes in UnitArtStyles, Music, CityArtStyles, CitySounds, Background Screens (if we want) ...

This actually needs several small changes in Era Sytem as well ... thus again effort ...
(Those can however only be done, after the basic Social Progress System is implemented.)

General Comment:

This is not that important for gameplay / balancing, but it has a lot of impact for atmosphere / immersion.

To simplify it:

Era Changes will not be triggered anymore by simple "turn checks".
Era Changes will be triggered specific "Era Triggering Social Progresses" becoming available ingame.

Reminder:
Need another XML tag in SocialProgress.xml to flag as "EraChangers".

--------------

Summary:

I have tried to find a concept to combine WTP like game design (unlocking and structure) and still use powerful Civ4BTS Techs funtional capabilities (effects) with it.

This is the part:
WTP like game design (unlocking and structure)

If this get accepted we can talk about the
Civ4BTS Techs funtional capabilities (effects)

--------------

Looking forward to feedback.
Somehow tried to do the impossible and make everybody happy ...
I hope you like it, because I personally feel it is one of the best game designs I ever created.

 

[Schmiddie]

In any case, it sounds interesting at first. But we should talk about the details here.

For example, what about the following areas:

- Agriculture/Animal Husbandry
- Production/Crafting/Industry

To my view both categories are important and the player will invest lots of efforts into that when he develops his colonies...

Do you have a plan how to combine the SP with FF? I mean, the FF system only grants a one-time bonus for the player who gets the FF. I think the FF categories are important as well for the development of the colonial empire of the player. Or do you intend to include these categories somehow into the SP system?

 

[raystuttgart]

For example, what about the following areas:

- Agriculture/Animal Husbandry
- Production/Crafting/Industry

Will updated my concept due to yesterday evenings "private game design workshop":

I missed several fields of Progress:
(Because the things I want to unlock do not fit in the others or need to be able to be researched in parallel.)

• Naval (Constructing Ships / Buying Ships, producing Sailcloth and Ropes)
• Military (Buying Miliary Units, producing Guns, Blades and Cannons)
• Nature (All Plot Yields, Traines from Natives)
• ...

I will also split "Buildings" and "Infrastructure".
(It is necessary for gameplay to be able to research in both in parallel.)

Do you have a plan how to combine the SP with FF?

They are systems on their own with a specific purpose.
I have absolutely no intention to combine them technically.

It is also really not even a good idea technically do do something like that.
(separate Screens, separate Colopedia, separate Effects they can trigger, separate XML for config ...)

To avoid misunderstandings:

I will not change the Founding Father System and never had any intention to do so.
I am simply reusing some design patterns from it for a completely independent and new Social Progress System.

 

[raystuttgart]

Ok, this is the updated version from my "game design" yesterday night:
(It is updated as well in the concept above.)

SP Points Categories could be:
(used in technically different Social Progress System - different XML, different Screen, different ...)

• Construction (every time you finish a Building / Building Upgrade, producing Hammers)
  
• Infrastructure (Building Roads / Improvements)
• Agriculture and Nature (every Plot Yield produced like Stone, Lumber, Cotton, Sugar ...)
• Manufacturing (every manufactured Yield produced like Cigars, Cloth, Rum, ...)
  
• Ships and Navy (Building a Ship, Buying a Ship in Europe, producing Rope or Sailcloth)
• Land Battles and War (Buying Military Units in Europe, producing Guns or Blades or Cannons)
  
• Education (Trained from Natives, Education from Schools and Learning by Doing)
• Society (producing Cuture, Health and Happiness and LbD Become Free)
• Domestic (Domestic Market Sales and Population Growth)
• Triangle Trade (every trip between continents, every Slave bought in Africa)
• Foreign Relations (basically all kind of Diplomacy with other Europeans, Kings or Pope)
  
• Progress (just producing "Knowledge" - aka "Research") <--- Main Yield for Social Progress System

To explain:

I need to have these 12 categories, because all of these are 12 independent "Tech Trees".
Thus the player can research and unlock their according Social Progress in parallel.

So depending on the "players actions ingame", he can "research" e.g. all of these things in parallel:
(basically he is simply getting "Techs" - which I now simply call "Social Progresses".)

• Unlocking Building Upgrade "Townhall"
  
• Unlocking Improvement Upgrade "Large Farm"
• Unlocking Yield Bonus of Tobacco (not its visibility)
  
• Unlocking Building Upgrade "Tobacco Factory"
• Unlocking Ship Promotion ...
• Unlocking new Military Unit ...
• Unlocking Building Upgrade "University"
• Unlocking 2-Plot City Radius (the feature itself ingame)
  
• Unlocking Yield "Luxury Goods" to become sellable in Domestic Market
• Unlocking / Getting "Fast Africa Route"
• Unlocking / Getting "Open Markets"
• Unlocking / Getting "Freedom of Speech"

---------

So instead having one "extremely long" Tech Tree, we will have 12 with an average length.
So almost all important gameplay content should already be available in midgame.

In late game you will of course still unlock stuff like a few Promotions, a few more porwerful Units, a few Civics, a few ...
So yes, there will be late game stuff you will not see in midgame or early game.

But again, we need these 12 parallel Tech Trees to let the player unlock all the stuff he needs for midgame in reasonable time and in immersive manner in parallel.

 

[raystuttgart]

I am still not sure however how I should handle the the "Tech Trees" ingame.
Sometimes I feel that "randomized conditional deck" would really be the most interesting.

Ensuring at leasts some order considering "early game, "mid game", "late game" is still possible.
(By using the conditions tot other "Social Progresses" - also in other Trees.)

More or less we would have:
(Split in 12 indedendent pools where the player can draw from in parallel.)

• Early Game Social Progresses --> no conditions
• Mid Game Social Progresses --> more conditions to other SPs (and maybe also a certain amount of SPs already drawn)
• Late Game Social Progresses --> many conditions to other SPs (and maybe also a certain amount of SPs already drawn)

Basically simplified but similar version of the Tech Drawing System of Stellaris.
(Which is one of my favourite 4x games of all times.)

For more information on Stellaris Tech System, see here.
(It is most likely the most interesting Tech System I have ever seen in a game.)

Thus the Players would:

• Not always know which Social Progrees they will get in each Tree
  
• Each Nation would get different Social Progresses

That again would lead to:

• More surprise and more replayability
• More incentive to trade "Social Progresses"

----------

Always remember:

There is not 1 Tech Tree you draw from there are 12 Tech Trees that you can draw from in parallel.
(Each using its own Social Progress Points as "currency" to pay for the Techs.)

 

[raystuttgart]

I was asked about the realistic amount of "Social Progresses" ...
Tough question actually.

All I can currently do is to look at this here:
(And then have my brain come up with ideas ...)

• Construction (every time you finish a Building / Building Upgrade, producing Hammers)
  
• Infrastructure (Building Roads / Improvements)
• Agriculture and Nature (every Plot Yield produced like Stone, Lumber, Cotton, Sugar ...)
• Manufacturing (every manufactured Yield produced like Cigars, Cloth, Rum, ...)
  
• Ships and Navy (Building a Ship, Buying a Ship in Europe, producing Rope or Sailcloth)
• Land Battles and War (Buying Military Units in Europe, producing Guns or Blades or Cannons)
  
• Education (Trained from Natives, Education from Schools and Learning by Doing)
• Society (producing Cuture, Health and Happiness and LbD Become Free)
• Domestic (Domestic Market Sales and Population Growth)
• Triangle Trade (every trip between continents, every Slave bought in Africa)
• Foreign Relations (basically all kind of Diplomacy with other Europeans, Kings or Pope)
  
• Progress (just producing "Knowledge" - aka "Research") <--- Main Yield for Social Progress System

• In some of these "Social Progress" Categories I can currently only come up with only 5 (each hard to get Social Progresses)
  
• Some of these "Social Progress" Categories I can imagine to have about 12 (each moderate to get Social Progresses)
• In some of these "Social Progress" Categories I can imagine at least 30 (each easy to get Social Progresses)

Summary:

It depends on our creativity and motivation ...

----

By the way:

These will have simple 2D images like e.g. for Buttons !!!
Graphical effort is the same as e.g. for a Promotion.

They will be in no way as much effort to create graphically as e.g. Founding Fathers.
If we even tried, that would most likely totally kill us considering graphical effort.

 

[Nightinggale]

Basically simplified but similar version of the Tech Drawing System of Stellaris.
(Which is one of my favourite 4x games of all times.)

For more information on Stellaris Tech System, see here.
(It is most likely the most interesting Tech System I have ever seen in a game.)

I have been wondering about adding something like the original Master of Orion tech system. The system is as follows (short summary)

• each tech is given a point requirement
• each tech provides some points towards research (unlocking other techs)
• when the game starts, it's random which techs will be in your tech tree
• critical techs will always be in the tech tree
• you can't see if a tech is in your tech tree until you can pick it for the next research

The problem with this approach is that it would work for something like "all ships gain a promotion to gain +10% strength", but not really for unlocking units/buildings etc. For this to work, we would have to do something like having 5 tier 1 techs and then each player will only be able to research 3 of them. Having 3 of them allows researching tier 2 intro, which unlocks the same as all tier 1 combined. This way you will eventually end up with everything unlocked, but the randomness might make you able to unlock something early.

The system for unlocking is that each unit/building/(well whatever, the list is long) has an allow int. The player can use it if the combined value of all owned CivEffects is > 0. This means we can add multiple CivEffects, which grants +1. We can also set the default CivEffect to provide -1 meaning it has to unlock twice to actually unlock.

If this sounds familiar, then it's because it's almost identical to how techs unlock stuff in BTS. There are a few differences, mainly the ability to set values in a default CivEffect (default for all, human, AI, native...) and some performance boosting.

Invisible to the player is that all players are given a free CivEffect at startup, which grants +1 to everything where no CivEffect provides a positive value. This way if nothing unlocks a specific unit, that unit is available from the start. BTS will during the game check if the unit has a positive value from any tech. The system I designed here won't have to know that meaning it doesn't have to loop CivEffects, making the canUse check much faster.

 

[raystuttgart]

• each tech is given a point requirement

Of course.
(That is why I have my "Social Progress Points")

• each tech provides some points towards research (unlocking other techs)

I actually really prefer "Dependencies" like e.g. Civ4BTS Techs use as well.
(Call them "Prerequisites" if that term is easier to understand.)

• "Dependencies" / "Prerequisites" are immersive, because we know them from daily life
  
• "Dependencies" / "Prerequisites" are much easier to balance and make sense for gameplay
  
• "Dependencies" / "Prerequisites" can use design patterns we already know (e.g. Techs from Civ4BTS or Promotions) - thus less effort and risk
• "Dependencies" / "Prerequisites" are known already from all Civ games and thus easy to understand for the player

• when the game starts, it's random which techs will be in your tech tree

Please not!

For WTP In every game 100% of the "Techs" must be in the game because we unlock and may configure dependencies / prerequisites.
Thus the order might be changed but still consider dependencies correctly. Anything else will become a nightmare for balancing and gameplay.

Most Players also absolutely hate to "not get their favourite Tech" or to "only have 80% of the game content" in a game.
(I do as well by the way - because I do not play that often and a game can be very long.)

you can't see if a tech is in your tech tree until you can pick it for the next research

The Deck from Stellaris does nothing else.
(That is why I like that "Deck Approach" so much.)

Basically you draw cards and do not know what they are before you draw.

----

As long as the "Deck" is not fully randomized there are no problems.
It must be "conditional" - in terms of allowing "dependencies" / "prerequisites".

Check the Stellaris System.
(There should be explanation videos around in YouTube)

It is a "semi-randomized" Deck, but it never gives you e.g. "Lasers 2" before you had "Lasers 1".

----

These are the only Systems I can imagine for structuring:
(And the only thing they change is the order and conditions - mainly in terms of dependencies to other Techs - to get Techs.)

1. linear (like Founding Fathers)
   
2. branched conditional Tree (like Civ4BTS Techs)
3. randomized conditional Deck (Stellaris Style, not yet done by a Civ game to my knowledge)

Linear:
(Basically like currently in Founding Fathers.)

Lowest effort, no risk but also boring.
(Also feeling too much like a "Founding Father Clone".)

Branched Conditional Tree:
(Basically like currently in Civ4BTS.)

Well since we know how it works in Civ4BTS it is still reasonable effort.
For Civ4Col it is also something not known existing.

However:
This only really makes sense, if you select directly.

But in this case your "player actions" determine what you get, not just what you select.

• The more Buildings you build, the faster you will get "Building Techs".
• The more Improvements you build, the faster you will get "Imrpovement Techs".
• The more Ships you build, the faster you will get "Ships Techs".
• The more Plot Yields you produce, the faster you will get "Ploty Yield Techs".
• The more Social Yields (e.g. Health) you produce the faster you will get "Social Techs".
• ...

Randomized Conditional Deck:
(Basically "blind drawing" from partially randomized Deck.)

It would work perfectly with this, because game logic can match automatically what the player gets as Techs according to the players ingame actions.
(And to do so, we can configure all conditional rules- e.g. Dependencies / Prerequisites / Point Costs / ... -we want in XML.)

And it will:

• surprising / thus high replayability
• ensure that not all Nationgs get exactly the same Techs
• have the player again adjust his game play according to the new situation (due to the new "Tech" he got)

The effort to create it is actually not as big as some might think ...
(Being "blind draw" and most of it happening in DLL logic removes a lot of UI necessities ingame for selection and visualization.)

 

[Schmiddie]

Hi all,

I like this system very much now!

I also like the "semi-randomized" Stellaris system...it makes games more interesting and is not completely random but you will never get "Lasers 2" before "Lasers 1"

I like that the player can unlock 12 categories in parallel and due to his ingame actions. That would already be random enough for me

However, it sounds to be a lot of effort for the programmer?

Graphics should not be a problem. I suggest to structure the 12 tech trees completely at first. Afterwards we can talk about the graphic requirements and the "general" look of the system (buttons, "cards", advisor screen, etc. - whatever you need). I'm sure we will find a lot od examples in the huge Civ4 mods.

 

[modmod]

At first in previous thread was symphatetic as base.

Here it became a hydra (with the 12 categories), AND with the same problems as techs.

1. Most categories even right now have certain limitatations, like high end buildings (time and materials, neccesities by other buildings), second level improvements appear with many turn delays, education even right now hard to come.
Further limitations are just restrict more. I mean any kind of "unlock", NOT the point collection itself.

2. In some categories, like: Agriculture and Nature, Manufacturin, Domestic it is pointless (if done normally, and not as restriction orientated), as that is what both AI and player does anyway (naturaly): produce/ consume.
In case cannot: like basically started in tundra and "progressed" just there - and after even if conquer in different parts - able to start at the bottom in for example savannah then again: restricts BASICS, while offers nothing.

3. To make existing features randomized (in the means: everything inside, but randomly appear) is bad: cannot count/ plan/ do strategy properly.
So linear OR branched conditional.
That don`t makes impossible to have SOME random (mainly at it`s endgame), but not the whole system.

4. Looks like based on some examples in posts, like:

• Unlocking Yield Bonus of Tobacco (not its visibility)

• Unlocking 2-Plot City Radius (the feature itself ingame)

• Unlocking Yield "Luxury Goods" to become sellable in Domestic Market

brings limitations/ restrictions to the extreme.


So the same problem as was some tech concepts:
Limits/ restricts (till the extreme) while simple "unlocks" / "allow" offers nothing.

There is a reasonable (minimalistic) level, like needs several shipyard for hight end warships - not to research them, but to have the social-engineering progress/ knowledge/ shipbuilding experience for that colonial power to able to produce them in the new world.

But to put "all in" or "most in" - meaning (untill now) BASIC game features/ in some case buildings/ units is simple no - same with techs.


So details will be important:
- if it is mostly "unlock"/ "allow": best not even start
- if there will be wide range of civeffects/ new "stuff" then: worth a test

 

[raystuttgart]

I like this system very much now!

Great.

I also like the "semi-randomized" Stellaris system...
it makes games more interesting and is not completely random but you will never get "Lasers 2" before "Lasers 1"

It is "kind of a Tech Tree" because it has conditions / dependencies between Techs.
But the same time it acts like a "Card Deck" and reshuffles itself every time you draw.

Condition / dependencies / prerequisites look like a Tech Tree.
But the paths that the system lets you take are always at least a bit random by the Deck Shuffle.

Thus yes, it is "semi-random".

It is actually really the best designed and thus most interesting and surpising Tech System I have ever seen.
For more information see here (from Stellaris Wiki).

I like that the player can unlock 12 categories in parallel and due to his ingame actions. That would already be random enough for me

Yeah, I figured 12 Social Progress Categories / 12 parallel researched small Tech Trees are enough ...

However, it sounds to be a lot of effort for the programmer?

Effort is always to be considered relative to benefit and motivation.
This feature could really make "WTP" a true "Colonization 3".

Just imagine:

• You step by step unlock all the cool stuff in the mod - thus more challenge throughout the game.
  
• Your game will look different every time you play ! (Depending on your ingame actions and semi-random deck)
• Dynamic gameplay changes throughout the centuries will become possible. (New Units, New Buildings, New Improvements, ...)

Graphics should not be a problem.

I want to keep this simple considering graphics:
Mainly 2D Buttons like e.g. Promotions also have.

I suggest to structure the 12 tech trees completely at first.

Exactly.

But I do not want to have this end in "personal taste chaos" again.
I suggest we do internally - only team and supporters - after upcoming release.

Anything else will end in endless personal taste discussions again.
And to be honest, I am fed up with turning in circles, sorry to say it like that.

@Community:

Sorry, but we learned our lessons with this concept.
It is simply too big and complex to chaotically discuss with people that do not have modding experience.

Once we have a concept can show, we will of course present it to community.
Then all you can ask questions, give your input and feedback.

We finally want to have a concept that all team members and supporters agree.
That is the base we need to also actually implement something and let it become part of the mod.

@team and supporters:

After the upcoming release, we will organize some concept workshops internally.
(e.g. using Zoom or discord or whatever)

If you want to prepare some concept drafts of your own, please use these here as inspiration:

Spoiler :

• free experience for new units (or CombatTypes)

• pioneer work speed modifier (general and/or specific builds)

• pioneer can start working after spending all movement points

• improvement upgrade modifier (might take 40 turns instead of 50)

• Changes to yield production at the colony plot (like all colonies produce +1 cotton if center plot produces cotton)

• Africa Screen will get unlocked

• Modify tax / Modify Max Tax Rate

• Modify native land prices

• King's fee for transporting treasure modifier

• Gold from natives modifier

• Immigration cross requirement modifier

• Buy in Europe price modifier

• Unit heal rate modifier (settings for own team, neutral and enemy owned plots)

• Unit stats (like movement points) changes for any unit, which might not have a UnitCombat (may or may not be needed)

• Extra yield from plot if it produces more than a certain amount (like +1 fur for any plot producing at least 6 furs)

• Modifier for research point requirements (per type of research points, like cost -5%)

• FF point cost modifiers, specific type and/or all

• Missionary conversion rate modifier

• Improvement yield production change (providing we can make the code fast enough)

• learn time in native settlement modifier

• Europe travel time changes

• Buildings (e.g. unlocking higher Buildings, improving Production Bonus of Buildings, adding more Production Slots ...)

• Improvements (e.g. 2nd Level of Growing Improvements and stuff like "Forts" and "Monasteries")

• New World (e.g. unlocking the Yield Increase of Bonus Ressources that are not known in the Old World - like Tobacco)

• Land Military (e.g. unlocking stronger Land Military Professions or unlocking specific Promotions)

• Ships (e.g. unlocking more powerful Ships or adding more Storage Slots to specific Ships or giving Free Promotions)

• Expansion (e.g. making Scouts stronger, making Pioneers require less Tools, unlocking new Roads Types, unlocking Transport Units, ...)

• Politics (e.g. unlocking Civics, unlocking Dialog options, unlocking DLL-Events, ...)

• ...

Afterwards we can talk about the graphic requirements and the "general" look of the system (buttons, "cards", advisor screen, etc. - whatever you need).
I'm sure we will find a lot od examples in the huge Civ4 mods.

Absolutely correct.

First we need to know what we want to have.
Then we will start working on it.

 

[Nightinggale]

However, it sounds to be a lot of effort for the programmer?

It depends on the implementation. Adding a new xml file to define types of social points and define uniqueness to research screens (different colors, different text etc) sounds very doable, like a day extra compared to having just one research yield and one tech screen. Nothing severe enough to really influence the decision on how to make this. For the most part it's just different rather than extra work. Also if done right, the difference between 2 and 20 is nothing in the code, or at least this part of the code.

What I view as the main workload is code to earn social points. Earning "code locations" would have to be added one by one. For instance improvements would likely have to hook into CvUnit::build(), which is called whenever a pioneer finishes something. Depending on how precisely points should be earned, this is either trivial or a major task.

I spot a number of design decisions, which Ray's post leaves out. Should it be possible to make research require more than one type of points? Should we include the produced yields too as in techs have two arrays, one is points, the other is yields.

 

[raystuttgart]

@modmod:

Seriously, you heavily misunderstand my concept and my ideas.
And also do not worry, this needs to get approved by all team members and supporters.

I will explain this in detail to the team and supporters and let them decide if they want to have it or not.
Then we will improve and work on this together or it will not become part of WTP.

I will not code a single line of code or even commit it until then.

----

Also, it seems like you never played "Stellaris" or otherwise you would know how the "Tech Sytem" worked there.
It is really great and it is not "pure random" as I tried to explain in so much detail

It takes care of logical dependencies, preconditions, ensuring a basic order ...
It is explained here, simply read this link.

So it is kind of a "Tech Tree" underneath having an order, having dependencies, having prerequisites, having ...
But it is also semi-randomized (by card shuffle of the currently "allowed / available" Techs).

Excerpt from the Stellaris Wiki:

Spoiler :

The user interaction aspect utilizes a card shuffle approach rather than a traditional tech tree presentation, thereby introducing an element of semi-randomness into the system.

----

See, I need 12 categories so all the things the Players needs can uncover in his gameplay in time.
(Ensuring that he does not get anything he needs too late.)

The idea is that the Player starts with very basic and limited possibilities in his colony.
Then step by step he will become more knowledged and more accustomed to the New World and will be able to do more.

Thus there is always more to discover and always more to do.
The concept in Civ4BTS Techs is really not that different.

----

4. Looks like based on some examples in posts, like:

Those were examples what could be done and not what will be done.
The what "will be done" will be discussed with team and supporters.

See here:

I suggest to structure the 12 tech trees completely at first.

I suggest we do that internally - only team and supporters - after upcoming release.

----

So details will be important:

Please ask whoever you want, if my game designs are known for anything then it is that they take care of details ...

I try to think about all different side effects and I take a lot of time to create my game designs.
I do not just rush into coding without thinking first ...

So details will be important:
- if it is mostly "unlock"/ "allow": best not even start
- if there will be wide range of civeffects/ new "stuff" then: worth a test

Where did I ever say that it will only unlock existing features ???
It will also unlock new features wherever we have good ideas.

And where did I say it will only unlock game features ???
It is also supposed to unlock Units, Promotions, Buildings, ... (existing AND new)

And also it may unlock Civics and Traits.
(Thus simply giving the Player modifiers - e.g. "faster Africa Travel" or "Pioneer Worker Speed")

All I do not want to do is to stupidly and boringly copy "Founding Fathers".
I want to do something that has not been done yet.

Currently I roughly estimate:

• 50% of Social Progresses will be about existing content
  
• 50% of Social Progresses will add new content

----

See, this will get implemented - at least I will try.
Even if nobody else is interested to have it, because I want to have it for myself.

The only questions that remain for me are:
(The details of the concept might of course still change.)

• Will it become part of WTP or will it be just in my private version - thus never published.
• Will it become great quality because the complete team works on it or will it be poor quality because I work on it alone.

 

[raystuttgart]

@team and supporters

Whenever you want to come up with a new "Social Progress" it should match the scheme of the attached Excel.
Get creative if you want. In our internal workshops we will collect the ideas and come up with a merged concept.

The content of the excel is just examples - so do not get worried by my ideas.
Also do not worry for now about what is already possible and what is not.

Simply get creative and in the end we really check what we can do and want to do.
Have fun.

Here are some examples what the upcoming Progress System might do
(Not yet set in stone, we might add effects or remove effects - likely it will become a long list though.)

Spoiler :

• Buildings (e.g. unlocking higher Buildings, improving Production Bonus of Buildings, adding more Production Slots ...)

• Improvements (e.g. 2nd Level of Growing Improvements and stuff like "Forts" and "Monasteries")

• New World (e.g. unlocking the Yield Increase of Bonus Ressources that are not known in the Old World - like Tobacco)

• Land Military (e.g. unlocking stronger Land Military Professions or unlocking specific Promotions)

• Ships (e.g. unlocking more powerful Ships or adding more Storage Slots to specific Ships or giving Free Promotions)

• Expansion (e.g. making Scouts stronger, making Pioneers require less Tools, unlocking new Roads Types, unlocking Transport Units, ...)

• Politics (e.g. unlocking Civics, unlocking Dialog options, unlocking DLL-Events, ...)

• ...

• free experience for new units (or CombatTypes)

• pioneer work speed modifier (general and/or specific builds)

• pioneer can start working after spending all movement points

• improvement upgrade modifier (might take 40 turns instead of 50)

• Changes to yield production at the colony plot (like all colonies produce +1 cotton if center plot produces cotton)

• Africa Screen will get unlocked

• Modify tax / Modify Max Tax Rate

• Modify native land prices

• King's fee for transporting treasure modifier

• Gold from natives modifier

• Immigration cross requirement modifier

• Buy in Europe price modifier

• Unit heal rate modifier (settings for own team, neutral and enemy owned plots)

• Unit stats (like movement points) changes for any unit, which might not have a UnitCombat (may or may not be needed)

• Extra yield from plot if it produces more than a certain amount (like +1 fur for any plot producing at least 6 furs)

• Modifier for research point requirements (per type of research points, like cost -5%)

• FF point cost modifiers, specific type and/or all

• Missionary conversion rate modifier

• Improvement yield production change (providing we can make the code fast enough)

• learn time in native settlement modifier

• Europe travel time changes
• ...

 

[modmod]

Seriously, you heavily misunderstand my concept and my ideas.

I hope I did misunderstand the primary goal (focus?) (eg. to limit many of the existing game features/ buildings/ units, etc...).


Understand Stellaris. That tech system is one reason why did not played that game (near the UI/ maps - most paradox games have horrible ui :/).

That part was clear: you did not want pure random/ miss any existing, but put many existing as: if newly made conditions are: true.

The idea is that the Player starts with very basic and limited possibilities in his colony.
Then step by step he will become more knowledged and more accustomed to the New World and will be able to do more.

No misunderstanding there.
Even agree with the principle. -> IF it adds primary new; right now non-existent stuff.

The serious disagreement lies there:
- I consider starts/ basic about 80-100% (depends on category) which already in the game NOW.
So there are only a few which are not - mostly for historical reasons (probably not 12 overall - mostly ships? ).
- Looks like this concept considers a far less share as basic... eg. wish to put far more limitations - in some category even pointlessly.

Currently I roughly estimate:

• 50% of Social Progresses will be about existing content
  
• 50% of Social Progresses will add new content

So for new content:
Restrict existing (there are a few exceptions):

What I could fully support (up to contribute with work) is de facto progress:

50% of Social Progresses will add new content

Some example:
- Instead to restrict XY building to late game -> that can get a new (now non-existent) level, or sub-building
- Instead to limit "Unlocking Yield Bonus of ..." -> get a new for example improvement, which specialised to that yield more than the ones right now.
- Instead to put ANY limit on current diplomacy -> expand the actual up to 2-3X of the present one (old desire btw)

Even if just a few new content as flavor.
But far more than any restrictions/ limitations.
Instead of restrict -> new.

I try to think about all different side effects and I take a lot of time to create my game designs.
I do not just rush into coding without thinking first ...

Trust you that much (actually more than in some game studios) - this is not a question, nor need to assure.

Where I may not "trust" - better to say disagree with concept:
- ratio/ focus (primary goal?) between new/ existing content
- quantity: if there are much change, and dislike things (like many "unlock" if) - seems a lot of time to check/ disable/ replace for personal taste

 

[raystuttgart]

(eg. to limit many of the existing game features/ buildings/ units, etc...).

Not to "limit", just to unlock step by step.
There is a major difference between those.

But yes that is and has always been what we - the complete WTP team - wanted to do.
Just the how to "unlock step by step" was discussed, not if we generally wanted to "unlock step by step".

The goal was always clear for us.
Only the path was discussed.

What I could fully support (up to contribute with work) is de facto progress:

What do you mean with "support"?
You are not going to become a modder or supporter as far as I understood.

... seems a lot of time to check/ disable/ replace for personal taste ...

Well, but this is not a personal taste discussion of single community members.

All I really need to know:

1. Team: full consense (a single "veto" will kill it for WTP - thus big compromises possible where necessary)
2. Supporters: general consense (no "veto" right - but strong impact on concept due to also investing effort)
3. Community Majority Vote: community majority (majority by poll is important - feedback and ideas of single members considered, but that is it)

----

Summary:

So sorry, that you do not like the general idea of "unlocking".
Some of it being new stuff, some of it being existing stuff.

But that was clear from the beginning and has always been the case in all previous "Tech Discussions" as well.
Otherwise we would totally flood and unbalance the mod with new "bonusses" and "presents".

One of my 3 most important design principles is simply:
"Good and Bad need to be balanced".
(I add positive stuff, so I also need to add some negative stuff to balance.)

I accept that you may not like what I suggest, but that does not matter to be honest, as long as team, supporters and community majority like it.
Sorry to tell you that openly but I am simply being honest.

I will simply not change anything because of the personal taste of a single community member ...
If I would create my concepts like that or even work like that I would never implement anything ...

 

[Kaskarn]

I would advise caution against locking too much existing content behind research.

In particular, building costs and timings feel balanced against the benefits they provide. Additionally, prolonging certain phases of gameplay (like raw resources trading, when manufacturing is inefficient) would require more balancing changes, like slowing down market price adjustments.

 

[raystuttgart]

I would advise caution ... would require more balancing changes ...

I am fully aware that there has never ever been any concept discussed in Civ4Col modding that had anywhere close to the impact on gameplay and balance as this.

Basically this is the transformation of "Colonization 2" into "Colonization 3" for WTP and the Civ4Col community!
(The 3rd dimension "timeline with progress" - the only thing Civ4Col lacks from Civ4BTS is finally added - in a new and better fitting way.)

• This concept will also offer possibilities for really using the timeline of this game (gameplay, atmosphere, graphics, ...) that we simply do not have now.
• This concept will offer us the possibilities for really creating dynamically changing gameplay (small colony fighting for survival to gigantic empire) that we simply do not have now.
• This concept will also offer possibilities to create surpises and replayability that we never had in any Civ game (semi-random conditional Deck) and until now many players can not even imagine
  
• ...

I know what this is, because I have been dreaming about this since the first discussions 13 years ago.

It is this here and nothing less:

We are talking about turning WTP into a new but better game. This is major game design change.
I look at my game design concept and it is breathtaking to see all the possibilities it has ...

----

Ask yourself:

What would Civ4BTS be without "Techs"?
Nothing! ... Nobody would play it.

Now ask yourself:

What could WTP become with "Social Progress"?
A completely new but better game with endless possibilities!

----

The question is simply:

Are we modders cowards that stay where we are because we are afraid of the unknown - a New World full of new Modding Possibilities?
I refuse to be that coward and I want to set sails into the unknow because I dream about the new adventures and riches of this New World.

Should we modders always give up when there are challenges and risks because that is what lazy people and cowards would do?
Is there nobody else out there, that still has dreams and is brave enough to take the challenge and conquer the unknown?

Do we modders not trust anymore in our own experience, skills, endurance and team spirit after all that we have already achieved ...
Have we now also started to doubt and question everything without even knowing what we talk about.

I can not believe that, because otherwise all the great features of the past would not have been created and TAC, RaR and WTP would never have existed ...
But maybe the great times of adventures and discoveries are over because we modders have now all become lazy cowards ...

----

Every modder shall answer this for himself ...
Any maybe there are also still a few people from community brave enough to set sails with us ...

 

[nci]

I personally strongly dislike the idea of locking units behind some linear continuity. Lack of necessity to research the same techs to get desired units every damn game is what makes Colonization less tedious than Civilization. Particularly, if changes result in smaller unit pool for each era, I believe it is terrible.

As player, I would love to see more content - more different combat and especially naval units with subtle differences, more quests and events, RAR Americas Gigantic reworked to prevent traveling from any colony to Europe/Africa/PortRoyal in a single turn. Fixed multiplayer would be great too - even if hotseat. Not that my opinion counts.

 

[raystuttgart]

I personally strongly dislike the idea of locking units ...

We will not lock anything you need, I promise.
If you play in any reasonable way you should get everything you need in time.

... behind some linear continuity.

What makes you believe that this is linear ?

• This is not just a stupid "turn x now unlock" logic - your gameply actions will determine the outcome.
• Also there is conditional semi-randomness in 12 parallel Tech Trees - how can something like that even be linear?

Lack of necessity to research ...

You do not really "research" as you know it from Civ4BTS. You play and your game actions will determine what is unlocked at what point of time for you ...
Do you feel you research Founding Fathers right now ? Because it will use a similar system for "unlocking" and "giving". (Just even more complex, a bit less predictable and much more powerful.)

Particularly, if changes result in smaller unit pool for each era, I believe it is terrible.

Just in the beginning, maybe the first 50 to 100 turns. But in the end it will be even bigger than what you know right now.
Do you really need all Ship Types in the first 50 turns right now? That is just the "illusion of choice" players often falsely have.

As player, I would love to see more content ...

And "more content" is what you will get with this concept as well ...
Because it offers us massive possibilities to also create further new content ...

Not that my opinion counts.

I listen to it and I answer ...
But my decision - for myself - has already been made.

I have dreamed to let something like this become reality for 13 years. ...
And a few doubts and challenges here and there will not scare me.

Summary:

I can not force anybody else to believe and dream ...
But I am still a free modder and I still believe and I still dream ...

I can not force and do not want to force this to become part of WTP ...
But I can try to make it become reality for myself ...

----

As comparison:

Spoiler :

Some people also doubted that we could make "Large Rivers" become true ...
But we simply did not listen to these doubters and made it become reality anyways.

And I am absolutely convinced that community will love "Large Rivers", once it gets released this weekend.
There were always doubters for every of our concepts but in the end the team still always succeeded ...