The Machine
Chieftain
are the techs u get when starting the game completely random, or is there some sort of pattern? and if so what is it?
starting techs
- Thread starter The Machine
- Start date
TimTheEnchanter
I...am...an Enchanter!
There was a study done a while ago (don't remember if it was here or Apolyton) that showed they are not entirely random. The later civs (down towards purple, orange) tend to get more, which is beleived to be compensation for relatively poor starting terrain since they are placed last on the map. Also, I think Militaristic civs tended to get more more of the military techs (warrior code, etc), while "civilized" civs tended to get the social techs. I also recall that there was some favoring of techs leading toward "natural" wonders like Egypt/pyramids, or something like that. Sorry I can't be of more help than that. Search around, and you might find the thread with all the details...it was pretty thorough.
Proximity to another civ seemed to be another "negative" that caused the gift of more starting techs as well as poor starting location (terrain, size of island, whatever). The good news is that for any game calculations that involve number of techs discovered or gained the starting techs do not count. Several Early Landing records have been based on starting with 6-8 freebie techs, including Monarchy and Trade...
Andu Indorin
Retired Druid
Having done some experiments with starting techs, I can say that starting terrain does effect the number of starting techs; and the "civilized modifier" (civilized versus militaristic) from the Rules.txt does effect the 'type" of starting techs awarded. And while my experiments have not been entirely systematic, I remain suspicious of the starting techs in a couple of those Early Landing games; for example, the chances of starting with Alp, CoL, Wri, and Lit from an unmodified Rules.txt file are of an astronomical maginitude ...
Ace
Emperor
I have been playing civ2 since it came out, and have NEVER seen literacy show up as a "free" tech to start a game. I have gotten monarchy a couple of times 
>), and, IIRC, once got eight or ten additional techs to start ( and got creamed by the AI on the third turn)!
>), and, IIRC, once got eight or ten additional techs to start ( and got creamed by the AI on the third turn)!la fayette
King
AFAIK the most comprehensive study of starting techs has been made by Scouse Gits at Apolyton (more than 5000 starts 
)
http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum3/HTML/001522.html?43
)http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum3/HTML/001522.html?43
Andu Indorin
Retired Druid
Originally posted by la fayette
AFAIK the most comprehensive study of starting techs has been made by Scouse Gits at Apolyton (more than 5000 starts
An interesting study that. Using their data set, I think I might be able to provide some clarification on the issue. Will get back to you with some results.
By the way, Apolyton's site appears to be case sensitive; I was unable to follow the above link and had to go through the front door. This link should do the trick:
Starting Techs by Gits
Originally posted by Ace
I have been playing civ2 since it came out, and have NEVER seen literacy show up as a "free" tech to start a game. I have gotten monarchy a couple of times
You were probably being "compensated" for being close to another Militaristic civ on the same continent. If it happens again, build Phalanx and City Walls fast!
Or build Horsemen/Chariots and go looking for em...
la fayette
King
indeed
...sorry I didn't check. I have just corrected the link I gave.
Andu Indorin
Retired Druid
I thought it might be helpful to compare the Gits results with data from the Rule.txt file. Their data, drawn from 1764 game starts, or 84 starts per civ, and 588 starts per civ type, is in the left hand column. The data, however, are sorted by required prerequisites, given that no "advanced" techs can be awarded unless the prerequisites are also awarded; only then is data sorted by frequency of occurence. For purposes of comparing frequency with the assigned value of each tech, I've added Writing, Mathematics, Polytheism, and Seafaring, none of which were awarded in the games from which this data set is drawn. The tech information is as per Rules.txt: AI Value (which Ive already adjusted as per civ type); prerequisites; period (all = 0 for ancient); and knowledge category (0=Military, 1=Economic, 2=Social, 3=Academic, 4=Applied).
Perhaps not surprisingly, the chances of receiving each of the first level techs correlates to the value assigned to that tech in the Rules.txt file. Yet, between techs of equal value, considerable variation can occur. For example, why is a Neutral civ awarded Horseback Riding twice as often as Pottery, Warrior Code, and Masonry combined?
After that, the awarding of starting techs is even more problematic. For example, a Neutral civ with the alphabet should then get Map Making as the first second level tech; but instead Code of Laws with an identical prerequisite -- appears much more often, despite the comparatively high value assigned to both Writing and Map Making. The same is true of a Civilized civ; Writing should be the first second level tech, but again Code of Laws is awarded more often.
Clearly, I think, there is at least one more variable at work in determining the type of tech received. Is it possible that one of the other civ characteristics (aggressive/rational or expansionist/perfectionist) come into play as a secondary variable in determining the AIs preference for a given tech? For example, might not a perfectionist civilization give added value to a academic tech over a military tech? After all, the type of knowledge is an active code in the Rules.txt, and therefore might be more than just a call for an icon.
Code:
TABLE 2 - CIVILISED type (n=588)
Alphabet (393; 66.8%) 6, nil, nil, 0, 3 ; Alp
Bronze Working (223; 37.9%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 4 ; Bro
Ceremonial Burial (171; 29.1%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 2 ; Cer
Masonry (171; 29.1%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 4 ; Mas
Pottery (135; 23.0%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 1 ; Pot
Warrior Code (4; 0.7%) 3, nil, nil, 0, 0 ; War
Horseback Riding (2; 0.3%) 3, nil, nil, 0, 0 ; Hor
Code of Laws (185; 31.5%) 5, Alp, nil, 0, 2 ; CoL
Currency (67; 11.4%) 5, Bro, nil, 0, 1 ; Cur
Mysticism (16; 2.7%) 4, Cer, nil, 0, 2 ; Mys
Writing (0; <0.2%) 6, Alp, nil, 0, 3 ; Wri
Map Making (0; <0.2%) 5, Alp, nil, 0, 1 ; Map
Wheel (0; <0.2%) 3, Hor, nil, 0, 4 ; Whe
Monarchy (16; 2.7%) 6, Cer, CoL, 0, 2 ; Mon
Trade (12; 2.0%) 6, Cur, CoL, 0, 1 ; Tra
Construction (7; 1.2%) 4, Mas, Cur, 0, 4 ; Cst
Iron Working (0; <0.2%) 4, Bro, War, 0, 4 ; Iro
Mathematics (0; <0.2%) 4, Alp, Mas, 0, 3 ; Mat
Polytheism (0; <0.2%) 4, Cer, Hor, 0, 2 ; PT
Seafaring (0; <0.2%) 4, Map, Pot, 0, 1 ; Sea
[average of 2.38 starting techs]
TABLE 3 - NEUTRAL type (n=588)
Bronze Working (331; 56.3%) 6, nil, nil, 0, 4 ; Bro
Ceremonial Burial (244; 41.5%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 2 ; Cer
Alphabet (237; 40.3%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 3 ; Alp
Horseback Riding (132; 22.4%) 4, nil, nil, 0, 0 ; Hor
Pottery (27; 4.6%) 4, nil, nil, 0, 1 ; Pot
Warrior Code (23; 3.9%) 4, nil, nil, 0, 0 ; War
Masonry (21; 3.8%) 4, nil, nil, 0, 4 ; Mas
Currency (65; 10.1%) 4, Bro, nil, 0, 1 ; Cur
Mysticism (57; 9.7%) 4, Cer, nil, 0, 2 ; Mys
Code of Laws (53; 9.0%) 4, Alp, nil, 0, 2 ; CoL
Wheel (5; 0.8%) 4, Hor, nil, 0, 4 ; Whe
Map Making (2; 0.3%) 6, Alp, nil, 0, 1 ; Map
Writing (0; <0.2%) 4, Alp, nil, 0, 3 ; Wri
Iron Working (6; 1.0%) 5, Bro, War, 0, 4 ; Iro
Monarchy (5; 0.8%) 5, Cer, CoL, 0, 2 ; Mon
Construction (3; 0.5%) 4, Mas, Cur, 0, 4 ; Cst
Trade (2; 0.3%) 4, Cur, CoL, 0, 1 ; Tra
Seafaring (0; <0.2%) 5, Map, Pot, 0, 1 ; Sea
Polytheism (0; <0.2%) 4, Cer, Hor, 0, 2 ; PT
Mathematics (0; <0.2%) 3, Alp, Mas, 0, 3 ; Mat
[average of 2.06 starting techs]
TABLE 4 - MILITARISTIC type (n=588)
Bronze Working (342; 58.2%) 7, nil, nil, 0, 4 ; Bro
Horseback Riding (169; 28.7%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 0 ; Hor
Ceremonial Burial (160; 27.2%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 2 ; Cer
Warrior Code (120; 20.4%) 5, nil, nil, 0, 0 ; War
Alphabet (76; 12.9%) 4, nil, nil, 0, 3 ; Alp
Masonry (3; 0.5%) 3, nil, nil, 0, 4 ; Mas
Pottery (0; <0.2%) 3, nil, nil, 0, 1 ; Pot
Wheel (48; 8.2%) 5, Hor, nil, 0, 4 ; Whe
Mysticism (23; 3.9%) 4, Cer, nil, 0, 2 ; Mys
Code of Laws (6; 1.0%) 3, Alp, nil, 0, 2 ; CoL
Currency (5; 0.8%) 3, Bro, nil, 0, 1 ; Cur
Map Making (0 <0.2%) 7, Alp, nil, 0, 1 ; Map
Writing (0 <0.2%) 2, Alp, nil, 0, 3 ; Wri
Iron Working (66; 11.2%) 6, Bro, War, 0, 4 ; Iro
Mathematics (0 <0.2%) 5 Alp, Mas, 0, 3 ; Mat
Construction (0 <0.2%) 4, Mas, Cur, 0, 4 ; Cst
Monarchy (0 <0.2%) 4, Cer, CoL, 0, 2 ; Mon
Polytheism (0 <0.2%) 4, Cer, Hor, 0, 2 ; PT
Seafaring (0 <0.2%) 3 Map, Pot, 0, 1 ; Sea
Trade (0 <0.2%) 2, Cur, CoL, 0, 1 ; Tra
n=1018
[average of 1.73 starting techs]Perhaps not surprisingly, the chances of receiving each of the first level techs correlates to the value assigned to that tech in the Rules.txt file. Yet, between techs of equal value, considerable variation can occur. For example, why is a Neutral civ awarded Horseback Riding twice as often as Pottery, Warrior Code, and Masonry combined?
After that, the awarding of starting techs is even more problematic. For example, a Neutral civ with the alphabet should then get Map Making as the first second level tech; but instead Code of Laws with an identical prerequisite -- appears much more often, despite the comparatively high value assigned to both Writing and Map Making. The same is true of a Civilized civ; Writing should be the first second level tech, but again Code of Laws is awarded more often.
Clearly, I think, there is at least one more variable at work in determining the type of tech received. Is it possible that one of the other civ characteristics (aggressive/rational or expansionist/perfectionist) come into play as a secondary variable in determining the AIs preference for a given tech? For example, might not a perfectionist civilization give added value to a academic tech over a military tech? After all, the type of knowledge is an active code in the Rules.txt, and therefore might be more than just a call for an icon.
Samson posted a study on Hut Outcomes over on Apolyton.Net which had an interesting formula for calculating chance of a particular tech being awarded based on its place in the full list of techs relative to others discovered:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69873
Could this be what is making those second-level techs appear with unexpected frequency?
Thanks for doing all that collation of data, by the way. The way you arranged it made much more sense to me.
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69873
Could this be what is making those second-level techs appear with unexpected frequency?
Thanks for doing all that collation of data, by the way. The way you arranged it made much more sense to me.
TimTheEnchanter
I...am...an Enchanter!
This is really an interesting topic. I hope we come to some understanding of it. I also thought about Samson's hut study, however, I dont think the hut algorithm is being used here, at least not without some significant modification that we don't understand. One of the things that came from Samson is that Ceremonial burial is almost impossible to get from a hut (with no starting techs) because of the existence of Bronze Working right before it in the list. Look at Militaristic in Andu's list where Ceremonial Burial, War Code and HBR all have a 5 value - it is fair to note that Bronze is the number one choice in all these cases, so it's selection increases the likelihood of Ceremonial Burial to be selected, but even with this consideration, the nubmers don't match what Samson came up with. In his study, and Solo's similar numbers, HBR and War code were given about 26% and 22% of the time, respectively. Even if you assume Bronze has been given out first (thus passing it's chances to the next in line tech...Cer.Bur.) the combined likelihood of Bronze and Cer.Bur. is still only 8% due to the existence of Alphabet just a few lines above them. Therefore you would expect HBR and Warcode to still be given out at a much higher rate. But in this study, Ceremonial Burial was given out nearly as much as HBR and more often than War Code. There are other examples where the numbers don't match, so I don't think this is using the same mechanism as the huts. However, it's probably something equally obscure.
