1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Tech Preference and Research Cost differences for each Civ

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by daft, Apr 2, 2015.

  1. daft

    daft The fargone

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New World
    If the designers choose to take the more Historical path, each tech research could take(cost) each civ more or less time to complete, depending on each civ's preferences.
    Accordingly(somewhat) to history, Mayas could take much less time studying Agriculture and Masonry than Huns.
    On the other hand it could take Huns a lot less time to develop Archery and Animal Domestication(Husbandry) than it would take the Mayans.
    What I mean is a pre-set amount of (science) points needed for different civs to discover a particular advancement.
    Any thoughts?
     
  2. SupremacyKing2

    SupremacyKing2 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,219
    Location:
    Indiana
    I would be ok with that.
     
  3. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,944
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    The ease or lack of it to research something should be relative to the Civ's position in the game, on the map, not to something 'built in' regardless of the situation.

    For instance, if my first two cities are both on the coast, researching Seafaring or its like should be much easier than if all my initial cities are in the middle of the desert.

    If I have stone, marble, or timber resources (or, say, two out of three) in my first city or three, then Architecture or Construction should be easier. If my first two Social Policies are both from the Honor Tree, researching anything Military should get easier. On the other hand, if I don't fight a war for the first 3000 years, I should lose the benefits of a purely-military Social Policy - it just isn't applicable to my population any more.

    There should be a LOT more interaction between In Game situations and actions and the ability to research Technologies, or get and keep Social Policies. How your civilization turns out should be much, much more dependent on the In Game situation, available resources and Starting Position than a Pre-Game programmed 'historical' prediliction (UA, UB, UU) that may be completely inappropriate.
     
  4. UWHabs

    UWHabs Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,963
    Location:
    Toronto
    I've always thought a cool mode would be one where all the uniques would not belong to a specific civ, but would only get given to a civ in a special circumstance. Not sure the mechanism, but it could be something like, "Your warrior has spent a long time learning the forests in your lands, and has now grown into a Mohawk Warrior". Whether it's random, or based on science (so if you are first to research iron working, you could go research another technology to give you a unique related to that tech), or how, I think it would open up new strategies. No longer would you say, "Damn, next to the English. I either need to attack them early, or wait for their longbows to be obsolete".

    But otherwise, the original point could work well with that. In many ways, techs should be reactionary. I mean, how can you learn "iron working" if you have no iron? Maybe some techs would be exploratory (your scientists have discovered that digging into rocks can produce things that are usable. We will call it "Mining"), and then from there, you can research into it further (your scientists have analyzed the rocks dug up by this mining, and when mixed together, have produced a strong substance called "Bronze"). But if you have no mines, you really shouldn't be able to go research into more advanced mining techniques, right?
     
  5. daft

    daft The fargone

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New World


    That makes very good sense indeed!
     
  6. daft

    daft The fargone

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New World

    I agree with your post to a point, it's very intelligently written may I add.
    However, the uniqueness of each nation in the game is now an essential part of the CIV, and the UU's, UB's and especially UA's of each are what differentiates nations from one another.
    However, I'd like to try and play a version of Civ with the rules you have mentioned, sounds very intriguing.
    On the other hand, would a game like that still be called Civilization?
    Perhaps, but the historical element of the game, with historically accurate leaders, units, buildings and other elements would end up being meshed into a game no longer based on history as much as the previous iterations, a different genre, I guess.
     
  7. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,944
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Right now, the 'uniqueness' of each civilization in the game is artificial, and therefore not Historical at all. 'History' comes from a Greek word meaning 'to learn by study'. but the UUs, UAs, UBs etc are not Learned at all, they are given and based on the given Game situation, may be utterly useless.
    As a single (Worst Case) example, I once restarted a game 15 times as Morocco without getting a start position that was both in a desert and with a Trade partner within trading distance. In other words, the UA, UB and UU for Morocco were of minor or no use to the player. What then, is the point of such Attributes?
    Instead, make the Attributes applicable to the In-Game Situation, either At Start or as the game develops. This also means the Attributes of a civilization will not be based on a single aspect of a civilization. For example, England now is represented by a Medieval UU (longbowman), a Renaissance UU (Ship of the Line) and a Starting Naval UA (more speed for naval units). Which means, the English Rule of Law that came out of the Enlightenment, the massive English/British trading networks of the Renaissance and later, the ability to rule administratively a huge Empire in the Industrial era, and their spawning of numerous Explorer-types in that same period, all are missing. This also shortchanges every other civilization, in that the Ship of the Line was built by every European power that had a navy between 1690 and 1820, but is now artificially Forbidden to them.
    Similar examples could be given for any civilization that has existed for any length of time - which is why almost every iteration of the Civilization games has had different Attributes, and frequently differing Leaders for them.

    If you really want to play a straight (and strait-jacketed) civilization, then the Starting Position has to represent the actual historical situation: A Starting Option for Historical Start, in which England will always start on a heavily-timbered island just off the coast of a continent, Sweden will start on a mountainous semi-arctic peninsula of a continent, and Morocco will always start in a desert. Otherwise, you wind up, as I have all too frequently, with a Starting Position that makes no sense at all in relation to the 'Attributes' of that civilization: an Inland Byzantium, an Arctic Venice with no City States within 20 tiles, a Montezuma starting in the desert - these are all actual examples from my games, and they make a mockery of the current system of Attributes.

    This does NOT mean that every civilization would start the game with a 'clean slate'. Civ has always, to my knowledge, used 4000 BCE as the 'Start Time', but a lot of things happened before that point in time. People living on the coast had learned how to make boats and exploit off-shore islands and resources. People with the right raw materials and requirements had learned to fire pottery, domesticate large and small animals, make religious monuments of very permanent aspect - lots of the current in-game 'Techs' in fact, could be available to a civilization from the Start - based on that civilization's starting position. This also extends to Social Policies and Religious Beliefs.

    I would change the starting sequence of the game. First, select a civilization or possibly just a civilization-type, such as Desert, Nomadic, Forest, Island. Then, you go to the map. Based on your starting surroundings, you then get a Starting Tech, or Starting Tech Choice - which, for an Island civ, might be between Boating and Pottery rather than Agriculture, for a Nomadic civ might be Animal Domestication. There are mountains nearby - they will likely give you a different Starting Religious Belief than if you started in the jungle, or in a desert, or (extreme case) next to a Volcano.
    In other words, even if you call yourselves 'Egyptians' in 4000 BCE, if you start on a well-timbered island it might be you who first develops the Ship of the Line in 1675 AD instead of those English fellows who started in the middle of the continent with horses nearby...
    And yes, I want to be able to rename my civilization at any time in the game: why shouldn't I start as the Celts in 4000 BCE and become the Gauls in 500 BCE, the Merovingians in 800 AD and the French in 1200 AD? The game could even offer hints as you go:
    "You have now built the Parthenon and developed Philosophy on your arid and hilly land: why not change your name from Faroffistan to Greeks?"

    And, finally, your first city would give you a set of First City Names, ranging from the appropriate (London on an island coast, Thebes on a desert river, Baghdad between two desert rivers, etc) to Random to Your Choice. And, contrary to the current, limited model in Civ V, I want to be able to move my Capital as required (with appropriate penalties) and rename it as my civilization's Attributes become more specific to a single historical model (or not!) throughout the game.

    I LIKE having civilizations that are different, that don't play the same way, that from the start are a unique - but I want the unique parts to make sense within the Game, and to have some relationship to the 'history' that I am 'writing' with my play of the game. :king:
     
  8. lefuet

    lefuet Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2014
    Messages:
    97
    I agree wholeheartedly.
    No prechosen uniques that might proof useless or absurd. Germans could develop like the Germans in Civ5 if they have a start (central, temperate, barbs, ..) that favours this development - but if they start in extensive jungles or on small archipelagos they would develop similar to Brazilan or Samoan.
     
  9. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,944
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    OR Germans in the Jungle could develop as Germans in the Jungle: a Hansa-like trade network among far-flung islands, an army that is very dangerous on the attack with extra flanking bonuses and faster movement in their favored terrain, or a Great General Staff that makes their Great Generals more dangerous. "Rommel the Jungle Fox", anyone?

    On the other hand, they are most unlikely to develop 'panzers' which are less than optimal military units for jungle terrain or amphibious invasions.

    The key to this, I think, would be a much more 'interactive' Civilopedia, which gives you 'hints' as you make decisions that will influence how your civilization develops. For instance, at the start: "You are Germans surrounded by the sea and jungle. You should develop Seafaring and Trade so you can found the Hansa at a later date and rake in money from trade routes." Or, later: "You are Germans who have to fight a war in the jungle. Concentrate on highly-promoted infantry units and develop the 'Auftragstaktik' Promotion to make your troops faster in any terrain and increase their flanking bonuses." Or, later: "Well, you could start building Factories and tell your Great General Staff to develop and build Panzers, but we are fighting in lousy tank terrain and don't have access to a lot of oil: do you really want to do this?"
    There are plenty of "Germanic" traits that you could develop based on the Game Situation, instead of being Locked In to Uniques that are only marginally useful.

    It would take a lot of research, but sets of Multiple Situation-based Uniques could be done for almost any civilization in the game, although some (Assyria, Babylon, Carthage, etc) would have to be 'extrapolated' as to what traits they might develop centuries after they disappeared.
     
  10. daft

    daft The fargone

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New World
    So the compromise could be to keep the current unique system when playing realistic Earth maps, when not playing on a Earth map however, the system you wrote about above would be used.
     
  11. jlim201

    jlim201 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2013
    Messages:
    825
    Location:
    Somewhere North of the South Pole
    Just general ideas:

    More than 3 cities on seperate islands: Faster research on naval techs, and Exploration is auto unlocked

    2 cities with at least 3 adjacent forest/jungle- Chopping forests/jungle= 50% faster, forest provide extra yield?

    Taken at least 2 capitals- Resistance is halved, Military Techs faster
     
  12. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,944
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Just the opposite: In order to have a Civilization that develops the Historical Uniques of any kind, you would have to have a Historical Starting Location and surrounding terrain.

    So, if you want to play as closely as possible to a historical Civ, your starting choice: "Historical Development" will Mandate a historical start:

    Playing England, you will start on a wooded island near a continent full of trading partners, with a portion of that continent visible from your island.

    Playing Morocco, you will start on the coast in desert terrain, with some City State/Civ locations along the same coast.

    Using combinations of
    Starting Terrain (desert, forest, plains, hills, jungle, grassland)
    basic Food resource (fish, grains, herd animals, wild animals)
    basic Building Resource (timber, stone, clay)
    basic Water Source (river, oasis, lake, coast)
    plus a possible differentiation of starting Tech, Social Policy or Religious Belief, and you've got over 600 distinct combinations. That should be enough for any conceivable commercial game, even for the Civ community...
     
  13. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,944
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    It works both as positiver and negative modifiers, because some Technologies simply won't be researched without a Reason. So, first city by an Oasis in the middle of the desert, with no river or coast nearby, and Boating/Seafaring/Sailing type techs will be Harder to research, but depending on the resources nearby, Agriculture, Irrigation, Animal Domestication may be faster.

    If your first city is on the coast, Boating (NOT sailing) will probably be your Starting Tech: allowing you to exploit fish and other resources off the coast and use the coastal waters to move units - heck, Crete (an island) was settled by people over 30,000 years ago - well before the Civ 'Start Date'. Sailing, and the ability to move faster and carry Trade Goods in quantity, comes later. - But faster, the more cities you have on coastal waters.

    Military Technology will come faster if you have Social Policies in Honor (your people are Interested in shiny swords and stuff) AND you are in conflict - either fighting lots of Barbarians or in Declared War much of the time. What effect your warring has on your (potential) Opponents depends more on their Social Policies, culture and government: they may be terrorized into submission/surrender, or they may redouble their efforts. Hint: If they have a Spartan-style set of Social Policies, you are Opening a Big Can of Trouble...
     

Share This Page