Tech Tree Discussion

[raxo2222]

Sounds like a to-die-for must-have for every modern stone-age family!

That wasn't intentional

The problem with setting specific dates to the tech tree is the tech tree is not a historic timeline. Its a guide to HOW (not when) different techs were invented. A player can beeline to different techs and get some earlier than others. Thus slowing and neglecting when other techs are invented.

Likewise in real life some techs are discovered at different rates depending upon the civ. For instance in the East was much more advanced than the West during the European Dark Ages. Likewise the Americas were very far behind on the tech tree compared to the Europeans that came.

In short setting X to mean a specific date is impossible to do. The best we can do is say these groups of techs are invented during this era and even then we fudge things if a tech straddles 2 different eras.

Okay.

 

[UncivilizedGuy]

Hello Development Team. I absolutely love this mod! I have been following its development pretty much since the beginning.

I am fascinated with the tech tree. I saw little things that bugged me and thought about creating a modmod of yours. So about a year ago I sat down and began creating my own tech tree just to see if my research was different than yours. I have been working on it off and on and learned a lot in the process. Didn't realize how much time it would take. When I got into the ancient era I stopped because I found mine wasn't much different than yours.

So here is my version of the prehistoric era. I wanted to share what I came up with in case you wanted to borrow some of my ideas. So here you go

 

[Hydromancerx]

@UncivilizedGuy

We appreciate your enthusiasm and input. However the Prehistoric era has been redone and redone, and redone again. Personally I am kind of stick of redoing it any time some questions it. At the moment the C2C is a good balance of realism vs game function. On the one hand one wants to use realism but that typically end s up with empty techs that do nothing. On the other hand game function leads to stuff that doesn't always fit, such as we have a limited number of unit graphics and say clubman are the not the most historically accurate type of unit to have.

Looking at your tech tree it looks mostly historical but not very game functional. If we were to rework the tree we would probably need more room and if that were done then ALL techs to the right would need to be moved too. We only have 18 columns to work with and yours is like 25+.

 

[UncivilizedGuy]

No worries Hydromancerx. Seems that no two tech trees are alike. I enjoyed putting it together and may continue working on it.

 

[Azurian]

No worries Hydromancerx. Seems that no two tech trees are alike. I enjoyed putting it together and may continue working on it.

I wasn't going to make it public for a while, but good news, I have some of your ideas in my personal modmod in development already, like Behavior Modernity (11 buildings by the way for that TECH), and others. Very early development, a side project, wont be public for a while. I haven't posted much the last few days.

Some pics

Spoiler :

 

[UncivilizedGuy]

MrAzure, when I began creating the tech tree I ran into the obstacle of humans discovering technologies before we became homo sapiens. It bugged me so much that I decided to insert the earlier homo genus into the tech tree. Even adding gathering and scavenging was a tough decision when earlier primates already practiced these "techs". When I arrived at Behavioral Modernity, it just felt necessary to add it.

 

[Thunderbrd]

@Uncivilized Guy: I'd suggest to make a modmod of the early tech tree redone and that gives us a chance to play it. The one we have is really cool imo but you do look to have some really good ideas. So I'd like to see how it plays without re-arranging the core to do it. Perhaps if it comes across as obviously superior or there emerge some beloved concepts then we could consider what I would also be reluctant as Hydro is to consider, AGAIN reworking (well... improving) the early tech tree.

 

[UncivilizedGuy]

@Thunderbrd, Sounds like a dare! I will never see the light of day again

 

[Azurian]

Deleted

 

[Hydromancerx]

@MrAzure

What are those buildings?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

MrAzure, when I began creating the tech tree I ran into the obstacle of humans discovering technologies before we became homo sapiens. It bugged me so much that I decided to insert the earlier homo genus into the tech tree. Even adding gathering and scavenging was a tough decision when earlier primates already practiced these "techs". When I arrived at Behavioral Modernity, it just felt necessary to add it.

I made the same arguments against gathering and scavenging but Hydro had all these buildings which he wanted to place on them. Aparently fake tech with buildings is OK where as real techs with out aren't.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I made the same arguments against gathering and scavenging but Hydro had all these buildings which he wanted to place on them. Aparently fake tech with buildings is OK where as real techs with out aren't.

Hey I added a bunch of new techs from you and Johny Smith when you wanted to redo stuff like having Hard Hammer Percussion, Soft Hammer Percussion and stuff. Scavenging and Gathering was a great way to have resources revealed after the beginning of the game. As I have explained before they are like you are learning what the local flora and fauna are. Which things you should eat and which things you should not.

Of course the ancestors could scavenge and gather before then, but this is an in game way to unlock different features without jut giving the player everything at the start.

As for "real techs" we have many "real techs" which "real techs" would you add that are absent? And what buildings/units/promotions would they give?

 

[n47]

@Dancing Hoskuld, actually it can be somehow defended as more organized ways of gathering and scavenging. Like gathering more and transporting it to a settlement. Or more advanced ways of searching. But in that case, maybe the cooperation should go before?

 

[UncivilizedGuy]

@n47: even cooperation exists amongst primates. I would just put scavenging and gathering at the very beginning. You could even have cooperative scavenging and cooperative gathering. That would solve the chicken and the egg dilemma. Now I'm second guessing about even having cooperation at all! Why not have a single tech called basic survival? I've discovered that I can do this sort of thing all day. At some point you just need to settle on something and go with it.

The tech tree is fine the way it is. Many of these techs are based on educative guesses and are debated by the experts. There is a lot of contradictory information out there. For example basket weaving is under a lot of debate. I personally feel its a tad too early in the C2C tree. In the creation of my own tech tree I discovered that you kind of have to go with your own instincts.

 

[Azurian]

The rule of thumb for Techs is that they should have at least 3 buildings.

My only complaints:
Gathering came before Nomadic Lifestyle.


Clothing; it was Leaf/Twigs , Then Bark, then Animal Skins, then Furs/Pelts combo, then Feather/Leather combo .

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Dancing Hoskuld, actually it can be somehow defended as more organized ways of gathering and scavenging. Like gathering more and transporting it to a settlement. Or more advanced ways of searching. But in that case, maybe the cooperation should go before?

The reason why cooperation is not before since the individual can identity the flora and fauna on their own. Basically when making tree I asked myself questions like, "could this be made without the knowledge of tech X?" Thus the tree has become more of a practical application of what game feature have you unlocked and which you have not.

For instance in a very old tech tree I had you could not get wood without Wood Working. And then people said well then how can you get fire? It must predate it. So I developed the stick gatherer so you have wood before you can chop trees. And even a driftwood gatherer between that. Likewise I split up Fire Making into Captured Fire and Fire Making. To where Captured Fire is the most primitive use of fire and Fire Making is like being able to make fire from advanced techniques like bow drills and stuff.

 

[n47]

The reason why cooperation is not before since the individual can identity the flora and fauna on their own. Basically when making tree I asked myself questions like, "could this be made without the knowledge of tech X?" Thus the tree has become more of a practical application of what game feature have you unlocked and which you have not.

For instance in a very old tech tree I had you could not get wood without Wood Working. And then people said well then how can you get fire? It must predate it. So I developed the stick gatherer so you have wood before you can chop trees. And even a driftwood gatherer between that. Likewise I split up Fire Making into Captured Fire and Fire Making. To where Captured Fire is the most primitive use of fire and Fire Making is like being able to make fire from advanced techniques like bow drills and stuff.

I know. But I pointed, that gathering and scavenging can have some reason in the tree tech, if we interpret them as advanced forms those. As Dancing Hoskuld and UncivilizedGuy pointed, they are hard to defend as the most primitive forms, because the most primitive forms were known even to apes or actually even insects.

Moreover, the advanced forms, like accumulation over take-and-eat, allowed development, as older individuals could stay in camps and thus had time for thinking. So IMO they indeed can deserve a place in tree tech.

However, inspired by the discussion, I actually check some materials about human evolution and it appears, the prehistoric tech tree firmly miss the history. - Not only about those above. - Actually stone tools making goes far before Homo Sapience. It seems, it can even go before Home species. As well as tracking, hunting, sinning, early fire control, cave dwelling. Moreover, cave dwelling was pretty rare and insignificant as a way of living. Caves, if they were used, were rather considered "specially" places. So generally, they were not connected to the shelters building. Everything of this went greatly before the language. Sinning went greatly before weaving. Herbalism was much younger, and went after this everything. ... and probably more, but I don't have time to read this everything.

Oh my, what a mess.

 

[raxo2222]

I know. But I pointed, that gathering and scavenging can have some reason in the tree tech, if we interpret them as advanced forms those. As Dancing Hoskuld and UncivilizedGuy pointed, they are hard to defend as the most primitive forms, because the most primitive forms were known even to apes or actually even insects.

Moreover, the advanced forms, like accumulation over take-and-eat, allowed development, as older individuals could stay in camps and thus had time for thinking. So IMO they indeed can deserve a place in tree tech.

However, inspired by the discussion, I actually check some materials about human evolution and it appears, the prehistoric tech tree firmly miss the history. - Not only about those above. - Actually stone tools making goes far before Homo Sapience. It seems, it can even go before Home species. As well as tracking, hunting, sinning, early fire control, cave dwelling. Moreover, cave dwelling was pretty rare and insignificant as a way of living. Caves, if they were used, were rather considered "specially" places. So generally, they were not connected to the shelters building. Everything of this went greatly before the language. Sinning went greatly before weaving. Herbalism was much younger, and went after this everything. ... and probably more, but I don't have time to read this everything.

Oh my, what a mess.

They might be more organized forms.

 

[Koshling]

I take the view hat:

1) It's a game
2) They are in a somewhat reasonable order, and the necessity of picking a start date is bound to make the earliest ones skewed/compressed
3) They work in relation to one another in gameplay terms

For me gameplay trumps realism, BUT realism is a worthwhile bonus if it doesn't cause gameplay problems. I just need enough realism for the same 'willing suspension of disbelief' that is necessary when watching movies to operate.

 

[n47]

They might be more organized forms.

Yup, you are right, why haven't I thought about that earlier? Stone tools making not-hit-my-finger technique, 5-stars-hotel cave dwelling, not-smash-my-nose-with-a-tree persistent hunting.

1) It's a game

Actually form Civilization 2 I learned quite a lot, when I was a child. So from my point of view it is also an educational material. -- The other thing is, it's only a mod to a game, played maybe by a hundred of people, so it's probably not a big deal in this case.

2) They are in a somewhat reasonable order, and the necessity of picking a start date is bound to make the earliest ones skewed/compressed

Untrue! I was annoyed from the beginning as some were strictly unreasonable. For example, caves are rare, especially on savannas which were our primary home, but somehow people there also built shelters. Don't know, from where it came from, but that the first people were cavemen is just some pop culture bullsh*t.

3) They work in relation to one another in gameplay terms

Maybe. But always some relations appear. And they playability probably depends more on what bonuses we assign to the tech, then on their order.

For me gameplay trumps realism

Then I demand magical unicorns.

But seriously, do you see anything reasonable, which stands against redoing tech tree to a more correct form? Except time of course.