Tech Tree Discussion

UncivilizedGuy said:
There is room to make the adjustment. I don’t have the tree in front of me at the moment but Naval Warfare can be moved over a column. Naval Warfare is a bit too soon also.
Click to expand...
I made screenshots of tech tree.
It is for latest SVN version.
 
@UncivilizedGuy, @raxo2222 what do you think? Mostly see the upper section.

EDIT: I could also move Piracy > Naval Warfare one row up (and make Piracy outright require trade) and bring Folk Medicine > Soap Making one row down.
 

Attachments

  • Revised.jpg
    Revised.jpg
    712.8 KB · Views: 103
  • Original.jpg
    Original.jpg
    676.6 KB · Views: 120
raxo2222 said:
I made screenshots of tech tree.
It is for latest SVN version.
Click to expand...
Ideally Pottery should lead to Sailing. Egyptians used Sailing to move heavy loads along the Nile. It’s tough to pinpoint 5000 BC because the techs don’t quite line up like that. The Wheel is about 4000 BC. So somewhere between Pottery and the Wheel.

Naval warfare is another one I disagree with. That should appear around the time of, or after Bronze Working. But I need to double check my research on that.
 
KaTiON_PT said:
@UncivilizedGuy, @raxo2222 what do you think? Mostly see the upper section.
Click to expand...
Looks good, but units and buildings in Sailing tech must be recosted including tech itself.
Make sure, that buildings, that has Sailing as proxy tech prereq (building prereq, that needs Sailing) from column where Sailing was placed originally to column right before sailing now need Sailing too.
That is no building should have their building/resource prereqs unlocked later than itself.
 
KaTiON_PT said:
@raxo2222 I will make sure of that. :thumbsup:


We do have Seafaring one column to the right of Bronze Working.

View attachment 505688
Click to expand...
For ease you can set era modifiers and globals to 100.
Also there is excel file, that I use to recost stuff.
Essentially its copypaste from here.

Code: 
    <Define>
        <DefineName>UNIT_PRODUCTION_PERCENT</DefineName>
        <iDefineIntVal>100</iDefineIntVal>
    </Define>
    <Define>
        <DefineName>BUILDING_PRODUCTION_PERCENT</DefineName>
        <iDefineIntVal>100</iDefineIntVal>
    </Define>
    <Define>
        <DefineName>UNIT_PRODUCTION_PERCENT_SM</DefineName>
        <iDefineIntVal>100</iDefineIntVal>
    </Define>
    <Define>
        <DefineName>PROJECT_PRODUCTION_PERCENT</DefineName>
        <iDefineIntVal>100</iDefineIntVal>
    </Define>
    <Define>
        <DefineName>TECH_COST_MODIFIER</DefineName>
        <iDefineIntVal>100</iDefineIntVal>
    </Define>

Use Normal speed.
 

Attachments

KaTiON_PT said:
@raxo2222 I will make sure of that. :thumbsup:


We do have Seafaring one column to the right of Bronze Working.

View attachment 505688
Click to expand...

I know from experience with my own mods that there is a lot to take into consideration when moving techs around.

I believe the earliest evidence of Naval Warfare was used by the Greeks. But I’m sure it can be assumed that some Warfare took place prior to that.
 
UncivilizedGuy said:
I know from experience with my own mods that there is a lot to take into consideration when moving techs around.

I believe the earliest evidence of Naval Warfare was used by the Greeks. But I’m sure it can be assumed that some Warfare took place prior to that.
Click to expand...
Well Naval Warfare has War Galley that upgrades to Trireme in Seafaring.

I guess Negotiation tech will require Sedentary Lifestyle after this move.
Sailing leads only to Negotiation tech now.
 
@raxo2222 does you excel take into account the era modifiers and globals as 100 or not? I'm seeing in the Era Multiplier column that they are like in the core version.
 
raxo2222 said:
Well Naval Warfare has War Galley that upgrades to Trireme in Seafaring.

I guess Negotiation tech will require Sedentary Lifestyle after this move.
Sailing leads only to Negotiation tech now.
Click to expand...
It would probably be safe to move naval warfare directly following sailing. According to Wikipedia the earliest archaeological evidence of naval warfare is around 1210 BC. Instead of upgrading the war galley to the trireme why not have two classical era units to use?

Negotiation is nothing I ever researched. So I could not give you any Input on that. But that definitely sounds like something that would come after a warfare tech.
 
Last edited:
KaTiON_PT said:
@raxo2222 does you excel take into account the era modifiers and globals as 100 or not? I'm seeing in the Era Multiplier column that they are like in the core version.
Click to expand...
It has base values and modified ones (era and globals).
It was easier for me to use unmodified values though.
Rounding errors happen and you see raw values in game.
 
Last edited:
KaTiON_PT said:
Something like this then?
Click to expand...
I’m never going to be satisfied. The earliest Galleys appear just after the inventions of writing and bronze. Earliest Naval Warfare appears at the beginning of the Iron Age. I know your trying to space your naval units out. So I guess we’ll just have to live with this.

So now I’m really looking at this tech tree. The next tech that jumps out at me is the Pulley. Earliest theorized use of the pulley is at the beginning of the Iron Age.
 
UncivilizedGuy said:
Earliest theorized use of the pulley is at the beginning of the Iron Age.
Click to expand...
No, the earliest theorized use of the pulley is the copper age by the Egyptians. It's plausible too considering the heavy rocks they used in construction.
The earliest proven use of the pulley is the Iron age (pulley remnants found and dated by archaeologists).
 
Toffer90 said:
No, the earliest theorized use of the pulley is the copper age by the Egyptians. It's plausible too considering the heavy rocks they used in construction.
The earliest proven use of the pulley is the Iron age (pulley remnants found and dated by archaeologists).
Click to expand...
Agreed. However experimental archeologists have demonstrated that is is possible to move and lift such blocks without pulleys.
 
Toffer90 said:
No, the earliest theorized use of the pulley is the copper age by the Egyptians. It's plausible too considering the heavy rocks they used in construction.
The earliest proven use of the pulley is the Iron age (pulley remnants found and dated by archaeologists).
Click to expand...
Ok. I got my info from an encyclopedia article because I couldn't find it in Wikipedia. The article said theorized at the beginning of the Iron Age and proven later on. I'm not sure what the Egyptians would have used as a pulley. Copper is way too soft to lift large stones. Bronze would work up to a certain weight but I'm sure archaeologists would have found something by now to prove that. I suppose the pulleys could have been made out of stone? But that sounds very Fred Flintstone to me. I think it's a stretch to say that the early ancient Egyptians used pulleys.

See this is where we get into a grey area with the tech tree. Many techs have been theorized to have been in use early on even though we lack physical evidence. Of course common sense comes into play here. I'm sure the indigenous Australians didn't just fly to Australia. :)

Edit: Here is an excellent article of how the Egyptians may have used a Fred Flinstone pulley: https://exarc.net/issue-2014-3/ea/reinventing-egyptian-pulley Still just a theory though.
 
Last edited:
Wooden pulleys have been used a lot, so why not stone. They made cylindrical blocks but those were only a few centimeters in diameter (5-6 cms, if I remember correctly) up to a cubit long. In hard stone like granite. It was usually a waste product though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Another scientific victory
Replies
4
Views
719
damerell
D
E
End Science In Renaissance, Westerosi Tech Tree
Replies
3
Views
155
EzraNaamah
E
SayHayKid
Re-Thinking the Industrial Era Tech Tree
Replies
16
Views
1K
SayHayKid
SayHayKid
T
efficient tech order in renaissance nightmare eternity speed?
Replies
6
Views
1K
Thunderbrd
Thunderbrd
mattwho
Matt's Civs: Ireland
Replies
6
Views
600
mattwho
mattwho
Back
Top Bottom