Tech Tree Revision

My knowledge of games is not that deep but I don't know of any other game franchise that has improved on the system that civ came up with. Perhaps there is but I'm guessing civ would adopt if there were.

Just because there are no alternative systems, that doesn't mean that an alternative system is not possible. Civ devs don't necessarily have to rely on other games or adopt the ideas from others. They can do things from scratch and come up with new ideas.That's why they're...devs! :)

Most likely the tech mechanics has been left untouched since civ 1 only because most players are satisfied with it and the devs just don't want to take that risk. Wasn't Sid Meier that once said that the key of sucess to a new version was "1/3 new, 1/3 improve, 1/3 old"? Well maybe they took that as an eternal dogma instead of a rule of thumb, and the tech-mechanics is fated to be in the "1/3 old" part. :)
 
Just because there are no alternative systems, that doesn't mean that an alternative system is not possible. Civ devs don't necessarily have to rely on other games or adopt the ideas from others. They can do things from scratch and come up with new ideas.That's why they're...devs! :)

Most likely the tech mechanics has been left untouched since civ 1 only because most players are satisfied with it and the devs just don't want to take that risk. Wasn't Sid Meier that once said that the key of sucess to a new version was "1/3 new, 1/3 improve, 1/3 old"? Well maybe they took that as an eternal dogma instead of a rule of thumb, and the tech-mechanics is fated to be in the "1/3 old" part. :)

That also describes the tech tree - new (research) improve (Eureka) old (current technologies known). It's a interesting comparison to look at the idea of the tech tree and the development of technology. There's no mechanism in Civ to simulate developing something new and having that new thing either be rejected by the populace or cause some unforeseen change.
 
My knowledge of games is not that deep but I don't know of any other game franchise that has improved on the system that civ came up with. Perhaps there is but I'm guessing civ would adopt if there were.

The 'Tech Tree' system in Civ and from Civ has been modified numerous times. It has the advantage of being simple and related (originally) to a single, abstracted set of 'science points/resources' that avoided all the messy details - not a bad system for a game.

On the other hand, just within the Civ games, Eurekas and other 'non-Science Points' have been added, Social and 'Civic' advances/changes have been separated out, and in the non-Civ Endless Legend game, within the Eras there was no Tech Progression - all Techs could be researched with equal facility in no particular order, and 'tech advance' to the next Era was simply based on the total number of Techs you finished researching.
Going back, SMAC had a 'Tech Web' in which you researched Areas like Exploration or Extermination (can't remember the actual titles they used now) instead of individual Techs, so your research was, to a great extent, 'blind' or at least 'squinting into the murk'.
Beyond Earth uses a very badly implemented form of this 'tech web' with the 'semi-blindness' left out.

So, even using the current system as a base, there are a lot of ways that it has already been modified, and therefore, more ways it can be.
Frankly, the more I have read and researched about actual historical technological developments, the more I appreciate the elegance of the game system that reduces Mind-Boggling complexity to simplicity, but also the more I realize that the relatively limited Linear System of the Tech Tree is grossly Eurocentric and Inaccurate for a world-wide Historical 4X. That needs to be addressed before the game goes any further in development, because the real differences in the development of Indonesia, China, the Americas, Africa and other Non-European areas of the World simply cannot be recreated in the current game with the current Tech Tree mechanism.
 
first: food is local, but the population of a city actually depends way more on trade routes and other things.

I agree. "Stuff your people with food to grow" and "mayors don't share" are two aspects of Civ that made sense with the computing power of Civ 1, but could be greatly improved going forward. Food, like sanitation, would better serve (in my opinion) as a limit on growth, rather than the driver of growth, and the ways that large cities import food could be much better modelled than the limited attempts that have been tried up to now. Having that modelling in place would also better bring the importance of natural harbours and navigable rivers into the forefront of city placement decisions.


I didn‘t say anything on science since there are enough examples in this thread... I would lose it completely, and rather than fill a bucket by turn

I agree. For historical 4x games, I'd lose science as a yield, too. I'd shift scientific development to events to be dealt with as they're triggered by actions on the map.

Science as something that's directed towards particular ends makes sense in a sci fi 4x game, and maybe (maybe) the very end of an historical 4x, but not the early eras which are the core of an historical 4x.

I see the gameplay need for technologies to act as a timeline, so having them purely depend on actions would run counter to giving the player self-determination.

I'm not concerned about this. How you respond to technological change - how open your society is to change - the impact of those choices … there's plenty of room for players to shape the development of their empire.

I also like the idea of a tech tree and a civic web where not every civ has to research every idea.

The development of new civics/social choices never made sense in a game dominated by filling a bucket with science yields. Civ 6 was an improvement in separating the two, but it still treats civics likes techs, only now with a separate bucket filled by a different yield. One of the benefits of eliminating the tech tree could be to put greater emphasis on the development of different ways to manage your society, with the pros and cons that come from each. I'd personally like to see this fleshed out more than it has been, with bigger gameplay differences between the various types of governments, greater diplomacy impact from differing ideology/religion choices through the eras, etc.

Again, it's all about creating interesting game play decisions about how to shape the development of your empire. Having to "research" (almost) every node of a civics tree to reach higher levels of government isn't necessarily the best way to handle this.

I'd rather see a system where when faced with problems, you need to choose from available solutions, and then have which solutions are available to you be based in part on what your social foundations are (i.e. what choices were made in the past).


And Gedemons mod looks cool.

I agree. @Gedemon 's mod is the first thing I've seen to make me think I might go back and play Civ 6 again someday.
 
(...)
For historical 4x games, I'd lose science as a yield, too. I'd shift scientific development to events to be dealt with as they're triggered by actions on the map.

(...)
Again, it's all about creating interesting game play decisions about how to shape the development of your empire. Having to "research" (almost) every node of a civics tree to reach higher levels of government isn't necessarily the best way to handle this.

I'd rather see a system where when faced with problems, you need to choose from available solutions,(...)

These thoughts summarize very well how I feel about the tech mechanics.

Here's what happens when you play Civ 5, Standard Pace Game, Raging Barbarians: at some point, barbarians start to invade your territory like wasps, ok I can deal with that, I asked for it. But this is how it's like: I'm always interrupting tile improvements to retreat my worker, I loose scouts and can't afford to produce more because I need to produce archers or warriors to defeat the invaders, and I also have to postpone production of buildings. So, I can hardly explore, expand or even develop my capital, but at the same time...I'm making tecnhological breakthroughs every 8 or 9 turns, faster than the time it takes to build a couple of archers, faster than the time it takes to build a farm, and faster than the time it takes to find a neighbour. :lol:

And at the same time I can not take advantage of the new breakthroughs, because I'm struggling to survive.
It's not just annoying for gameplay, it seems too far from reality to enjoy it.
 
These thoughts summarize very well how I feel about the tech mechanics.

Here's what happens when you play Civ 5, Standard Pace Game, Raging Barbarians: at some point, barbarians start to invade your territory like wasps, ok I can deal with that, I asked for it. But this is how it's like: I'm always interrupting tile improvements to retreat my worker, I loose scouts and can't afford to produce more because I need to produce archers or warriors to defeat the invaders, and I also have to postpone production of buildings. So, I can hardly explore, expand or even develop my capital, but at the same time...I'm making tecnhological breakthroughs every 8 or 9 turns, faster than the time it takes to build a couple of archers, faster than the time it takes to build a farm, and faster than the time it takes to find a neighbour. :lol:

And at the same time I can not take advantage of the new breakthroughs, because I'm struggling to survive.
It's not just annoying for gameplay, it seems too far from reality to enjoy it.

This is not a problem of Tech, it's a problem of not matching the speed/pace of the various systems in the game:
You cannot build units as fas as you can develop Tech
You cannot buy off 'Barbarians' - and the Mindless Permanently Hostile Barbarian is strictly a Fantasy Game Mechanic: there was no such thing in the real world, as the extensive trade between China, Persia, Egypt, Rome and Greece and their 'barbarian' neighbors proves.
Continuous attack causes no social/civic/scientific Reaction in your own Civ. More Fantasy. Again, Real Historical World examples, Tang Dynasty China's main military striking force was a core unit of armored lancers also armed with bows - copied and improved from the 'Northern Barbarians' China had been fighting for centuries. Likewise, the number of cavalry units as auxiliaries in the Imperial Roman Army doubled between the first and third centuries CE, because their most dangerous 'barbarian' (and Persian) opponents were increasingly cavalry-heavy forces. They even had a unit of Sagitarii Equites Hunorum - hired Hunnic horse archers stationed in Britain!

Both Civ V and Civ VI had systems that simply did not work together, or interact in any meaningful way, and both games are considerably the worse for it.
At the very least, many Tech Advances and consequences are heavily influenced by the Social/Civic system in which they are developed, and some of them in turn should massively affect your social, civic and political systems.
 
This is not a problem of Tech, it's a problem of not matching the speed/pace of the various systems in the game:
You cannot build units as fas as you can develop Tech

Yes, but if the tech-mechanics was different, wouldn't the matching of the pace of the systems be less important in the example I gave? As Trav'ling Canuck said before, in the current system science is just a yield. And if in early game it essentially depends on the number of citizens, it will generate tech advances regardless of what else is going on in the game. I mentioned the example of barbarians in early game, but the same would happen if you were at war with another civ. You could have all of your empire mobilized to war, but tech advances would just keep coming. Even if the pace of the different systems was properly matched, a kind of delay on the technological/scientific development would still be needed in certain game situations to "simulate" what happens in real life. Of course, we could say that many scientific achievements of the 20th century were directly or indirectly related to the World Wars (nuclear fission, rocketry, even fertilizers, just to name a few), but that happened under a new scientific paradigm and in a very different world than that of the ancient, classical or medieval eras.

But I agree when you say that the pace of the different systems of the game don't match properly. Btw, I never really understood what's the point in having "epic" and "marathon" game paces with slower tech progress, when at the same time it takes longer to produce units and buildings. The only thing you get is more time to explore and fight wars. But in Civ 5 the AI performs so badly during war, that epic and marathon game paces are just boring.
 
I lost my longer post, but in short: Yes, systems need to be integrated with each other. But I for example mostly play on online or fast speed, and I very rarely get to use units, they are just obsolete by the time I get them to the frontline. But I could never finish games otherwise...
 
Let's take a look at Tech Tree Progress and, for a change, Start at the Beginning.

I suggest that should be the Neolithic - about 10,000 to 4000 BCE.
This is before any of the regular Civ games have started, but on the other hand, most of the so-called 'Ancient' Civ Tech Tree represents technologies that were discovered during the Neolithic or even earlier. Also, if we want to start with a 'wandering hunter-gatherer' starting group, it was during the Neolithic that the earliest of those began to settle down and Farm or 'Pasturize' (domesticate) animals, and form Cities. To shove all that into the post-4000 BE "Ancient" Era is to compress the start of game and warp a bunch of earlier cultures.

Now, I don't like the Eras as they have been used in recent Civ games. Its been said elsewhere, but I'll repeat: they are Euro-centric, artificial, and frequently have only the vaguest relevance to what is actually happening in the game - and in the way they are Hard Coded in Civ VI now, they warp every game into a rigid pattern of Eras. Humankind, I fear, is going to elaborate on this further, by making the basic characteristics of your Civ/Faction dependent largely on what Era you are in, since you (usually pick your Faction based on the Era and, apparently, with nothing related to what has already happened in the previous Era(s)

So, while I will refer to Eras here for convenience, I don't want them in the game, except, possibly, as 'markers' of achievement for your individual Civilization - reaching the Bronze Age, or Industrial Age, or Age of Aquarius or Age of Reason/Enlightenment, should mean something to your folks, but to those benighted neighboring Civilizations still wallowing in their swinish ignorance, not so much.

So, for a start, here are the basic Needs (see Post above) that are present from the beginning of the Neolithic Era and the Game: Starting Needs, if you will:
Food
Water
Protection from Neighbors
Protection from/Requests to the Gods
Increased Comfort
Exploration (we are a curious lot, us humans, but this is lower priority, and usually connected to one of the other Needs)

Technologies available to address those Needs, available in the Neolithic:

Agriculture
Need: Food
Prerequisite Resources: Wheat, Millet, Rice, Barley (We could list a dozen, but these are the most important early domesticated Basic Food Crops)
Prerequisite Technologies: None
Animal Domestication/Husbandry
Need: Depends on the Animal:
.....Sheep/Goats: Food, Basic Resources (leather, bone, horn, sinew)
.....Cattle: Food, Basic Resources, Draft Animal
.....Horse: Food, Basic Resources, Draft/Riding Animal
Prerequisite Resources: Sheep/Goats, Cattle, Horses (Camels and Llamas were Domesticated much later)
Prerequisite Technologies: None
Effects: Boosts research into Wheel
Boating
Need: Water, Food, Exploration: Specifically, coastal water with resources in it, or visible Islands or other features across water that could potentially provide Food, Protection, or Comfort.
Prerequisite Resources: Basic Resources, Wood (Forest, Rain Forest)
Prerequisite Technologies: None
Effects: Will boost research into Woodworking, Weaving, Metal Working Technologies
Pottery
Need: Food, Water (carrying and storing)
Prerequisite Resources: Clay (virtually any land water source: oasis, river, marsh, wetlands)
Prerequisite Technologies: None
Effects: Boosts research into Metal Working, Bronze and Iron Working
Archery
Need: Food (hunting animals), Protection from Neighbors (other group with archery already)
Prerequisite Resources: Basic Resources
Prerequisite Technologies: None
Calendar
Need: Food (agriculture, hunting migratory animals), Gods
Prerequisite Resources: Basic Resources, Stone OR Forest, Rain Forest
Prerequisite Technologies: (Agriculture)
Effects: Boosts Religion, Mathematics, Astrology
Metal-Working
Need: Comfort, Food
Prerequisite Resources: Copper, Lead, Silver, Gold (all workable at relatively low temperature)
Prerequisite Technologies: (Pottery)
Effects: Boosts Bronze, Iron Working,
Stone-Working
Need: Protection, Comfort
Prerequisite Resources: Stone
Prerequisite Technologies: (Metal-Working)
Effects: Boosts Civic Organization, Construction, Architecture
Weaving
Need: Comfort, Food (fishing nets, traps)
Prerequisite Resources: Cotton OR Flax OR hemp
Prerequisite Technologies: None
Effects: Boosts Heirarchy in Civics

This is mostly preliminary, but as you can see, the resources you find while wandering will directly and massively influence what you have to work with in early Technology and the direction your early 'research' will take when you settle down.
 
^ So the game will begin at 10,000 BC and thus Pehistoric Era has to be made. There are those who interested in this prehisto stuffs.
oh! i saw one thing that interests me. there gotta be stone age spearman. previous modtest with Slasher (a bronze age melee unit that exists with Bronze Working, came between Warrior and Swordsman) included turned out that Barbarians became exhorably stronger because they can built ones from the start! so i have to remove one and there might be a different approach.... there gotta be stone age spearmen that exists from the beginning, Barbarians will not earn Bronze Working for free anymore.
whatchu think of this? will this works?
 
^ So the game will begin at 10,000 BC and thus Pehistoric Era has to be made. There are those who interested in this prehisto stuffs.
oh! i saw one thing that interests me. there gotta be stone age spearman. previous modtest with Slasher (a bronze age melee unit that exists with Bronze Working, came between Warrior and Swordsman) included turned out that Barbarians became exhorably stronger because they can built ones from the start! so i have to remove one and there might be a different approach.... there gotta be stone age spearmen that exists from the beginning, Barbarians will not earn Bronze Working for free anymore.
whatchu think of this? will this works?

First, the term Barbarian = uncultured militarily dangerous Foreigner, is another Eurocentric concept: it grew out of the original Greek Barbarian = Does Not Speak Greek definition. Interestingly, there is no Chinese word which has the same meaning. The words that are all too frequently translated as 'barbarian' in fact mean 'non-Chinese' but have no connotation or meaning of 'dangerous' or even necessarily 'enemy'.

So there will be no Barbarians in the game.

Instead, there will at the start be a whole bunch of Tribes, some of which may stop roaming about and start permanent Settlements or whatever we want to call a Not Quite A City Yet Places on the map.
The 'Starting Technology' for all these Tribes will be the same, and their starting units will be the same:
Warriors with short spears, clubs, throwing spears (very short range) - all made of wood with perhaps stone points.
Scouts with the same weapons.

By the way, the earliest illustrations (cave paintings, wall frescos, etc) of 'warriors' show men with bows shooting at other men, and men with clubs and short spears (possibly throwing spears, because we know 'stone age' warriors used those a lot when they were observed in South America and Southeast Asia in the 19th and 20th centuries)
The earliest Spearman is from Pre-Dynastic Egypt, (approximately 3200 BCE) and he has a long flint-tipped spear, a shield made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame, and a helmet made of coiled fiber - a cushion against head blows. BUT the first image/evidence of a Group of Spearmen working together and thus getting a real Bonus from massed spears and shields is much, much later: Sumer about 2500 BCE, during the Bronze Age.

That means, in the Neolithic Era early in the game, you can get Archers and Slingers, and 'improved' Warriors with shields and stone-tipped spears, but they won't be Anti-Cavalry because they don't work together in formations - and there is no 'cavalry' anywhere in the world to be Anti - a couple of cultures have solid-wheeled carts, but nothing like a battle cart, chariot, or rider of anything has appeared yet.

Once a Settlement starts getting a Social/Civic development: Heirarchy, where it is no longer just a collection of separate families/clans, it can develop into a City or a Pastoral Camp and you can start developing a Civilization. That, in fact, is the point at which I would have you select from a set of choices as to which Civilization you are going to start playing, based on criteria developed in the game you are playing: if you are settled on the shore getting most of your Food from fish and rice growing wild in the local marshy river banks, you are not going to get a chance to start playing as Kiffians, Dadiwans, Cishans, Cucuteni, Yamnayans or Afanasievans - all inland non-fishing cultures. Unless you move, you are also probably not going to be playing as Cimmerians, Assyrians, Scythians, or Huns later on - none of them were Seacoast cultures either.
 
The earliest Spearman is from Pre-Dynastic Egypt, (approximately 3200 BCE) and he has a long flint-tipped spear, a shield made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame, and a helmet made of coiled fiber - a cushion against head blows. BUT the first image/evidence of a Group of Spearmen working together and thus getting a real Bonus from massed spears and shields is much, much later: Sumer about 2500 BCE, during the Bronze Age.

That means, in the Neolithic Era early in the game, you can get Archers and Slingers, and 'improved' Warriors with shields and stone-tipped spears, but they won't be Anti-Cavalry because they don't work together in formations - and there is no 'cavalry' anywhere in the world to be Anti - a couple of cultures have solid-wheeled carts, but nothing like a battle cart, chariot, or rider of anything has appeared yet.

Organized warfare is such a costly activity that people don't engage in it unless they have no other option.
You need a critical mass of population size to draft a reasonable number of warriors, you need to convince warriors to temporarily abandon their families and risk their lives and they need maintenance.
So, in an under-populated environment with a lot of free space and resources, humans would most likely look for a different spot to live, than fighting the neighbour.
I believe that's the most realistic scenario in a pre-historic "era", so I agree with Boris that no such thing as a regular army of stone age spearmen should be allowed. This could raise a problem, though, because in mods designed to include pre-history and to create more immersion in ancient era, I've seen people complaining that, despite all the new stuff, nothing interesting happens - just producing pre-historic buildings and wonders one after another without real purpose.
 
Pretty sure making Brewing, specifically of beer but also making wine is a prereq for having a settled city. Some have theorized that the reason why humans settled down and began agriculture is to brew beer more effectively.
 
First, the term Barbarian = uncultured militarily dangerous Foreigner, is another Eurocentric concept: it grew out of the original Greek Barbarian = Does Not Speak Greek definition. Interestingly, there is no Chinese word which has the same meaning. The words that are all too frequently translated as 'barbarian' in fact mean 'non-Chinese' but have no connotation or meaning of 'dangerous' or even necessarily 'enemy'.
In Chinese, there were different terms they used to refer to outsiders which they often deemed 'inferior'. Particularly since the Hans were the first in the Far East to develop 'civilized' lifestyles and even the first in the east to form 'an empire', such success granted them an illusion of Cosmic Center and thus they called their country 'The Middle Empire' (中国) (actually i want to use Traditional characters for 'guo2'.
By the way, the earliest illustrations (cave paintings, wall frescos, etc) of 'warriors' show men with bows shooting at other men, and men with clubs and short spears (possibly throwing spears, because we know 'stone age' warriors used those a lot when they were observed in South America and Southeast Asia in the 19th and 20th centuries)
The earliest Spearman is from Pre-Dynastic Egypt, (approximately 3200 BCE) and he has a long flint-tipped spear, a shield made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame, and a helmet made of coiled fiber - a cushion against head blows. BUT the first image/evidence of a Group of Spearmen working together and thus getting a real Bonus from massed spears and shields is much, much later: Sumer about 2500 BCE, during the Bronze Age.

That means, in the Neolithic Era early in the game, you can get Archers and Slingers, and 'improved' Warriors with shields and stone-tipped spears, but they won't be Anti-Cavalry because they don't work together in formations - and there is no 'cavalry' anywhere in the world to be Anti - a couple of cultures have solid-wheeled carts, but nothing like a battle cart, chariot, or rider of anything has appeared yet.
.

In standard games. 'barbarian camp' is usually guarded by Spearmen unit. they didn't use spearmen as an offensive force (unless one barbarian band losts a camp but spearmen survived. while othe civilizations reguarly used ones. I don't understand why Firaxis choose Spearman to protect such camp. But this affects them as well when I add Slasher (Equivalent to Civ4 axemen but also used (bronze) swords, particularly of khopesh type but Qin swordsmen used straight ones and not scimitar/falcion of any kind).

So 'bronze spearmen' success in the Bronze Age is more on the coordinations (And warfare evolutions that went beyong simple tribal rustlings) than the superiority of metals over stone and spear reaches?
(This portion might involved with game mechanics as well which it is not a scope of this topic). Do you think 'Impaler' unit (stone age spearman) should be introduced to do this if i've removed a code that grants barbarian a free bronze working in my mod ?
 
Organized warfare is such a costly activity that people don't engage in it unless they have no other option.
You need a critical mass of population size to draft a reasonable number of warriors, you need to convince warriors to temporarily abandon their families and risk their lives and they need maintenance.
So, in an under-populated environment with a lot of free space and resources, humans would most likely look for a different spot to live, than fighting the neighbour.
I believe that's the most realistic scenario in a pre-historic "era", so I agree with Boris that no such thing as a regular army of stone age spearmen should be allowed. This could raise a problem, though, because in mods designed to include pre-history and to create more immersion in ancient era, I've seen people complaining that, despite all the new stuff, nothing interesting happens - just producing pre-historic buildings and wonders one after another without real purpose.

Two 'bits' of data reinforce this:
1. The earliest 'urban concentrations' that start to show 'city characteristics' - social stratigraphy in that some houses are bigger and more elaborate than others, community defenses, central communal buildings (shrines/temples, storage pits or buildings) start with a population of around 1000 (150 - 250 'dwellings') people.
2. The few examples of exact numbers given for 'armies' or 'hosts' among the early Mesopotamian and Egyptian kingdoms (Old Kingdom Egypt) and city states indicate that the largest 'unit' - sometimes the entire Army - was about 600 men.

That means, quite simply, the earliest cities didn't have enough men to form more than one unit, and if they did that, there was practically no one left to do anything else - farm, hunt, fish, throw pots, brew beer (yes, I know that many of these tasks were performed by women, but having them do all of them cuts into population growth, because it takes time away from child protection and rearing - TANSTAAFL: There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch, or 'free' labor)

Which doesn't mean there won't be a lot to do. I would make 'scouts' a much smaller unit in the amount of population it takes, so you can explore like crazy - and should, because there will be indications of Resources around that you will want to know about. Conquering a city might be near-impossible, or too expensive to be worth it, but, if you are so inclined, Raiding other groups for resources - including people - should be possible ('Slavery' in the sense of forcible incorporation of foreigners into your population shows signs of being a near-universal 'trait' of early Human settled populations, largely because the early cities were also Cesspits of Disease so they had 0 population growth without importing people).

Also, the earliest cities were pretty fragile. You can settle down in 6500 BCE in your shiny new city and get hit with a 200 year Drought (look up the Lake Ojibway Event and its effects on the Middle East and southern Europe, or the African Humid Period, which would be in effect when the game started in 10,000 BCE) And - Yes, Virginia, there should be Climate Change from the Start of the Game, not relegated to the very end - and discover that your population has largely wandered away looking for food when the crops failed and your people go back to being Hunter-Gatherers or 'convert' to Pastoralists because herds can go where the water is while the crops stay in place and die, along with the people relying on them.
Also, Trade existed from the Beginning: in stone for tools, seashells for ornament, Obsidian for edged tools and weapons, and probably in hides, plants, and other perishable goods that we can't track at this point.

So, even before you get Bronze and Spearmen and Chariots and Empires and all, you can keep very busy setting up you first settlements and growing them into Cities, maintaining your precarious cities, stealing from or trading with your neighbors, looking for Resources to exploit. Yes, you cannot do Alexander's Conquests or wage World War Pre-One until later, but you also are unlikely to face a massive invading army - nobody else can Wage World War either! You will, however, have some very important decisions to make on what kind of economic and social system you will start building, beginning religion and politics and what military you can afford. What you can do later with More Resources and Technology and Civucs will depend to a great degree on decisions you make and steps you take early on.

Pretty sure making Brewing, specifically of beer but also making wine is a prereq for having a settled city. Some have theorized that the reason why humans settled down and began agriculture is to brew beer more effectively.

A British archeologist back in the 1960s, I believe, was the first to propose this theory: that the first use of cultivated or gathered grains was to brew them into beer, not thresh them, crush them, make them into dough and bake them into bread - the bread-making process is pretty complex, whereas grain tossed into water to ferment gets you a (nasty but alcoholic) beer almost automatically.
In fact, there is evidence of beer-making from the Natufian Culture back to 12,000 BCE, so it is a Starting Tech, or, better in Game Terms, an automatic Bonus to cultivating grain. However, pastoralists were also fermenting milk from their herds very, very early (most of them didn't use permanent containers like pottery, so we don't have as much residue evidence as we do for beer), so 'alcoholic beverage' from fermented grain, milk, or fruits is almost a Universal Human Product.
Making Beer an 'extra benefit' from Agriculture, though, would be a nice touch: you settle down and start famring because you not only get much more food, but also a 'Happiness/Amenity" Boost from booze!
Wine is later. Earliest evidence is from about 7000 BCE in China, so it would make a legitimate 'Tech Advance' relating to having certain Resources available - wine grapes or rice. The earliest evidence of Industrial Scale (for the time) wine production, with heavy wine pressing an storage equipment, dates from the very end of the Neolithic, about 4200 - 4100 BCE in Armenia and next door in Georgia (the modern wine grapes all can be 'tracked' by their DNA back to a wild ancestor in the Caucasus - a good case for a single source Resource on the map that can be spread later). Of course, wine has both a Social/Cultural ("Luxury/Amenity") aspect and from very early was a Trade Good. It's for another discussion, but one of the distinctions to be made among Trade and Luxury Goods/Resources is those that are purely Happy-Making, and those that are Physically/Psychologically Addictive, like Wine, Sugar, Coffee, Tea, Cacao, or Opium (another very early product of 'Agriculture" that has been left out of the 4X games completely!)
 
. Of course, wine has both a Social/Cultural ("Luxury/Amenity") aspect and from very early was a Trade Good. It's for another discussion, but one of the distinctions to be made among Trade and Luxury Goods/Resources is those that are purely Happy-Making, and those that are Physically/Psychologically Addictive, like Wine, Sugar, Coffee, Tea, Cacao, or Opium (another very early product of 'Agriculture" that has been left out of the 4X games completely!)

Because Opium is a very addictive agent. and W.H.O. (or other U.N. 'ministry' i don't really know that it exists) still lists Opium as narcotics and almost every country in the world listed this one as class 1 narcotics (though Amphetamine based drugs beat it two or three decades ago) and if Opium is included in ani 4X games it will get 'M' (or at least T) rating and many countries might consider ban it. As soon as Bethesda took Fallout franchise they released Fallout 3, they ran into regional restrictions problems; in Australia the game was banned because one drug (called 'chems') is named 'morphine', it has to be renamed to MedX so the game can be sold there, for example)

Fast forward to the Age of Firearms.
1. Did Rifling correctly placed in the Industrial Era ? I favor either 'Machine Tools' or 'Power Tools' instead since custom made rifles already exists well in the 16th Century. but power tools to make one were industrial era thing.
2. Where should Steel be? Middle Ages (Civ5, enables Longswordsman), Industrial Era (Civ4 maybe??) or Modern Era (Unlocks Battleship and Artillery). I favor its positions in the Industrial Era that it comes AFTER steam power and it should enabled Pre-Dreadnough Battleship and Protected Cruisers. (Chemistry will now enables Artillery and Combustions enabled AT guns/crew thing instead :P My idea
3. And 'Replaceable Parts' being placed in Modern Era and enabled 'Infantry' ? I'd favor them to be in the mid or late Industrial Era, in place i'd like to see either 'metal cartridges' or 'repeating firearms'.
Brown Bess was the first weapon that has replaciable parts, and amongs the first to be converted to percussion caps muskets. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/355854808034142974/
 
Fast forward to the Age of Firearms.
1. Did Rifling correctly placed in the Industrial Era ? I favor either 'Machine Tools' or 'Power Tools' instead since custom made rifles already exists well in the 16th Century. but power tools to make one were industrial era thing.
2. Where should Steel be? Middle Ages (Civ5, enables Longswordsman), Industrial Era (Civ4 maybe??) or Modern Era (Unlocks Battleship and Artillery). I favor its positions in the Industrial Era that it comes AFTER steam power and it should enabled Pre-Dreadnough Battleship and Protected Cruisers. (Chemistry will now enables Artillery and Combustions enabled AT guns/crew thing instead :p My idea
3. And 'Replaceable Parts' being placed in Modern Era and enabled 'Infantry' ? I'd favor them to be in the mid or late Industrial Era, in place i'd like to see either 'metal cartridges' or 'repeating firearms'.
Brown Bess was the first weapon that has replaciable parts, and amongs the first to be converted to percussion caps muskets. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/355854808034142974/

I believe that Boris Gudenuf and Gedemon are trying a new approach to the technology mechanics in which the tech advancements will depend on how the game develops (needs, available resources, geographical and political context, social policies, etc) and not necessarily on what happened in real history. So, under this premise, I think there's no need to assign specific and "rigid" places for each technology in a tech-tree. Therefore, we don't need to assume a sequence of eras (medieval, renaissance, industrial, etc) that replicates the historical sequence that we are familiar with, nor do we need to assume that tech Y belongs in the era X.

Of course, it wouldn't make sense if a civilization was using GPS and at the same time was fighting with clubs. But, for instance, you mentioned Steam Power as an Industrial Era technology, and that's accurate, but steam power as a concept goes back to the first century AD. It didn't have repercussions back then because there was no economic or social incentive to develop it, unlike what happened in the 18th century. A new approach to the tech-tree in which tech progress would depend on many factors, and not just on "prerequisite techs" would be more interesting because it would allow a complete rewriting of history as you play, instead of just following the path that we already know from history classes.

So, discussion is needed not only to establish what "techs should be prerequisite for each techs, but also what general and specific conditions are needed to unlock or develop some tech (resources? social policies? needs? tech level of neighbours?).
 
. . . Fast forward to the Age of Firearms.
1. Did Rifling correctly placed in the Industrial Era ? I favor either 'Machine Tools' or 'Power Tools' instead since custom made rifles already exists well in the 16th Century. but power tools to make one were industrial era thing.
2. Where should Steel be? Middle Ages (Civ5, enables Longswordsman), Industrial Era (Civ4 maybe??) or Modern Era (Unlocks Battleship and Artillery). I favor its positions in the Industrial Era that it comes AFTER steam power and it should enabled Pre-Dreadnough Battleship and Protected Cruisers. (Chemistry will now enables Artillery and Combustions enabled AT guns/crew thing instead :p My idea
3. And 'Replaceable Parts' being placed in Modern Era and enabled 'Infantry' ? I'd favor them to be in the mid or late Industrial Era, in place i'd like to see either 'metal cartridges' or 'repeating firearms'.
Brown Bess was the first weapon that has replaciable parts, and amongs the first to be converted to percussion caps muskets. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/355854808034142974/

Rifling and Steel are two 'Technologies' that fit into our discussion of Needs and Prerequisites, and not understanding those is why both of them have been wandering through the various Civ Tech Trees.
Both Steel of various grades and Rifling were available, respectively, in the Classical and Renaissance Eras, but only as minor effects and not fulfilling any real Need in either case.
Let's take Steel.

There is a continuity from Iron to Steel which has more components than Civ has ever shown.
1. Wrought Iron - the first 'iron' was heated in medium-temperature forges and hammered into shape; 'wrought'. How much carbon was included, a measure of how close to Steel it got, was almost completely Random, because nobody understood the molecular processes taking place in the alloy. When a blacksmith (because everything was Individually Made - even the Roman 'arms factories' were just collections of individual blacksmiths and metalworkers, each working on his own) got it exactly right - either because he got a really good batch of Iron Ore or happened to have a carbon source mixed in when the iron was being forged - the result was one of the Legendary Weapons: Excaliber, Durendal, or the 'magical' weapons of the Gods. There's a reason all those myths and stories exist, but it's not the sort of thing you can build a Unit or an Army around. More common is the account of Celts bending their swords into an 'L' shape and having to brace them against a rock and stomp on them to straighten them - in the middle of a battle. That's low-carbon wrought iron, not any kind of Steel.
2. 'Wrought' Steel. As early as the 4th century BCE Wootz Steel was being produced in India. This was a Historical Accident. On the one hand, there was a particularly 'pure' deposit of Iron ore which resulted in very pure Iron, on the other hand, chimney kilns for pottery were adapted to provide a 'blast' furnace for smelting iron using the steady, strong Monsoon winds and the 'kilns or furnaces were stoked with Wood because they had no coal yet. The result was a good carbon content in the mix, and actual Steel. Alexander the Great was given a 20 kilogram batch of it as a gift when he was in India, and may have been the first man in history to wear a genuine Steel Cuirass body armor. This is the 'pure' Iron/Steel which was traded into the Middle East and gave the 'Damascus' Steel Blades their reputation over a thousand years later. Again, though, this is a One Off - available in small quantities (20 kg was a 'Kingly Gift', which gives you an idea of the quantities available) from one location in the world and still with no real appreciation of what was actually causing the exceptional nature of this 'iron'.
By the 10th century, Blacksmiths in Europe had discovered that carbon, in the form of various woody plants or charcoal fuel, made a huge difference in the quality of 'iron' objects. They started producing at least medium Carbon Steels with which they were able to produce real steel swords and other blades, and steel armor culminating in the late 13th century with articulated steel plate armor so sophisticated that NASA consulted the Tower of London armory which maintained the tool set used to make such armored suits when designing joints for Space Suits in the 1960s CE.
Still, this is all Hand Made. The best 'mechanization; you could get, by the Renaissance, was a waterwheel-driven trip hammer to help hammer the raw iron into rough ingots/plates before the individual Blacksmith/Swordsmith took over to do the 'real' work.
3. Cast Iron. By adapting relatively high temperature pottery kilns (required to fire Porcelain) the Chinese were making and using Cast Iron as early as the 6th century BCE (Zhou Dynasty). That's almost 2000 years before Europe was casting iron, but there's a reason: cast iron is almost useless for traditional weapons - too brittle. It was used extensively for household objects - lamps, bowls, cookware - and tools - iron plows, hammers and saws, for instance. In Europe there were other materials available for all of those, including wrought iron from the village blacksmith. No Need.
When Europe finally developed Cast Iron in the 14th century, it was by adapting the casting techniques used with Bronze to make Cathedral Bells (1 ton or larger castings) to casting Bombards - iron was a lot cheaper metal than Bronze or Brass, and the warring European States needed lots and lots of the new 'artillery' requiring 100s of tons of metal. Brand New Need = Brand New Development/Technology.

The big development that has not been in Civ (or any other 4X game) in the past is the transition from Hand Made metallurgy of all kinds to Industrial Mass Production metallurgy. This started on a relatively small scale in the mid-18th century with Iron Rolling Mills (water-powered) and the Puddling Process to produce steel ingots, but the 'take off' was in 1856 and 1861 CE, when the Bessemer and Open Hearth processes for making steel by the dozens of tons at a time were developed. After that, Steel was the basic material for nearly everything, but specifically the Needs that had developed were for Steel Cannon (various inventors and engineers were wrestling with the problem of breech-loading, rifled cannon, for which wrought iron or bronze was only marginally suitable) and - the Big One - Railroad Rails: required by the thousands of miles and thousands of tons, and again wrought iron was a grossly inadequate material.
Side Effect: Rise of the Krupp Empire, because Krupp was first to develop the techniques for working with cast and rolled steel to produce steel rails in quantity and cast steel cannon by the mid-1860s CE.

If you are looking for a simple, Civ VI-type Effect, Industrial Steel = rifled, breechloading cannon and Railroads.

BUT to summarize, the timeline is like this:

(Wrought) Iron
Need: Better Weapons, Better Tools
Prerequisite Resource; Iron Ore
Other Prerequisites: Pottery Kilns (relatively high temperature firing), Bronze Working (basic metal forging and working)
Historically, first Iron Objects were iron-tipped Plows in Egypt and Assyria, about 2300 BCE - because Bronze was much too expensive to be used for simple agricultural tools. By 1400 BCE wrought iron was in use in Anatolia for weapons like swords, spear points and daggers.
Side Effect: Once people knew how to work Iron, it was a much cheaper metal than Bronze, so the 'middle class' army like the Greek Hoplites or Roman Legion became possible. Contrary to Civ, the Hoplite was not a Bronze Era Unit, he was Iron Age (post 600 BCE)
Cast Iron
Need: Better Tools, Decorative 'Luxury' Items (bowls, furniture), Bombards/cast iron Cannon
Prerequisite Resource: Iron Ore
Prerequisite Technology: Porcelain (high temperature blast furnace firing) OR Blast Furnace metallurgy
Steel
Need: Better Weapons, Better Tools
Prerequisite Resource: Iron Ore
Other Prerequisites: Charcoal Fired Furnace, Watermill-Powered Metal-working
Industrial Steel
Need: Railroads, mass-produced rifled weapons, ships, buildings, bridges
Prerequisite Resource: Iron Ore in Industrial Quantities (Deep Mining)
Other Prerequisites: Coal (Coke) Fired Furnaces, Cast Iron hearths and converters
Historical Note: after first Industrial Quantity Steel was available in 1856 CE, Krupp's first cast steel rifled cannon followed in the same year, steel railroad rails the following year (1857 CE), first steel-wire suspension bridge in 1870 CE, steel alloy ship armor in 1876 CE, first steel-hulled warship the same year, first steel-frame skyscraper in 1890 CE.

Oh, and a quick note on Replaceable Parts:
The idea actually dates back to Classical Athens and Carthage: both had stockpiles of interchangeable parts for warships stored in the Ship Sheds at Piraeas for Athenian Triremes and the Cothon at Carthage for their Quinqueremes in the 1st Punic War: pre-cast Rams, pre-built oars, stem and stern posts, and other 'interchangeable' parts.
NONE of the machines or mechanical weapons like muskets built before 1800 CE had truly interchangeable parts, because the required precision in machine manufacturing didn't exist yet. The Land Pattern Musket ("Brown Bess") in England AND the Charleroi Musket in France had parts made to 'standard' patterns, like the barrel and lock (firing) mechanism, but the locks themselves were individually made by craft workers: you could change one lock for another because the overall dimensions were roughly the same, but you couldn't switch out the parts of a lock, because they were all individually made. Eli Whitney's "interchangeable/replaceable' parts in 1801 CE was a Fake. He fooled the government purchasing agents by having all the parts pre-crafted by metalworkers so they apparently 'fit together', but each musket had to be made by hand and fitted individually.
Real Interchangeable/Replaceable Parts date to 1800 CE: Henry Maudslay's (who should be a Great Engineer) Screw-Cutting Lathe which allowed precisely identical screw threads to be cut by machine - meaning that all the things fastened together by screws could be made interchangeable for the first time. Within 5 years, machine-made precisely-interchangeable/replaceable parts were being used to build clocks (in the USA) and Pulley Blocks for the Royal Navy (Britain). In 1836 CE Samual Colt had machine tools whipping out interchangeable parts to mass-produce repeating pistols (revolvers) for the US military - the first really Interchangeable Part Firearms. By 1880 CE the principle was applied to manufacture everything from sewing machines to typewriters to agricultural machinery to railroad locomotives to cannon.
 
(Wrought) Iron
Need: Better Weapons, Better Tools
Prerequisite Resource; Iron Ore
Other Prerequisites: Pottery Kilns (relatively high temperature firing), Bronze Working (basic metal forging and working)
Historically, first Iron Objects were iron-tipped Plows in Egypt and Assyria, about 2300 BCE - because Bronze was much too expensive to be used for simple agricultural tools. By 1400 BCE wrought iron was in use in Anatolia for weapons like swords, spear points and daggers.
Side Effect: Once people knew how to work Iron, it was a much cheaper metal than Bronze, so the 'middle class' army like the Greek Hoplites or Roman Legion became possible. Contrary to Civ, the Hoplite was not a Bronze Era Unit, he was Iron Age (post 600 BCE)
I already did this in my mod Zaab Spicey ,in that mod, Greek hoplites are now Heavy Spearmen rather than JUST spearman (Available with Ironworking) and stronger than they were)

Do you think I choose correct 'generic' name for this unit? (this unit is to facilitate players who had no access to iron (Vanilla and RF Rule, the mod itself is for Vanilla, and the next version which i'm working on will still be Vanilla mod) to stand a better chance against those who have one, because Heavy Spearman is, per rules, does not need iron, they're not meant to replace swordsman or fight swordsman toe to toe with no supports at all)

Cast Iron
Need: Better Tools, Decorative 'Luxury' Items (bowls, furniture), Bombards/cast iron Cannon
Prerequisite Resource: Iron Ore
Prerequisite Technology: Porcelain (high temperature blast furnace firing) OR Blast Furnace metallurgy
Steel
Need: Better Weapons, Better Tools
Prerequisite Resource: Iron Ore
Other Prerequisites: Charcoal Fired Furnace, Watermill-Powered Metal-working
Industrial Steel
Need: Railroads, mass-produced rifled weapons, ships, buildings, bridges
Prerequisite Resource: Iron Ore in Industrial Quantities (Deep Mining)
Other Prerequisites: Coal (Coke) Fired Furnaces, Cast Iron hearths and converters
Historical Note: after first Industrial Quantity Steel was available in 1856 CE, Krupp's first cast steel rifled cannon followed in the same year, steel railroad rails the following year (1857 CE), first steel-wire suspension bridge in 1870 CE, steel alloy ship armor in 1876 CE, first steel-hulled warship the same year, first steel-frame skyscraper in 1890 CE.

So my proposals to have Steel in late Industrial Era as per Bessemer Process is right? I'm working on tech tree now and i disagrees with Firaxis on many things, the other issues was Stirrups. Just because Chivalry became policy card and feudalism became civics, so one tech has to be made to 'cloth hang' knights?? Bah! Civilopedia even cited that stirrups appeared in Classical Era (600 BC) and if Horseback Riding permits Horseman, then Stirrups for heavier cavs, and that heavy cavs in question should be Cataphracts (And Firaxis got it WRONG! DEAD WRONG on Cataphracts in previous games because they said Cataphracts are Byzantine 'Knights' which in truth this unit came out of Central Asia (where Horseback riding was first achieved), Also anyone else had and used Cataphracts as well; Chinese 'Tree Kingdoms' heroes and generals were cataphracts (And Guan Yu is shown in his shrine to wear cataphract armor, but weapons shown in his shrines aren't what he actually used). Romans used Cataphracts after a lessions learned from Persians. And Byzantines are what's left of the Old Roma and thus everything Roma has were inherited as well; organized navy and cataphracts under Imperial Army system, In the successer kingdoms Cataphracts became Knights (and I think King Arthur's Roundtable Knights were actaully Cataphracts dressed in Late Roman armor). So techs should be called either 'Plate armor' or 'Full armor'. Your call.

Oh, and a quick note on Replaceable Parts:
The idea actually dates back to Classical Athens and Carthage: both had stockpiles of interchangeable parts for warships stored in the Ship Sheds at Piraeas for Athenian Triremes and the Cothon at Carthage for their Quinqueremes in the 1st Punic War: pre-cast Rams, pre-built oars, stem and stern posts, and other 'interchangeable' parts.
NONE of the machines or mechanical weapons like muskets built before 1800 CE had truly interchangeable parts, because the required precision in machine manufacturing didn't exist yet. The Land Pattern Musket ("Brown Bess") in England AND the Charleroi Musket in France had parts made to 'standard' patterns, like the barrel and lock (firing) mechanism, but the locks themselves were individually made by craft workers: you could change one lock for another because the overall dimensions were roughly the same, but you couldn't switch out the parts of a lock, because they were all individually made. Eli Whitney's "interchangeable/replaceable' parts in 1801 CE was a Fake. He fooled the government purchasing agents by having all the parts pre-crafted by metalworkers so they apparently 'fit together', but each musket had to be made by hand and fitted individually.
Real Interchangeable/Replaceable Parts date to 1800 CE: Henry Maudslay's (who should be a Great Engineer) Screw-Cutting Lathe which allowed precisely identical screw threads to be cut by machine - meaning that all the things fastened together by screws could be made interchangeable for the first time. Within 5 years, machine-made precisely-interchangeable/replaceable parts were being used to build clocks (in the USA) and Pulley Blocks for the Royal Navy (Britain). In 1836 CE Samual Colt had machine tools whipping out interchangeable parts to mass-produce repeating pistols (revolvers) for the US military - the first really Interchangeable Part Firearms. By 1880 CE the principle was applied to manufacture everything from sewing machines to typewriters to agricultural machinery to railroad locomotives to cannon.

Then again, my proposals to move Replaceable Parts to mid or late Industrial Era is correct while Firaxis perspective is wrong?
so if there's gonna be a tech to unlocks Infantry (and MG), what should it be? (names)
- Repeating Firearms
- Metal Cartridges

And 'Artillery' should also be unlocked by Chemistry, my view is that Siege Rifles and Artillery are different units and should also appeared. My weight is on Trinitrotolouene (in Civ5 Artillery is unlocked with 'Dynamite
:P ), and what distict Siege Rifles and WW1 Artillery are not just the use of steel and breechloadings, and not even the inventions of recoil springs, but TNT-bases shells made it real killers.
 
Back
Top Bottom