The Tech Tree - Why Bother?

Ah, I just caught this mod: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=479234

It seems to not only enliven the tech tree, but also have a decent tech diffusion, helping to mitigate the slippery slope of huge powers to victory. Also, I see that Drawmeus has cooking:

There will be N trees:
Financial: Focused on increasing the Gold output of this City.
Construction: Focused on increasing this City's ability to construct Buildings and Wonders. Limited bonuses to military production.
Government: Focused primarily on Empire Stability (Happiness), and secondarily on Gold. Also provides protection from Espionage.
Infrastructure: Food and general bonuses.
Entertainment: Focused on Culture and Happiness bonuses.
Science: Improve the City's Science output.
Military: Improves the speed with which this City builds military units and the quality of military units produced in this City.
Defense: Improves this City's defenses, including providing bonuses to nearby military units.
Naval: Provides substantial food, gold and production bonuses to Coastal cities, as well as bonuses to Naval unit production and to the quality of Naval units built in this City.
Core: Not a tree per se, Core buildings are cheap, easily constructed buildings that nearly every city should have. Examples include the Monument and Town Hall buildings.


Neat, short blogpost about this too, here: http://strabogaming.com/?p=164#comment-877
 
The tree is more so for order than overall decision. Yes you will get animal husbandry, pottery, archery, and mining...but the order you get them in is what makes the tree useful. If I am prepping for a war I want iron working first(even though I may get philosophy eventually anyways) and vise versa.
 
What an infuriating post in the first place. At least the poster stays civil through the discussion to make it seem like a legit question/discussion. You are questioning one of the most fundamental mechanics of this game but at least you do so admitting your own ignorance, seeking for answers. Enough attempts have been made to explain the value/importance of the tech but I disagree that it is only a matter of play speed. The tech tree matters on quick as well. Maybe not if you play the low difficulties (hence why they're low difficulties...) but ultimately what you are saying is that it doesn't matter if you drive an Aston Martin or a Smart. Both have 4 wheels and both get you from A to B. Sure, but an Aston Martin does so in a much superior way than the Smart.
 
Take a chill pill... Your post has blatant arrogance to it. Why bother posting with your remarks?

If you have read through the posts, I have mentioned that I play on Quick (the games are very long even at that speed) and on the lower difficulty settings (I often play with my young daughter, or family/friend). I had mentioned, through the knowledge gained by some of the posters here, that at slower speeds and higher difficulty levels, the tech tree and its window of opportunity expands and its importance grows.

I also mentioned what I believe would make the tech tree more significant. It appears that Drawmeus is making adjustments to the tech tree, and other trees in his mod.

Marc
 
JohnYoga said:
Take a chill pill... Your post has blatant arrogance to it. Why bother posting with your remarks?
Click to expand...

The arrogance is a reaction to your ignorance. Maybe I worded my opinion a bit too strongly, but let's not argue about that. What bothers me more is that you won't budge from two viewpoints that I find puzzling.

1. "I play on Quick (the games are very long even at that speed)"
I guess that depends on your definition of long. A quick game is a 2-3 hour games max. Is that long? Arguably, but your 50 hours example is simply nonsense

2. "window of opportunity"
It's not about a window, it's about prioritizing in order to achieve a desired goal. Domination, Science, Culture or whathaveyou. A naval game on an archipelago map, for example, can almost completely ignore the bottom part of the tree. One of the more seasoned players here (was it Tabarnak?) showed that you can even ignore writing and thus the following upper part of the tree for a long time and play a domination game succesfully.

So I guess I agree with you that by playing at your settings you fail to see the importance of the tech tree and I guess that's what you came here to find out. But again, my Aston Martin vs Smart example holds. Or I could go a step further: Why bother playing at all?
 
1. "I play on Quick (the games are very long even at that speed)"
I guess that depends on your definition of long. A quick game is a 2-3 hour games max. Is that long? Arguably, but your 50 hours example is simply nonsense

I am in a hot seat game with my daughter and we are 46 hours into the game, and, I would guess an easy four more hours to go. We are playing Earth, 42 City States and 14 Civilizations. I am also in a game with a friend, and we are four hours into the game and still in the Medieval Era. Even using BLITZ mode (in Civ IV) the family would never be under 16 hours, and each game never finished as we went out of synch. We only made it about half-way through the periods.

Windows of Opportunity: There is a window of opportunity that lengthens out at the slower game speeds; not as apparent on Quick. Which, like I said, is still very slow.

Marc
 
wannabewarlord said:
The arrogance is a reaction to your ignorance. Maybe I worded my opinion a bit too strongly, but let's not argue about that. What bothers me more is that you won't budge from two viewpoints that I find puzzling.

1. "I play on Quick (the games are very long even at that speed)"
I guess that depends on your definition of long. A quick game is a 2-3 hour games max. Is that long? Arguably, but your 50 hours example is simply nonsense
Click to expand...

After reading these posts I must concur with Johnyoga in that the tech tree especially on faster/lower settings makes less of an impact than longer/slower settings. The relatively small windows of opportunity like to go for a certain wonder, or for the briefly held edge of a certain unit or bldg. are very relative to speed and difficulty settings.

Any path in most games can not be followed exclusively for long. Following Science however can speed up the overall effort, but still at the expense at times of some things you may have to take a break and pursue to stay alive, grow, or prosper, then you are right back to Johnyoga's point.

Growth is probably the single most effective way to go down the tech tree in whatever style you choose the fastest. Growth= resourses, science, gold, culture, options.

I have played and won many games where all I did was click the next suggested tech with no thought whatever. Is someone ignorant when they suggest a more decisive divide between the three "paths" to make them less intertwined? ~ I don't think so.

The comment someone made about archipelago map strategies being so critical; to me is just an opinion. On those maps I still want to build my favorite early game wonders, and be able to develop my ground in a timely fashion which is often in conflict with the maritime path. Although I must admit the Great Lighthouse and Colossus are in my archipelago map agenda, but not at the expense of my favorite stuff.

Now the Vikings being close by on archipelogo may be an exception for awhile...

1) It is often crippling (to the extent it's even possible) to follow any one path at the exclusion of another very long.

2) I pay much more attention to my choices at higher/slower game specs and unusual occurances in a game.

3) none of what I have said should be taken to indicate I don't love the race to a certain tech, or pursue a path for a ways, like to get frigates; i.e.: special or desperate reasons in higher/longer game specs

4) on faster/lower settings many units become obsolete before they are even implementable where they would have counted!

So Wannabewarlord, what do you say? Is narrowminded "nonsense" not really just the inability to accept another valid (and his is valid) though different point of view?

Rather than just expressing an interesting oppinion, some folks seem to feel a need to be what to me seems condscending but in a week maner.
Like standing up on a chair to be on eye level with a grown up and then trying to talk down to them.
 
Thanks for the interesting links.

btw: In all Civ versions I believe it has been possible to build frigates before you understand how to make and fire the cannon they carry. Must be something about the open sea that enables operational cannon on ships when only on the drawing board on land.
 
So what I have come to see JohnYoga is that people have varying points of view, and different ways of expressing them. :yup:

I have an alternate idea check into these 2 channels:
Madjinn's YouTube, "Beyond the Monument" series
Madjinn's Twitch channel

They are actually the same videos, except the 'Twitch" channel is recorded live w/ viewers, actively answering questions and doing situational play-throughs. Generally not full games.
The YouTube channel is just those same Twitch videos, but playable at anytime, where the alternate is on a schedule.

I find his advice is thoughtful, and fully explained..just join the Twitch events! :coffee:
 
JohnYoga many others have already stated the strategic importance of tech selection and order, so I'm not going to go into that. If you still think the tech tree is just mindless micromanagement as your first tech just select "Future Tech" from the very end of the tree and you will never have to choose another tech to research again.
 
I do find myself following a similar path in many games at higher difficulty levels: beelining to science-related techs (to get the Library, the National College, the University, etc.). As I (and others) said earlier in this thread, the "tactical" order of techs does matter on higher difficulties and, to some extent, on slower game speeds. But the "strategic" game seems awfully similar from one game to the next: it's all about the science, isn't it?
 
Grotius said:
I do find myself following a similar path in many games at higher difficulty levels: beelining to science-related techs (to get the Library, the National College, the University, etc.). As I (and others) said earlier in this thread, the "tactical" order of techs does matter on higher difficulties and, to some extent, on slower game speeds. But the "strategic" game seems awfully similar from one game to the next: it's all about the science, isn't it?
Click to expand...

In part. There are science targets, just as there are cultural and military targets in the tech tree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sTAPler27
Anyone else feel the tech tree is a bit janky in some places?
2
Replies
24
Views
2K
rocksinmypath
R
Lord Lakely
Finally played the game, here's my honest first impression.
Replies
12
Views
1K
Lord Lakely
Lord Lakely
UncivilizedGuy
Historical Timeline Project
Replies
11
Views
4K
UncivilizedGuy
UncivilizedGuy
F
The perfect army
Replies
5
Views
2K
Fins
F
LastSword
Anchor, or why civilization-changing is not important per se
2
Replies
23
Views
3K
Thormodr
Thormodr
Back
Top Bottom