v42+ Tech Tree Project - Item #3: Prehistoric Tech Renames as a Whole? (Discussion)

[Somebody613]

I don't get why we have to rename any Prehistoric techs imo. They all are fine and I am already used to them, Stone Peelers seems weird.

THIS, of course.
But [Scrapping Tools], [Chopping Tools], etc... sounds like a decent "compromise", if you ask me.

 

[cobbaut]

But [Scrapping Tools], [Chopping Tools], etc... sounds like a decent "compromise"

No please.
imho the name of a tech should represent the *technology* and not the tool used to implement this technology.
That's why trapping is a good name for the tech and animal snare traps is perfect for the building (aka the implementation) of this tech.

I just glanced over all prehistory techs and I see only one that maybe does not follow this logic: trails. I can't think of a good name, something like trail following maybe?

 

[Somebody613]

No please.
imho the name of a tech should represent the *technology* and not the tool used to implement this technology.
That's why trapping is a good name for the tech and animal snare traps is perfect for the building (aka the implementation) of this tech.

I just glanced over all prehistory techs and I see only one that maybe does not follow this logic: trails. I can't think of a good name, something like trail following maybe?

Yes, but how then would you differentiate between "apes scrapping bark" and "humans scrapping bark"?
Unless you WON'T, which is hilarious.

 

[cobbaut]

Yes, but how then would you differentiate between "apes scrapping bark" and "humans scrapping bark"?
Unless you WON'T, which is hilarious.

'Apes' sounds like a perfectly fine civilization to play with, so indeed I would not. (+1 for a Planet of the Apes civ)

EDIT: Apes exists apparently, will try this in my next game!

 

[Thunderbrd]

NOW y'all are getting me to think deeper on this, which is what I was hoping I could draw out of this amazingly deeply thoughtful community.

It seems like such a pointless thing but I think I can understand why some would read 'Scraping' and scoff at our decision to include it as a tech because it predates our rise as an intelligent species entirely... so what IS this representing and how do we improve the way it's represented? OR, should we just let that mental itch go unscratched entirely and expect that the human mind can understand our thinking as developers to prioritize brevity over specificity and that we KNOW THEY KNOW that we MEAN this is a point at which people figured out simply how to 'Scrape' better and more effectively with repeatable improved practices and tools?

 

[Sakura Matou]

IMHO no need to re-invent the wheel on what works, especially the Prehistoric era which already by far has the most love and very fitting techs. If anything some other eras could have more content and possibly Tech name changes. I can go through all the names and see if I see any that could have better names if you guys wish and make a list.

 

[Somebody613]

NOW y'all are getting me to think deeper on this, which is what I was hoping I could draw out of this amazingly deeply thoughtful community.

It seems like such a pointless thing but I think I can understand why some would read 'Scraping' and scoff at our decision to include it as a tech because it predates our rise as an intelligent species entirely... so what IS this representing and how do we improve the way it's represented? OR, should we just let that mental itch go unscratched entirely and expect that the human mind can understand our thinking as developers to prioritize brevity over specificity and that we KNOW THEY KNOW that we MEAN this is a point at which people figured out simply how to 'Scrape' better and more effectively with repeatable improved practices and tools?

I'll be honest - I see no need to even pay this topic any attention to begin with.
You have a zillion of more interesting and "urgent" topics than "precise tech names", lol.
Not sure what your personal "field of job" is (I never remember that for anyone here), but I bet you have BETTER ongoing projects than this nonsense, no?
Just asking.

 

[Maltazard]

I think that reasoning on names alone leaves a lot open to semantics, different logical thinking, interpretation... but that's not how techs are represented in game. Tech icons, tech splash screens, tech quotes, and what techs actually do, all contribute to contextualize each tech in the bigger picture - not to mention their prerequisites and following techs. So in the case of scraping, peeling, chopping etc, as they all come after stone tools and early work organization techs (community I think), it is understood that they refer to the professional developing of those sets of skills for warfare and manufacturing.
So I think the reasoning shouldn't be made on names alone, as there is a decent contextual relationship among prehistoric era techs - the ones that stand out the most are vanilla Civ techs that were recycled, in fact, like hunting.

 

[Thunderbrd]

IMHO no need to re-invent the wheel on what works, especially the Prehistoric era which already by far has the most love and very fitting techs. If anything some other eras could have more content and possibly Tech name changes. I can go through all the names and see if I see any that could have better names if you guys wish and make a list.

A lot of this discussion is to try to jar out the rationale behind naming. There are a number of tech adjustments coming but if you want to make a list of some suggestions we can bring up for further discussion, I'd be happy to add them to the list of suggested techs to rename along with the notes I have.

Keep in mind I'm not actually personally making these suggestions - they came from other sources in many cases. I'm trying to present the reasons why the renaming was suggested. Some of these also come from rationales to change some spots of unit access and may be somewhat related to that.

Anyhow, it's as valid an opinion as any to say you feel that a tech has a good name - though I'm curious to hear ongoing commentary in light of other reasons given that may come up after you've made this kind of point too.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I'll be honest - I see no need to even pay this topic any attention to begin with.
You have a zillion of more interesting and "urgent" topics than "precise tech names", lol.
Not sure what your personal "field of job" is (I never remember that for anyone here), but I bet you have BETTER ongoing projects than this nonsense, no?
Just asking.

Fair perspective. I'm not doing this when it conflicts with the things I'm trying to achieve so if anything I'm just attempting to keep the community actively discussing things in ways that might help to shape other decisions that won't be asked prior to presentation because to do so WOULD be to slow progress.

 

[Sakura Matou]

A lot of this discussion is to try to jar out the rationale behind naming. There are a number of tech adjustments coming but if you want to make a list of some suggestions we can bring up for further discussion, I'd be happy to add them to the list of suggested techs to rename along with the notes I have.

Keep in mind I'm not actually personally making these suggestions - they came from other sources in many cases. I'm trying to present the reasons why the renaming was suggested. Some of these also come from rationales to change some spots of unit access and may be somewhat related to that.

Anyhow, it's as valid an opinion as any to say you feel that a tech has a good name - though I'm curious to hear ongoing commentary in light of other reasons given that may come up after you've made this kind of point too.

Yeah that's a fair point for sure, it's always good to open a dialogue when it comes to these things. I don't know if any techs really need to have a name change either in other eras, but will scour through them to see if I fell any are strange, but I never really came across a tech name that made me scratch my head.

 

[JosEPh_II]

We have had tech name changes before. Iirc raxo did some awhile back. In any case imho the original tech names are and were superior to those that got changed. I'm not in favor of changing any of these tech's name you have brought up at the behest of others T-brd.

Been rather busy last several weeks so I did not see this topic till now. Trying to get a greenhouse built, Garden tilled and to start planting. But the rains now just won't stop. <sigh>

 

[Thunderbrd]

We have had tech name changes before. Iirc raxo did some awhile back. In any case imho the original tech names are and were superior to those that got changed. I'm not in favor of changing any of these tech's name you have brought up at the behest of others T-brd.

Been rather busy last several weeks so I did not see this topic till now. Trying to get a greenhouse built, Garden tilled and to start planting. But the rains now just won't stop. <sigh>

We've been doing some planting as well but it all seems to die as soon as we get it into the ground so far - not sure if its the winds or the intense vegas sun, overwatering, underwatering or whatnot.

Thanks for commenting anyhow.

 

[raxo2222]

We have had tech name changes before. Iirc raxo did some awhile back. In any case imho the original tech names are and were superior to those that got changed. I'm not in favor of changing any of these tech's name you have brought up at the behest of others T-brd.

Been rather busy last several weeks so I did not see this topic till now. Trying to get a greenhouse built, Garden tilled and to start planting. But the rains now just won't stop. <sigh>

Kation and few others renamed some techs too.

I remember few things I renamed like Hunting Tactics to Hunting for example.

 

[MattCA]

Been rather busy last several weeks so I did not see this topic till now. Trying to get a greenhouse built, Garden tilled and to start planting. But the rains now just won't stop. <sigh>

Growing (the legal amount of) weed is a new hobby of mine.
It's usually a bit too early to have plants outside, but the weather looks very nice for the next month.

We've been doing some planting as well but it all seems to die as soon as we get it into the ground so far - not sure if its the winds

I have damaged plants from a fan blowing too strong. Leaves turned brown and dried up at the tips.

or the intense vegas sun

I've cooked some plants a bit. Leaves closest to the light shriveled up.

overwatering

Leaves got a bit bloated.

underwatering

Plant wilts. Happens all the time to my plants. They recover fast when you give them water.

or whatnot

I gotta add ph down to the tap water or leaves will turn purple.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Item #3: Prehistoric Tech Renames as a Whole?

OK, Item #2 seems not only a foregone conclusion in the vote before we even hold one but it also seems to have resolved the questions of:
Chopping was suggested to be changed to 'Stone Axe Heads'
Piercing was suggested to be changed to 'Stone Awls'
Sewing was suggested to be changed to 'Stone Needles'
and Carving was suggested to be changed to 'Stone Knives'

Now, it is important to note that Stone Knives in particular is a better representation for the reason that tech will be unlocking the Stone Knifemen unit that's to be introduced, but my perception of the commentary that we're getting suggests that for the most part, nobody cares enough to have any issue with tech names at all. To the point that if Stone Knifemen were introduced at Adhesives that'd pretty much be fine as long as we don't change the naming of what we have, at least in the prehistoric, that the idea of even considering the prehistoric names is more of a slog than its even worth.

If I'm wrong I'm happy to have someone correct the record, but that's the impression I'm getting.

I would imagine that the idea of a unit called Stone Knifemen itself would be a more compelling realm for debate and discussion in itself, but I've made up my mind that this is how we'll begin the sword line earlier than we have previously seen.

This also puts to rest the suggestion of Composite Tools being changed to Hafted Tools
Simple Wood Working over to Stick Working (since the wood working naming conventions really struck the original suggester as being extremely vague in what they were representing)
They had also suggested Wood Working change to Wood Crafting

Also puts down the discussion on Conduct, where Codes of Conduct was suggested as an alternative given how many ways the word 'conduct' could be taken and being a legal tech, 'codes of' would help it stand out more as that.

I'm really not sure why Barter was suggested to be changed to Gift Economy, perhaps because Barter was considered a bit of a Human default that was taking place far earlier (Crows will trade for trinkets).

This conversation did bring up if Hunting and Fishing should get some improved specificity or if we're good to say, here's where what you think of when you think of these things was largely invented, lines, nets, hiding, stalking, baiting and just all around extreme rounding off of the strategies we've been exploring so far.

Before I move on, I'll just open up all of these and see if anyone thinks we should actually consider any of them - if the reasons given are compelling enough to consider any of these factors deeper or if we should just leave ALL of them alone completely. I was exploring previously to see if it would help us to be ultra focused on one small suggest at a time, but it seems we might be better off trying to take it all as a whole for the sake of discussion and if I find that we get any larger points of disagreement emerging then maybe we can create a poll on THAT.


Speaking of polling, I've decided that we'll keep discussions in one unending thread, this one, and we can poll in another quick thread that can be deleted when the poll is done if we do need to poll on anything.

 

[Sakura Matou]

Barter should certainly stay the same, Gift Economy sounds terrible...

Composite Tools certainly could be changed to Hafted tools. So that one is certainly ok in my book!

Codes of Conduct is also a better sounding name for the tech then Conduct.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Composite Tools certainly could be changed to Hafted tools. So that one is certainly ok in my book!

Codes of Conduct is also a better sounding name for the tech then Conduct.

OK, so far we can put these to vote before we totally close the book on the Prehistoric names. (I agree with you on all three points as well.)

 

[Maltazard]

Gift economy reminds me of some very modern theories on social behaviour that have been retroactively applied to human history, but that have very little to do with actual barter. Them anthropologists can't help themselves from standing out sadly. It would take place well after sedentary lifestyle anyway, and also imply a hierarchy, complex social relations, absolutely nothing to do with prehistoric life. This one is simply wrong imo. Barter is a much broader, inclusive term that certainly covers prehistoric dynamics better - gift economies were at best a regional phenomenon and, as the name implies, were based on social obligations derived from status, not exchange of basic goods.

So one of the constants of prehistoric era are the obsidian units. Leaving aside the issue that obsidian is in fact a stone... Stating for each tech that it uses stone seems redundant and restrictive beyond what's necessary, again imo. Are we going to have hardwood weapons too?

I don't really mind code of conduct but I think any lawyer would disagree on the notion. Codification only started after writing. What you have before that is socialization into expected behaviours, or conducts, but they're not really codified in the modern sense of the term. At the end of the day though, this is pedantic, but I feel not wrong either way.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Barter should certainly stay the same, Gift Economy sounds terrible...

Composite Tools certainly could be changed to Hafted tools. So that one is certainly ok in my book!

Codes of Conduct is also a better sounding name for the tech then Conduct.

I agree about Barter. No change needed.

If composite tools is changed to hafted tools then spear making and axe making are redundant techs and should therefore be removed. So spearman, mace and axe would be exposed under the tech Hafted Tools.
And taking it even further, even the Atl-atl could be exposed there as well. Thus removing the need for the Atl-Atl tech because it too would be redundant. Spear, axe , mace, and atl-atl; none of these require glue/Adhesives for them to be made. Cordage from weaving would make all these possible long before Adhesives was discovered.

And as Maltazard pointed out Preh Era is before writing and Conduct is more appropriate than Code of conduct. But the passing down of ways of behavior, ie how to act with other people, could also come under Rituals as Moral Behaviors. Thus eliminating the need to have a separate Tech for Conduct. But if Conduct must stay (for whatever reason), then I would favor Moral Behavior over Conduct or Code of Conduct.