• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Why Tech tree is so stiff?

Do you agree?


  • Total voters
    40
Might want to bump up your difficulty, if you are going north side while a competitor goes south they can bring the hammer if your not careful
On Emperor difficulty for me that's about the point in the game where I can start getting techs every 1-2 turns thanks to super strong and common great scientists (assuming I took rationalism, freedom, and am able to build Civilized Jewelers). So if a civ declares war I can probably catch up to them before I'm in trouble. Maybe it's different on immortal or deity.
 
While I understand that the tech tree is very stiff and why it has to be so that the AI can function properly, I do think that there're ways to improve progression in more interactive ways.

The problem is that there's so much getting packed inside techs (new buildings/units/improvements/policies....) making it feels like the only "tall" progression a civ can have (as in unlock new tools, in comparison to "wide" progressions like increasing city counts/yield/infrastructure/... aka getting more of what you already unlocked).
Thus, we can take care of the issue by splitting tech rewards and put some of them into other appropriate wide progression elements (number of units/buildings/yield per turn/...). This way there're alternative methods to progress unevenly (or rush) without completely stuck on tech tree progression, and it would also AI friendly if we implement them based on what the AI already doing.
A generic example would be, to unlock some specific buildings/units/improvements half a tier ahead based on your current numbers of buildings/yields/units/... you already have at the moment. Already having 10 composite bowmen plus one of the 2 tech leading to machinery allows you to immediately build xbow at twice the hammer price, or 5 libraries and one of the 2 tech leading to education allows you to build more expensive university, effectively skipping maximum of 4 tech (exact numbers can be adjusted for balance purpose). Similarly unlocking based on yield per turn/improvements/trade routes/... or other wide progression elements would also work, and the AI would automatically get the benefits just by going into that general direction anyway.

However, it should be noted that this is ots of work, not so much on the balance side since there're already trade off within the deal, but more on the thematic side where you'd have to specifically pick which conditions unlock what case by case. More of an alternative progression mod idea for more fun/interactive gameplay than actual congress proposal.
 
While I understand that the tech tree is very stiff and why it has to be so that the AI can function properly, I do think that there're ways to improve progression in more interactive ways.

The problem is that there's so much getting packed inside techs (new buildings/units/improvements/policies....) making it feels like the only "tall" progression a civ can have (as in unlock new tools, in comparison to "wide" progressions like increasing city counts/yield/infrastructure/... aka getting more of what you already unlocked).
Thus, we can take care of the issue by splitting tech rewards and put some of them into other appropriate wide progression elements (number of units/buildings/yield per turn/...). This way there're alternative methods to progress unevenly (or rush) without completely stuck on tech tree progression, and it would also AI friendly if we implement them based on what the AI already doing.
A generic example would be, to unlock some specific buildings/units/improvements half a tier ahead based on your current numbers of buildings/yields/units/... you already have at the moment. Already having 10 composite bowmen plus one of the 2 tech leading to machinery allows you to immediately build xbow at twice the hammer price, or 5 libraries and one of the 2 tech leading to education allows you to build more expensive university, effectively skipping maximum of 4 tech (exact numbers can be adjusted for balance purpose). Similarly unlocking based on yield per turn/improvements/trade routes/... or other wide progression elements would also work, and the AI would automatically get the benefits just by going into that general direction anyway.

However, it should be noted that this is ots of work, not so much on the balance side since there're already trade off within the deal, but more on the thematic side where you'd have to specifically pick which conditions unlock what case by case. More of an alternative progression mod idea for more fun/interactive gameplay than actual congress proposal.
So basically eurekas from civ6, which we have a modmod for that.
 
City-State quests have that sort of element, although they aren't limited to science (or culture) rewards.

This also sounds a lot like making use of the Events system, where certain events or event choices are only available if certain "wide" criteria are met. If that's the way you wanted to take it.

That said, the game already has an "anti-wide" bias in terms of tech progression (from empire size penalties).
 
I've played with Bonus Resources Revealed and it does a pretty good job of helping smooth out decision making in terms of techs, so if you haven't tried it I would recommend it. There's a little bit of yield inflation, so in some ways the early game isn't balanced around it, so take that as you will.
Maybe it would be better if those tier 1 resources were revealed at start, but they give no bonus yields until the corresponding tech is researched.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4CV
Maybe it would be better if those tier 1 resources were revealed at start, but they give no bonus yields until the corresponding tech is researched.
... if only as an option to activate in RAS.
 
It's not possible, nor desirable. Revealed resources block improvements.
 
I think the game would be improved by having small changes. For instance, we wouldn't lose anything by removing "Sailing" as a requirement for "Drama and Poetry", while we'd keep it as a requirement for "Philosophy" since "Philosophy" is a prerequisite for other naval units.

The Ancient era tree works great, and it isn't fully interconnected. If we were to do small rational changes we could improve the other eras so they wouldn't be so ridiculous and boring.
 
Better this tech than vanilla, where you can reach last era in 1500s while not knowing how to make a boat.
 
It's not possible, nor desirable. Revealed resources block improvements.
Well if we are talking tier 1 resources, I mean ultimately your goal is to get those pretty quickly anyway, so its not like you would be out of luck can't build improvements for a long period of time.
 
Better this tech than vanilla, where you can reach last era in 1500s while not knowing how to make a boat.
I think having the option to do this sort of thing would be much better
it's not even a real advantage 99% of the time, since when you get that far out, the early techs that you're skipping cost like 0.2 turns of research, and you can't do whatever that tech unlocks. most of the time you're just gimping yourself
 
I like the dynamic between a peaceful science/culture and a war approach. I usually have to play catch up on certain war technologies to not fall too far behind but in the modern era this deficiency pays off when giant death robots become available on the upper route of the tree. I always find it satisfying to get there and "equal" the playing field a bit.

Overall the games with this mod are highly entertaining and suspenseful which is partly due to the tech tree IMO. It still give the opportunity to push for certain things and getting an advantage but, of course, not as excessive.
 
Top Bottom