I really liked GalCiv2 except for one critical part of the whole experience. Tech tree on it was boring and pointless. Which was annoying since tech is my favourite aspect on any game in this genre. I seriously hope GC3 improves on this aspect. And I'm not just talking about lots of unique tech on races.
Multiple requirements, optional requirements.. Tech tree needs to be more complex. Or the very least it should support modding in tech tree that is more interesting and provides more options for advancement than just next in the endless straight line. Some techs should depend on more than one other tech possibly from other branches and some techs could have optional dependencies that are not required but could reduce research cost if acquired.
Other than that, I'm really exited on GalCiv3.
Agreed. While in GalCiv 2 one could have multiple technologies come from the same prerequisite tech, one could not have multiple prerequisite technologies lead to one or more techs. I would also like to see technology levels where the benefit derived and the cost are defined by formulas calculated from whatever tech level one happens to be researching, it would save having to define hundreds of them by hand to achieve the same effect like in GalCiv 2, which would allow for infinite research, like the end technologies in Fallen Enchantress.
You could, as long as you edited the tech tree via something other than the provide Tech Editor, like Notepad++. It looked horrible, because the UI wasn't designed for this, but it worked. I tested this during the development of my mod.
Interesting, it would still be nice if it was officially supported though instead of having to do it through a workaround.
One of the things you would have to do though is make sure the AI isn't hampered by the tech tree arrangement. What is convenient and logical for humans isn't necessarily so for the AI.
As long as they keep the separate tech trees for different races, I'll be happy (though, it'd be nice to see them be even more different - or, should I say alien)
I think, that's the plan, based on what the Features list says:
Researching TechnologyEach race has their own technology tree that provides unique ship equipment, planetary improvements, weapons, defenses, terraforming, sensors, and more.
Well, yeah, that's what it says now. You've obviously never worked in software development and had to present a pre-alpha feature list.
Seriously, though, I was just saying that my needs are few in regards to the tech tree. I just loved that feature, and i won't complain as long as I have that. Everything else is gravy.
The problem for any tech tree design, regardless of complexity / size, is that it will very quickly come down to:
Strategy A requires beeline for techs X, Y & Z for optimal effectiveness
Strategy B requires beeline for techs P, Q & Z for optimal effectiveness etc, etc
Variation is then thrown out of the window as, especially in multiplayer, anything less than optimal equals defeat (or lower score in single player). Ideally, some form of undirected research mechanic would improve this situation - but at the same time would likely introduce too much of a luck element that would cause uproar. It is a damned if they do, damned if they don't scenario. Will be interesting to see what they come up with.
Pretty much it in a nutshell. The only thing I can think of is something like the blueprinting system in Warring Factions that would give a little bit of both, directed research with some luck thrown in, but not so much that it breaks everything.
I quite enjoyed the research mechanic in MOO2 where you had to choose a tech making you, consequently, lose others.
I wouldn't make it so drastic with galciv3, yet I would love to see them implement something of the sort. Perhaps making a few branches as race specialties once said branches are chosen.
Other research could be chosen, yet may be slower as a result of another already researched and delved into. Having the race making discoveries geared from that route more easily, perhaps.
If anyone's old enough (not in physical age, but in gamer age ) to remember how GCI's tech tree worked, I actually quite preferred that. As I recall (and I could be mistaken, as I never played it very much), there were multiple branches, but more than one branch would lead to a given end result. So one wouldn't necessarily need to research an exact A, B, C techs to reach tech Z-one could research the L, M, N techs instead and still unlock the same tech. The interesting thing here of course is not just multiple paths to the same end result, but that the possible end results are wider in variation-one path to unlock a tech can give you easier access to another tech, while other paths to the same tech can give you easier access to other techs entirely.
If I am in fact misremembering GCI, that's still how I'd prefer for things to work. It is more complicated, though.
Heretic!
Never played that. Only Hexen 2.
Aw crap...here we go again.
No, he has a very good point. A sandbox mode is an essential part of any 4X game, and has been the mainstay of many. Invariably it has come down to player communities to instigate any form of competitive play.
Stardock allowed limited competitive elements for GC1 & 2 through the Metaverse. For me that was one of the main factors that kept me playing those games far longer than any other 4X game I have ever played - but I fully support that some people just want to play for fun with no competitive aspect at all.
Now they have said multiplayer will be a launch feature of GC3, they have created a problem for themselves in that they now have to keep different sets of players with different mindsets happy with their design decisions. Tech tree is going to be one of those areas that I suspect will see much discussion (with a fair sprinkling of trolling and flaming thrown in for good measure). Maybe not as much as tactical combat though...
The main problem with tech trees is their rarely balanced and never want to commit to points in time relative to the number of game turns. There should be obvious plateaus where a player can easily say to themselves, ok now I want to switch focus off research.
If you get engines 1 and engines 2 is so close as to make building anything with engines 1 fairly pointless then engines 1 is a pointless tech and engines 2 should cost more and be renamed engines 1. Its usually because the scaling of points needed to get the tech factors in more with map size and other setup options as opposed to primarily being concerned with the pace of getting techs.
The other major pitfall is late game techs. Insanely good techs that last for 5 turns until the game ends are also pointless especially ones that introduce a new mechanic or radically change an existing one. Late game techs should mark the start of the end game not the middle or end. Time to deploy the mechanic introduced with the tech should be factored in heavily to the balance.
I like really ramping up techs fast. Even on harder difficulties, I could keep ahead of the AI on GC2 ..... or if not, at least counter their weapon and defense choices.
4x tech research has a serious flaw in my opinion. It always assumes that technological research is somehow centrally planned. There are vast private industries, presumably, in the GalCiv universe. I'm sure they're all researching their own stuff for commercial purposes. I'd love to see the private sector added to 4x games as the market is vastly larger than what is planned centrally by a government.
In that idealized utopia of mine, private enterprise would make research and tech breakthroughs that aren't visible or 'selectable' by the user on the tech tree. They could be randomized to some degree so they're not always the same. Imagine a pool of thousands of techs that are gradually and randomly selected for 'discovery' via private sector companies over the course of the game. Maybe human companies are weighted for propulsion tech, etc.
Actually while I'm at it, why not a whole sub component of the game that is this vast private sector that isn't 100% directly controllable by the user but can be influenced by policies, techs, diplomatic actions, etc. Companies and industries could come and go over the course of the game. Government types would also influence how/whether the private market worked. It'd add flavor and a certain uncontrollable element that would enhance replay value.
I'm hoping for (but not expecting) a complex tech tree, where you can add conditions like:
As I envision it, first you need to discover that a tech is possible. This has separate requirements: it's possible to invent lasers and perfect the "laser cannons" tech from them - and simply never realize that holograms are possible, even though you have all the requirements to build the tech. (This kind of knowledge is fairly easy to steal with a spy, or discover by chance if you interact a lot with a race.)
Discovery done, you need to research it. You know roughly what the requirements are. For example, you might need a huge particle accelerator, and so you have the option to invade Earth for a week - to make use of their CERN planetary installation - or to buddy up to the Terrans so you can rent lab-time there, or to give them the discovery and steal it from them once they've researched it.
Then, you make use of it - which is not guaranteed to work. If the Torians have researched Human Super-viagra, well it's not going to do THEM any good - but the Terrans will most assuredly pay big bucks for it.
Finally, there may be side-effects, bonuses and follow-up research. Maybe the Drengin turn out to be fatally allergic to the Super-viagra, and you can use it to poison their water supply during an invasion...
I think these kinds of things could really add some strategic aspects to the research part of the game. Of course, the REALLY difficult obstacles should be reserved for the very coolest, game-changing tech...
The problems with tech is often why I dearly enjoy playing the long games. Epic time frames and such.
Makes much of the research more meaningful.
agree there needs to be a more complex tech tree. My 2 cents is that it never made sense that you were stuck in some linear developmental path. You could have 50 labs on 10 planets, but for some reason they were all working on the same tech? I would like to be able to allocate my tech spending to multiple different technologies for research at once.
Why can't I develop shield technology at the same time that I research new farming techniques? Are the physicists and horticultural scientists job sharing or something?
This is going back a long long time, to a very crude but enjoyable game that was Star Trek birth of the federation. You only had six tech areas to research and you split your research points between them. Now I know stardock can do something a hell of a lot better than that with a 64bit game!
obviously you will have to make a call on what you research and how you allocate your resources. The more fields you work on at once, the longer it will take to research each tech, and in times of war you have the option of prioritising your military techs by shifting all resource allocations to weapons or defences etc
Allocating research points would be easy to implement. Might be problematical game-wise. I can easily see the AI wanting to screw up, hard, every which way from Sunday.
The points allocation idea is already in a game called Horizon, which is in beta right now, I cannot be sure how well the AI really uses the system. The idea of a private industry that cannot be controlled is an interesting idea, especially the way ctiberus describes it, since a similar system in Distant Worlds adds an interesting element to the game as far the economic aspect is concerned.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
