What do you mean by 'european religious infrastructure'? I thought that a church hierarchy like Europe's would violate basic Oriental ideas about religion. And if you are talking about monasteries or cathedrals, then my tech model would not disallow that. If the Oriental player heard about how helpful the Benedictine monasteries are, that player could copy the idea. But their monasteries would end up having Oriental architecture instead of European. The function would not change, but the appearance would change to fit in better.
---
I know i want some techs to be relatively easy for any culture to learn, but others i think certain types of cultures just should have a hard time coping with learning, but not have it impossible.
---
How can you make this kind of judgement? Suppose that you set Vikings or Mongols to be warlike and make it hard for them to learn. You have then said that these races of people are violent and stupid. You are basically saying that no matter what happens, no matter how the people change over thousands of years, they will always be inept at science.

Besides, this is not accurate anyway. The Vikings were warlike because they faced intense population pressures. Once they settled down in their new lands, they bacame farmers and merchants and were as peaceful as anyone in the region. It seems that your tech model would make it very hard for a player to change like this. You are leading the player down a path that is based on a stereotype, and you are saying that a group of people do not have the ability to change.
---
That is so that u have to make a choice when u start as to what type of culture u want because that will ultimatly shape your entire society.
---
I just don't think that it is accurate or proper for the entire civ to be locked into a certain mindset for thousands of years. Anyone looking at Europe around 1200 AD would say, "These people are stupid and warlike. They will never be able to learn science well." Yet 600 years later Europe had the most advanced technology on the planet while science and art were advancing rapidly. Your method would not allow a group of people to change like that.

My method would say that all people are equal, but they do things in different ways. Anyone has an equal chance of doing something, but they might do it in a different way.

1) By Culture we're not talking exclusively about 'high culture', rather its the kind of culutre that cultural anthropologists study. The whole big thing. Desire for investment in education, what the language is (for how well you communicate with other civs), whether soldiering is one of the highest callings or one of the lowest...

I strongly believe the Culture in Clash Should influence tech. It will IMO make for a richer environment and more complicated and nuanced strategy as LGJ said. You Will Not be able to play the same cookie-cutter strategy every time. Even if you pick the same culture, the cultures around you will be different, and they will affect your tech through diffusion of ideas differently.

LGJ Quote #2:
There are just some things FE the british wouldn't be able to do as well as the chinese and vise versa.

LGJ Quote #3:
People can and do change...

LGJ Quote #4:
Not only that, but the mindset of the people was changed. Then after the occupation, it was changed again in only 1, count it, 1, gerneration.
---
I totally agree with Quotes 3 and 4. Cultural abilities are not inherent. People can change and all people have the ability to change to something new.

Yet you also keep saying that a culture has the same adavantages and disadvantages for thoudands of years, as evidenced by Quotes 1 and 2. How do you know that one generatiion from now the British mindset and culture will not be exactly like the Chinese? Then there might be no difference between the abilities of the two people.

You also said that the Vikings were better at seafaring. This is true. But WHY are they better at seafaring? Is it genetic? Or is it because they have experience with sea travel? Suppose the Vikings invaded inland Europe and settled down. Now suppose that someone else invaded their original homeland. The Vikings have now lost contact with the ocean. Will they still be better at developing seafaring technologies?

The cultural abilities model seems to say "Viking=Sea Tech +X%." This means that they would still develop such technologies faster even if they had no way of reaching the ocean. The abilities of a civilization should depend on where they live and what situation they have been facing.

I am saying that all people have the ability to do all things equally. They will have cultural advantages/disadvantages, but those should be based on geography and game history, not an arbitrary definition.

I personally would like to start with a 'blank slate' and have my people not have any attribute that affects game mechanics. But I understand that some people want to start with a different culture. However, the people should have the ability to change so that they can become anything.
---
And how's that? Ur model could have the very same flaws only in differnt way.
---
My model simply says that if the people decide to do something, they do it. The Europeans simply start to climb the tech tree. Their history is not held against them.

I agree entirely with Glak. My original idea was all technologies are the same, but certain ideas given a different covering to add flavor.

Sorry, nearly simultaneous post, missed yours the last time around.

Agree with you and Richard that we don't want weird metaphysical shit, like Vikings = magical advantage to seafaring. The kind of thing I'm talking about is:

Your culture has high regard for merchants

Therefore your people are more interested than usual in commercial and transportation technolgies

Lets say the barbarians come over the hill and your civ is mostly sacked because the merchants (say they are politically powerful) were too busy making money to protect them. Your civ's culture might evolve in the direction of higher military status and lower social status and political for the merchants. This would have further ramifications on tech. The player could try and stop this evolution, or push it by spending money and (making an attempt at) distributing political power differently.

Richard: Kinda thought you were using that definition. I prefer the more inclusive one.

But a few Comments:

We have agreed on a compromise. It is in the "Characters 2" thread. The player will control basic technologies and industrial processes, but a large proportion of specific ideas are supplied by inventor or philosopher characters.

In response to Comments:
1) I should have thought that statement through more carefully. You are right.

2) I will post a comprehensive Ideas model proposal sometime soon. I am in the middle of reviewing the existing models so my idea will fit in better.

3) This is already modeled. In ancient times this technology spreading is very rapid, but in modern times things are more complex and you have to steal the blueprints.

Mark: Yea those sound fine. land and water transportation for basic also maybe. And animal riding (with breeding maybe as a soft tech) and riverboats. That should cover the basics for everything...wait copper working as a inital tech (if copper's available). This will act as a soft tech for iron working.

-------
Personally, I think only the 60 or so most crucial achievements of humanity should be regular techs. And All the regular techs should allow you to Build or Do something Really new.
------
I also think 60 might be cutting it a little 2 low, maybe 80 and 20 future techs for a nice even 100. Not all but 90%. some techs should just lead to more techs like the Theory of Evolution. It might improve things, but not ness allow for new items/cultures/major changes.

-----
Basic techs should also have some techs embedded in them IMO. This would allow for some advances that are pretty much on the standard track to be covered, without them being a whole separate entry. This would also add some description to the otherwise bland basic techs.
-----
Almpst all of the techs have basic techs at certain percentages if that's what u mean, otherwise i don't get u.

-----
A basic tech at the 0% level is essentially neolithic technology. 100% is the modern level. The apogee of ancient civilizations might be something like 20%. Technology past modern level just goes past 100%.
-----
This is true for about 80-90% of them. Those that aren't well are fairly modern and we'll decide what percentage for them is equal to modern day level. As far as i can recall its only 3-4: Electronics, Air Transportaion, Space Transportain and if not there i'm wanting to add computers. But that's it unless we get into future basic techs (cybernetics FE), but I'll wait on that.

-----
Taking as a premise that we want things to be fairly even throughout history, what can we say?
-----
I think this is generally true, though in fits and starts. Also though thing have changed in the last 2 centuries. In the 19th century we discovered a lot more than in the previous few centuries and in the later half of this century alone we've done more than pretty much since the dawn of civ (well maybe not that far).

-----
Temporary conclusions (2 will be changed later)
1) tech points earned per turn grow by about a factor of 1000 over the game
2) for every 5% increase in basic tech there is a doubling in the cost
(this may need to change as we determine how many prerequisites each basic tech has, and what it's penalty is)
-----
Actually i was planning on having each with its own set cost and multiplier per % point since some techs are easier to advance in than others. All would start out at say 5, but from there they'd increase at differnt rate's exponetially per percentage point (min 1).

Finnaly after replying i thought of this:

First off this is related a lot with culture as well as technology but since i'm here and it does have to do with technology i'm posting it now b4 i forget (which already happened once)

Second I don't know if this could even poss be implimented, but its a cool though anyway that i thought i'd share.

Now for the idea:

Ok, of all the major advances throughout history, the greatest is agriciculutre (note i am saying history, not prehistory in which case it would be fire). Anyway this is because it reshaped the whole way humans were up to that point. It impacted religion, migration (or the new way of the lack of it), hunting (or the new way of less people doing it), trade, devolopement of large comunities and cities, governments, need for transportation, etc. Basically nothing has so impacted our life since then, until a few years ago (or rather this invention will, according to historians).

What is this? Well i can guarantee u've all heard of it. Its the computer.

>
-----
Basic techs should also have some techs embedded in them IMO. This would allow for
some advances that are pretty much on the standard track to be covered, without them
being a whole separate entry. This would also add some description to the otherwise
bland basic techs.
-----
Almpst all of the techs have basic techs at certain percentages if that's what u mean,
otherwise i don't get u.
>

What I meant was that you would get certain technologies automatically when particular basic techs get to a certain level. These "embedded" technologies might allow you to build new things just like single tech advancements. An example might be that Civil Engineering 15% would mean you've achieved the technology for Aqueducts. no other techs would be required, once you get to 15% you can build them. It would IMO add some excitement to the basic techs, and give us a place to put some techs that aren't "first string".

>
Actually i was planning on having each with its own set cost and multiplier per % point
since some techs are easier to advance in than others. All would start out at say 5, but from there they'd increase at differnt rate's exponetially per percentage point (min 1)
>
Sounds Good. I think we're just dealing with first shots at it anyway, because there's a tremendous amount we'll need to do for play balancing.

But it is true that computers allow completely new ways of doing things. To simulate the contstant improvement of computers, I think it should be a Basic Tech that rises in percentage. Then there are other techs like Networking that require Computers X%. These techs would have a huge impact on society.

For example, I would guess that there are maybe 50 people on Earth that are really interested in making a good game that models human history and lets a player control a civilization and compete with a good AI and other people. If the Internet didn't exist, a Project like Clash would never be possible.

The social model will have to see a change in the modern era as communities develop around almost every concievable idea.

Anyway if u get right down to it, all things were possible because of language.

----
What I meant was that you would get certain technologies automatically when particular basic techs get to a certain level. These "embedded" technologies might allow you to build new things just like single tech advancements. An example might be that Civil Engineering 15% would mean you've achieved the technology for Aqueducts. no other techs would be required, once you get to 15% you can build them. It would IMO add some excitement to the basic techs, and give us a place to put some techs that aren't "first string".
----
Sounds fine. I don't know about that particular tech. I think we should also limit these though.

----
Another very important innovation was the telephone, something that civ 2 does not even include. The telephone revolutionized society in many of the the same ways that computers will. The same is true for radio and television.
----
Yea the telephone was quite inportant, but didn't change the world in quite the same impact. Radio and TV were, but again not as much. I guess this is one way to figure out what techs were most important in civilization mark

----
PS I think it would be fun to sneak an 'Easter Egg' into Clash. If you get a Really high score and have a thriving computerized society, you get a message saying that a group of people has created a game called, "Clash of Civilizations."
----
Yea i would have liked to one myself having to do why i use this nickname. I guess it would be the ultimate tech of "interdimentional travel" since well...just check out "El Hazard: The Wanderers" on the web. Its an anime and i'm the main villian. hehe

Physical Power & Speed: A man is limited in his physical accomplishments by the strength of his body. You can do more with groups, but it's expensive and time-consuming. Harness an animal (horse/ox) and one man can do far more work (and travel faster). You can gain some improvements by using more animals, but the gains level off pretty quickly (ie you can't plow twice as much land with two horses and your chariot won't go twice as fast, etc). I'm generalizing, so bear with me. The Industrial Revolution was a major step forward, because 1) machines gave us the first power & speed boost since the domestication of animals and 2) you COULD achieve dramatic improvements in power and speed by making better machines. Technology was better than biology, in that respect.

Information: Mankind has progressed in a similar fashion in this area. From oral we soon proceeded to written, and languished there for a time. Information transmission was closely linked to physical speed. Inventions such as a series of hilltop beacons and carrier pigeons could improve upon the man/horse limitation, but they never entered the mainstream. The printing press was a major storage advance because we could duplicate information much faster, but it didn't address the speed problem. Not until the telegraph was information liberated from the physical transmission prison. To a large extent, the telephone, radio, and tv were simply improvements upon that principle. Although important from a storage perspective, the computer was hailed largely because of it's information manipulation capabilities. The Internet features it all: Speed, storage, and manipulation.

Genetics: From a Clash standpoint, this one is just too recent to have much impact. But it is a NEW revolution, albeit one with elements of both the physical and the informational.

But there's more. Until now, it's always been necessary to have a human at the controls. Whether running the machines or working the phones. The incredible miracle that lies ahead will come from the merging of the information and industrial revolutions. Machines operated by computers. Designed by them. No longer subject to the physical or informational limitations of the human operator or user. Think of it. The two fundamental human revolutions combined, for the first time. And the Genetic one will undoubtedly merge in the very near future. As we begin to dip our toes in this new ocean, we can barely conceive of all that is to come.

Also,on genetics, there has been much more done than u think and it will affect clash. Also i may impliment another tech after neural grafting (if u seen my tech model u know what i'm talking about somewhat). I would be bioelectronics. This is where part of the "electronics" and such are intrigrated with biomaterial more a "harmonious" existance, not just grafted on, but an itertwined relationship like our neural pathways react with the rest of our body.

LGJ, I know you're all for it, but I personally think anything beyond what is available now should only be available when The Player desires for that option to be selected. So although the tech tree Should accommodate going into the near future... IMO Many players will want it pruned.

One more shot at a Unified Basic Tech scale...

That is the same scale used for ancient "modern" basic techs. Perhaps it's irrational, but I'd like to have the same zero-100% + scale for All the basic techs. So electronics might Start at 65%, but otherwise would be on the same scale as Architecture which started at 0%. One reason I'd like to do this is then a player's tech level could be handled graphically easily on the zero-100% scale. If everything were "equally" advanced you'd see a flat line across all techs. A bulge in an area would allow immediate visual recognition (say if basic techs are color coded) of where a competitor is ahead. Also, if everything is on the same scale, an Overall tech level can be easily expressed. Although the percent scale itself is un-exciting, and we should probably think of something better.

First off i still think we should have future techs in there, however we can see about an on/off switch. The reason i want them is because i don't want to get to the point where i have tons of research in my basic techs and am not really producing anything new because it doesn't seem natural. Also take the case where my society decides to become extremely advanced in agriculture. So if i've gone above and beyond say what's been discovered in our own history what's next? I think the player should have more breakthrus because he might not want to switch to something else (ie it could be for economic reasons). Anyway like i said b4 we can see about and on/off switch, just so long as its in there i'll prob be happy.

An on/off switch for the near-future is what I meant And perhaps another switch for far-future techs...

Electronics starts at 0% or 65% question:

"standards for each era" problem is Real, but is No different regardless of which alternative you pick, so I don't get your argument...

-----
Electronics starts at 0% or 65% question:

"standards for each era" problem is Real, but is No different regardless of which alternative you pick, so I don't get your argument...
-----
Well in my original proposal 100% would be double eff. as what 0% would be, the latter being just the very basics of what is ness for that tech.

The only problem I see with this is that (somewhat paradoxically) the sooner you discover something, the more work you have to do to improve it -- although this problem may not in practice exist due to two compensating effects
1) If you have a number of prereqs, research is cheap, and you should rapidly catch up to where you "should" be if you are initially behind. Conversely, if you start out far ahead of where you "should" be, then further research will be nigh impossible until other things catch up.
2) The player that discovers electronics "late" had to advance a lot of basic techs without the benefit of electronics (making it more expensive to do so), whereas the player that discovers electronics early will have to advance electronics seperately from other basic techs, but will be able to make those advances more cheaply.

I think in the end, the benefits from early discovery should outweigh the downside of advancing the basic tech to where it would have been had you discovered it later. (Or at least it is in principle possible that a properly balanced tech web could provide this.)

Every advance cost some money. This price is relative to the level of the advance. FE the map making cost something like 1000$. If the player wants to research the fusion power without map making, gun powder, etc. It is possible but the price will be at time enormous something like 100000$, so practically not worth to research in ancient time. The time being the economy start to produce huge amount of money, so the player can start to pump enough money to research the FE fusion power.
This way we can produce a flexible, but realistic research system without strict research tree climbing.