Although I could just be tardy, I'm actually waiting to get my hands on a copy of Victoria, the new release in the Europa Universalis 2 series, so I can se how they did their tech tree. We've passed some basic stuff about it and the next big question we'll have is the tech tree, so hopefully in a couple days I'll have digested it enough to phrase it in a form that is organized enough to be trampled on by the masses as much as our tech tree is likely to be.
enjoying his last day or two of peace,
Aquitaine
So where are the new design threads!?
Moderator: Oberlus
So where are the new design threads!?
Surprise and Terror! I am greeted by the smooth and hostile face of our old enemy, the Hootmans! No... the Huge-glands, no, I remember, the Hunams!
This prompted me to explain how we will be doing the tech tree.
For everyone who has a pet 'super giga-laser' description saved up their sleeve, hold on to it. We are going to map out the tech tree in terms of requirements (or triggers, if we want to start using EU2 'event' engine speak) and simply what the tech does; we are not going to come up with art assets or sci-fi descriptions until much later, because:
1) we can only do a piece of the tech tree at a time (can't do ship tech until we have, like, real ships)
2) everybody, and I mean everybody, is going to think they have the best tech submissions, where the fact is that I am only interested in the boring half of the submission, in balancing the tree against itself. No eye candy and no fancy write-ups.
3) this will be an on-going process all the way until v1.0. For v0.3 we are going to come up with overall categories (and even those are a little more likely to change in the future than most things we pass).
and so, just to clarify, it is the system that Victoria uses that may interest me, not inventing bolt-action rifles.
-Aquitaine
For everyone who has a pet 'super giga-laser' description saved up their sleeve, hold on to it. We are going to map out the tech tree in terms of requirements (or triggers, if we want to start using EU2 'event' engine speak) and simply what the tech does; we are not going to come up with art assets or sci-fi descriptions until much later, because:
1) we can only do a piece of the tech tree at a time (can't do ship tech until we have, like, real ships)
2) everybody, and I mean everybody, is going to think they have the best tech submissions, where the fact is that I am only interested in the boring half of the submission, in balancing the tree against itself. No eye candy and no fancy write-ups.
3) this will be an on-going process all the way until v1.0. For v0.3 we are going to come up with overall categories (and even those are a little more likely to change in the future than most things we pass).
and so, just to clarify, it is the system that Victoria uses that may interest me, not inventing bolt-action rifles.
-Aquitaine
Surprise and Terror! I am greeted by the smooth and hostile face of our old enemy, the Hootmans! No... the Huge-glands, no, I remember, the Hunams!
It's not the EU2 tech system I'm interested in -- it's the event engine.
EU2 has a very highly customizable scripting system that drives events, which are basically the core of the game; for example, if you're England, you have an event that is 'King Henry V dies' which then removes your military leader 'Henry V.' France has a bunch of events related to Joan of Arc which affect morale and army size. Events can affect economy, diplomacy, whatever you like -- it's basically a framework for people to write their own stuff, a mini-language that lets you set conditions on things like 'if it's after 1530 and before 1622 and such and such monarch is in power and Burgandy is not at war with Japan then do X.'
Technology can be tied into this events. The Victoria engine is closer to HoI's (which is the current semi-model for ours) but has a few significant differences; you pick a single tech to research, and you get it, and it gives you things, and then over the next several years, it triggers additional inventions that you don't have to do anything for; it's sort of like saying 'instead of having a tech that gives you X bonuses as soon as you get it, we'll have a tech that gives you X-1 bonuses when you get it, and then Y bonus after a few turns, and then Z bonus a few turns later.'
Now, EU2, HoI, and Victoria are all real-time (somewhat) rather than turn-based, so it's not identical. Just more food for thought. I will copy and paste this into a design thread soon when I get time to figure out how I want to phrase the opening shot in the tech tree war. er...discussion.
-Aq
EU2 has a very highly customizable scripting system that drives events, which are basically the core of the game; for example, if you're England, you have an event that is 'King Henry V dies' which then removes your military leader 'Henry V.' France has a bunch of events related to Joan of Arc which affect morale and army size. Events can affect economy, diplomacy, whatever you like -- it's basically a framework for people to write their own stuff, a mini-language that lets you set conditions on things like 'if it's after 1530 and before 1622 and such and such monarch is in power and Burgandy is not at war with Japan then do X.'
Technology can be tied into this events. The Victoria engine is closer to HoI's (which is the current semi-model for ours) but has a few significant differences; you pick a single tech to research, and you get it, and it gives you things, and then over the next several years, it triggers additional inventions that you don't have to do anything for; it's sort of like saying 'instead of having a tech that gives you X bonuses as soon as you get it, we'll have a tech that gives you X-1 bonuses when you get it, and then Y bonus after a few turns, and then Z bonus a few turns later.'
Now, EU2, HoI, and Victoria are all real-time (somewhat) rather than turn-based, so it's not identical. Just more food for thought. I will copy and paste this into a design thread soon when I get time to figure out how I want to phrase the opening shot in the tech tree war. er...discussion.
-Aq
Surprise and Terror! I am greeted by the smooth and hostile face of our old enemy, the Hootmans! No... the Huge-glands, no, I remember, the Hunams!
Here are some thoughts on approaching the tech tree.
1. Figure out the crucial parameters and mechanics so every player know exactly what happens when he researched a tech and how a "giga-laser" fits in FO. He should be able to double check with his calculator instead of being left out like in moo3. Some simple mechanics is good. A list of parameters will be very helpful; so far we got food, industry, mineral, reserach, EP, starlanes and pop.
2. Organize the tech tree. So far, cramming 100+ techs into theory, applied, refined (TAR) is too much. I suggest to sub-divide or use a grid where columns represent TAR and rows divides TAR into biology, physics...blah blah and how each branch relates to the parameters. Alternatively, we can plot out the entire tree and the players scrolls along the tree to figure where he is and what other techs are avaliable. There are other ideas but they aren't surfacing in my mind right now.
3. Balance the tech tree against other macro-decisions and rest of the game. Before balancing the tree among its branches and TAR, we should first figure out how exactly research should influence the game. With a rough math model, we can be objective about each tech, and more importantly, the whole tech tree or branches vs. rest of the game. Some questions we need to ask are like recursive tree so techs don't stop at 50; linear or exp or parabolic benefit:cost ratio; sould all techs appear and be available for every race or are we going to use some probability; aq's event trigger; butter goose principle...
Other crucial concepts are whether or not buildings will be used for our econ model (did we passed this?). how much should techs influences causus belli and the diplomatic AI mechanics. How big of an advantage should every 10 levels of tech impact military, ship combat, defenses. Should we balance these "macros" first or maybe make them dynamic or secondary features.
4. Brainstorm each tech
5. Descriptions and effects after all above have passed.
1. Figure out the crucial parameters and mechanics so every player know exactly what happens when he researched a tech and how a "giga-laser" fits in FO. He should be able to double check with his calculator instead of being left out like in moo3. Some simple mechanics is good. A list of parameters will be very helpful; so far we got food, industry, mineral, reserach, EP, starlanes and pop.
2. Organize the tech tree. So far, cramming 100+ techs into theory, applied, refined (TAR) is too much. I suggest to sub-divide or use a grid where columns represent TAR and rows divides TAR into biology, physics...blah blah and how each branch relates to the parameters. Alternatively, we can plot out the entire tree and the players scrolls along the tree to figure where he is and what other techs are avaliable. There are other ideas but they aren't surfacing in my mind right now.
3. Balance the tech tree against other macro-decisions and rest of the game. Before balancing the tree among its branches and TAR, we should first figure out how exactly research should influence the game. With a rough math model, we can be objective about each tech, and more importantly, the whole tech tree or branches vs. rest of the game. Some questions we need to ask are like recursive tree so techs don't stop at 50; linear or exp or parabolic benefit:cost ratio; sould all techs appear and be available for every race or are we going to use some probability; aq's event trigger; butter goose principle...
Other crucial concepts are whether or not buildings will be used for our econ model (did we passed this?). how much should techs influences causus belli and the diplomatic AI mechanics. How big of an advantage should every 10 levels of tech impact military, ship combat, defenses. Should we balance these "macros" first or maybe make them dynamic or secondary features.
4. Brainstorm each tech
5. Descriptions and effects after all above have passed.
