Totally different researching model (the more realistic I found)

[Trifna]

I already posted this in a bunch of other threads, but I guess it needed its own thread to be seen and because of its difference to Civ I-II, SMAC and Moo's models. It is, I think, much more realistic, but it is also implicating many factors. Which some could dislike. As it does in reality. So here it is:


I think that the closest to reality is that you can give general orientations, since you pratically never work on ONE thing, since you would lose the potential of scientists that aren't interested to work in this particular field but more in annother. The thing you can do is to give more funds to researchers of a field or annother. Like our governments which give priorities, but wouldn't be idiot enough to lose all these potential scientists that aren't specialized especifically in the general of researches demanded.

Secondly, there are some research that you can be more precise on. These are the ones that you can anticipate alot from the knowledge you already have. Like such projects as space projects (maybe not all), in which we put alot of money in many prototypes and tests, judging the ones that have more chances. Such as the atomic bomb also. Or such as stealth of planes or of the possibility to build faster computers, since we already found some ways to make faster computers and stealthier planes. Some projects that we think have potential also are total waists (not all research money gives something).

So, all this should depend on the tech and many types of techs should exist. Also, if you would put all your funds to ONE place, you would lose your scientists in some other fields while puting so much money elsewhere that even low-grades scientists would have totally paid researches, which implicts more losses.

This is reality. How to we implement a good model in Civ III? Well I guess that we could give general directions, give a certain % to each general field of researches for exemple. We could be more precise with some techs also. At which point? Well you could have a better % of chance of effectively get what you were aiming for, getting a certain % of discovery that becomes higher and higher with time and ressources invested, so no "will get tech in 3 years". Maybe that some could be as precise at in Civ I-II. Would there be maluses when puting an excessive amount of money for the researchers you have? Would the first 10-20% have a bonus? Would the 60% or 70% profit more than the 80th % and so on? Could be good... This is up to Firaxis. Hope you like my model. It's realistic. But gheez, can be hard to implement realistically and balanced.

Signed:

Trifna,
Realism purist perfectionist.

[Adm.Naismith]

I understand is not very kind to jump against a post, but:

Point 1: it's too late. While we had different "extimate time of arrival" for Civ III publishing, we now know Firaxis can only work on minor tuning.

Point 2: I red lot of interesting research model into "The List v.2.0", and often I suggest to consider how good it seems (to me) the model about "prerequisite points" (par. 2.4 into The List 2.0 word doc) needed, just to underline different approach to research that different culture did here on earth (and a much more flexible model to try alternative history, IMHO, compared to classical Civ II research tree).

The List is not the "only true" around here, but it still is a great work that summarize many interesting (and some crazy ) proposal. If I would be able to start an alternative Civ game, I surely will start studying it from page 1 to the last (478! ).

[Adagio]

I like that idea if it's done this way:

You choose how much priority for each field (military, economy, etc) with the %, like I'd like to use 60% of my science "energy" in economy, etc...

BUT, it should still be like you choose what the next thing you want to invent (in each field though).

It is to late to bring into the game now, but if they make an add-on CD FIRAXIS could inplent this idea, as an optional (not default) thing.

[Frugal_Gourmet]

This is an inherently un-Sid Meier-esque idea, and so the chances of seeing such a system in any Sid Meier game are extremely slim.

What make a Sid Meier game is simple strategic decisions presented in an easy-to-understand and fun fashion. The system you mentioned -- while perhaps more realistic (and maybe even just as strategic) -- lack the simplistic beauty of what makes Civilization a great game.

I start setting sliders for various things instead of eagerly awaiting the next "big decision" that could take my Civ in an entirely new direction or give me new and interesting strategic options... and I lose a lot of the "I can't wait to see the next turn" experience of Civilization

Trust me, here. This idea would make the game less fun to play.