The Future

[New Yorker]

i been hearing about how that many people what to delete the whole idea of future techs & future units. while others suggested that the people should create their own future techs

personally, i think Sid & his crew should add what future techs they desire cuz they did a damn good job with SMAC, maybe they could move some techs from SMAC to civ 3

so what are your ideas on the future techs

-------------------------------------------
New York is a good place to visit, unless you are wearing something expensive

[AzNtoccata]

I think they should just get up to about half-way up alpha centauri tech tree. Some of the top techs are too weird (maybe I'm just too dumb to understand them =) ). Fusion (aka Plasma) tanks are okay, but something like an eco-ranger from CTP is just plain ****ed up.

[Grumbold]

I don't think the SMAC techs are suitable because the early ones are mainly providing sci-fi alternatives to Civ buildings. Just having various different paths that slowly upgrade the maximum attack, defence, movement etc factors of the modern unit types would be just fine (or give them tiny combat bonuses if the unit workshop approach is not implemented.)

[Lord_Davinator]

Personally I'd say that sid should work a lot on future tech for civ3 cause its kinda stupid researching future tech. and not knowing what the hell it is you discovered (civ2) SMAC does have some cool ideas but I'm not so sure about copy the whole thing into the civ3 tech tree

[bagdar]

just don't have "cyber NINJA"s and "eco RANGER"s. They even sound stupid. I don't want to see city improvements such as mind controllers either. In fact, "every future tech. adds 5 points to your civ score" is enough.

[Cannes]

I for one am in great favor of future techs, I agree that some of the techs and units from CTP where a bit off, but it worked quite well in general terms. I was always annoyed with the fact of being cut off from advancing my civilization upon discovery of fusion power of which ever tech is last in the tech tree. You don't even get a fusion power plant! It always left me with the feeling that they could have guessed a little...

[Bender]

I can't stand future techs. The Civ II tech tree went far enough, and I don't want Civ III to go any farther. One of my least favorite features of CTP and CTPII is future technology.

I don't care so much if future techs come built in or not - I'll add them as I did with Civ2. I thought the future techs in CTP were good except the space colonies (although I did like the space layer as a place to sent space planes, spy satelites, and do that sort of thing not to mention shoot those things down). As for Eco-Rangers, those ruled! High level atrocious nanoweapons - more evil than nukes! Whatever happens, I just hope Civ3 can at least be modified to add sea colonies and city obliterating nanoweapons.

[EnochF]

It only goes to lend support to my theory that nobody can agree on which future tech is silly and which isn't. I think reasonable extrapolations include Nanotechnology (vague, but safe), Gene Therapy, Fuel Cells, and Orbital Construction. Asteroid Mining and Neural Interface are distant but real possibilities, probably too far in the future to include. But a lot of people disagree with me. That's why we should just limit the future tech in Civ 3 to a reasonable, near-future level, and let people design their own future tech tree. My future tech tree would include hardly any new military units, for example. It would include new city improvements and Wonders mostly, and if they let me, a lot of the techs will have minor worldwide effects. Fuel Cells would lower every city's pollution slightly, for example. My future tech tree would focus on peaceful development, since hopefully by then there will be little if any room for expansion. (I'd also like to think I could spend most of my time waging economical war using my corporations by this point in the game, but maybe that's just a pipe dream.)

Point well taken EnochF

[Sean]

You posts are the most insightful in this area EnochF.

[EnochF]

I swear, these guys are not just me posting under different names!

Difficult though it may be to believe...

[Shadowstrike]

Yeah, sure.... we believe ya....

*Thought Police arrest Enoch*

OK now levity aside, IMHO Civ3 should include the near future (Genetic Manipulation, Cold Fusion) but only the probably, not the improbable (Warp Drive, etc.)

Even so, it should only extend so far. I believe that the limit should be set to what is possible in this century (i.e. nanotechnology, quantum computers) because beyond that we don't have a clue about what might be. Sure we can throw around phrases like "microfusion" and "quantum slipstream", but the reality of such things are low if possible at all. We will not knw such things for many years to come. Let us not make a game with an improbable future history. Let us make one that inspires people to create inventions and techniques slightly beyond the range of the possible at the current moment.

[New Yorker]

i think those really weird, far out techs should be included in civ 3. these techs would be different(this idea was posted before)meaning that they are almost impossible to research cuz they require so much research

the reason i want this is the fact that many people after researching the whole tech tree complete shut off all research & put the cash somewhere else. this would give a reason to continue the research

--------------------------------------------
New York is the city that never sleeps
Texas is the state that puts its people to sleep

[Roman]

No future techs, please!! That is the main point that spoiled CTP for me, which otherwise has some decent mechanics (wages, PW, etc.).
As to the problem of shutting of research after the player has everything, it cannot be solved, but can equally effectively be delayed by making the tech tree denser rather than go into the future.
I you really have to include future technologies, at least make them only very close in the future and only those that already exist, but are not yet in practical use, for example fuel cells, or fusion. Anyway it simply is not possible to make any sound projections for our technological development more than 50 years into the future and even these are very inaccurate.
I want to reiterate, please no future techs, especially no warp drives, cold fusion (which was in fact a scientific hoax) and so on.

[Roman]

Hmm, looking at the gallery on civ 3 homepage, I cannot find any futuristic renders or animations. This I think makes it safe to assume there will be no future techs in civ 3, or at least they will not stretch very far out into the future. Hurray, long live Sid!! It seems my atheistic prayers have been answered.

[Grumbold]

I would welcome a dynamic research cost that adjusted the cost of discovery somewhat to account for the scientific output of the players. If you couldn't reach modern techs before 1900 then there would be less need for a meaningful "future tech 25" and no spaceships setting off to colonise AC in 1650.

[Biddles]

I think they should include heaps of future techs, but they do nothing. They should just be there instead of the first heap of "future tech x" so you have something to look at and go that's nice, space-time distortion, cool quote, i'll have to buy SMAC2 now .

[Vrank Prins]

quote: Originally posted by EnochF on 01-25-2001 07:52 PMIt only goes to lend support to my theory that nobody can agree on which future tech is silly and which isn't. I think reasonable extrapolations include Nanotechnology (vague, but safe), Gene Therapy, Fuel Cells, and Orbital Construction. Asteroid Mining and Neural Interface are distant but real possibilities

I couldn't agree more with you. Future techs have been discussed here before. About two or three months I made about the same statement.

It all has to do with the fact that if you're a smart player you'll have plenty of time left to the end of the game after you've finished to discover the whole techtree. Filling that gap with futuretechs won't solve this "problem", it will only postpone the moment where there is nothing more to discover . . . .

CIV uses history as its setting, IMO we should concentrate on that. If you like to play a scifi-game play SMAC. And I've said this before too, maybe it would be possible to make a link from CIV to SMAC, so that if we want to, we'll be able to run from the past & present into the future.
[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited January 26, 2001).]

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Roman on 01-26-2001 04:32 AM Hmm, looking at the gallery on civ 3 homepage, I cannot find any futuristic renders or animations. This I think makes it safe to assume there will be no future techs in civ 3, or at least they will not stretch very far out into the future. Hurray, long live Sid!!

I couldnt agree more! Civ-3 should end 2020 or 2040 AD.
For the love of God, let SMAC be SMAC, and Civ-3 be Civ-3 - NOT Civ-3 + half of SMAC.

I dont want a diluted tech-tree with hard-to-relate-to futuristic techs ala CTP/CTP-2. Keep socially inept/single-minded SciFi technocracy fantasies out from the main game, and in to tailor-cut scenarios instead.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 27, 2001).]

[bagdar]

quote: Originally posted by Vrank Prins on 01-26-2001 08:08 AM It all has to do with the fact that if you're a smart player you'll have plenty of time left to the end of the game after you've finished to discover the whole techtree. Filling that gap with futuretechs won't solve this "problem", it will only postpone the moment where there is nothing more to discover . . . .

that's the point. Let alone stupid units, city improvements and advances; adding more techs means nothing concerning gameplay. SDI Defence was a fictional future improvement in the original civs, and that's enough. The first time it would be nice discovering the imagination of the designers, the second time... no. ctp comes to my mind and I... I think I'll be sick... boargh!

[EnochF]

*stumbles in*

Just got back from the Thought Police Station. It's not as bad as you might assume; they spend most of their time thinking about donuts.

Anyhoo, what were we talking about? Future tech, right. And I've made my position clear.

Still, it might be nice to have a near-future scenario included in the box, just so we would have a pool of future unit, improvement and wonder graphics to draw from. An interplanetary space scenario might be nice, too.

[Cyclotron]

I agree that CTP future techs could have been handled better, and I personally am a proponent of very limited (if noonexistant) future techs. Some extentions of now are good (i.e. improvements like SDI, fusion plant, etc., and wonders like cure for cancer, and (my suggestion) the International Space Station. I thought the CTP "Alien Life project" was pretty hokey and that CivII put it best.

Don't mess with the classic.

[Steve Clark]

Absolutely no techs beyond 2001. If you want those stupid futuristic/sci-fi techs, then build or play a scenario with its custom tech tree.

Edit: OK, I forgot to change the calendar.
[This message has been edited by Steve Clark (edited January 26, 2001).]

[EnochF]

quote: Absolutely no techs beyond 2000.

Um, Steve? Have you noticed today's date?

[ajbera]

Although I enjoy future technologies, I recognize that many folks only want to play within the current scope of history, plus a few decades. Fair enough.
The inclusion of a near-future scenario would be a nice touch. Even better would be a tech tree with plenty of room for additions, and many open slots for new units and improvements. That way, some enterprising scenario/modmaker can extend the tech tree and add science-fiction type units, so those of us who wish to can play from 4000 BC, starting with settlers and warriors, to 4000 AD, ending with cybernetic shock troops and robotic terraformers.
The ability to custom-tailor the game to fit individual specifications will be one of the keys to the longevity of the game.
Hail Sid.

[New Yorker]

since there is a krap load against my idea "the future", then i thought why not make the future techs be something you can choose in the beginning of the game, like pollution

------------------------------
Survivor III: The New York 'Hood'

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Chronus on 01-27-2001 12:53 PM Someone suggested haveing many techs between the current techs. This sounds like a good solution ...

This is what I have advocated all along! A more AMPLE and ENRICHED tech-tree, with more in-between techs, within that good old Civ-2 4000 BC - 2020/2040 AD time-frame.

quote: as long as the techs mean something (not merely give points) and prevent me from hitting the end of the tech tree.

Yes, this is very important! No stopgap-techs. Each and every tech must be, both meaningful/purposeful in the game - and also be something that you actually can relate to as a player. The latter was often a problem in SMAC. Not to mention futuristic era TOT/CTP/CTP-2 games.

quote: Giving a lengthy discovery rate was also a good idea. However, I believe this can already be done in Civ 2.

Yes, and I would add: Perhaps adding more turns to the game. Not too much - just an moderate increase, from 500 SMAC-turns to, let say 600+ Civ-3 turns.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 27, 2001).]

[Harel]

My belief is that we should include all future technology that is currently under testing and design, and it's feasability is unquestionable. Those are technologies that simply need to be perfected and already available today at great cost.
This can include laser weaponary, one-stage rockets, more effiecent hydrogen cars, human cloning and organ regrowning, wide-bandwidth world-wide web... those sort of things, the things we will get 20 years from now.
I woudln't go too far, or the future culture may just reach out and shake a big finger across our face.

[Chronus]

I don't care for wild future techs but I don't like the current Future Techs either (getting 5 points for each, etc.) I suppose something has to be there but reaching the end of the tech tree radically changes my gaming style: sell all tech improvements, switch to Fundamentalism, etc. And I don't like that feeling that once I can produce Mech Infantry, I don't have to reconsider whether I should build it or WAIT until a better generation of units can be built. Firaxis, please keep me looking over my shoulder ... always "afraid" of that better unit/building peeking around the corner.

Someone suggested haveing many techs between the current techs. This sounds like a good solution ... as long as the techs mean something (not merely give points) and prevent me from hitting the end of the tech tree. Giving a lengthy discovery rate was also a good idea. However, I believe this can already be done in Civ 2.