4 ms·

> It's hard when there's a whole tech level grind that also has to tick along in the background, fueling the sense of growth & achievement & pushing players ahe

by msla 6y ago

> It's hard when there's a whole tech level grind that also has to tick along in the background, fueling the sense of growth & achievement & pushing players ahead. I have a real problem with how tech levels are implemented in Civilization, at least in the variants I'm familiar with: There's just a few ways to progress, and advances are always better. Technology is not fitted to the environment, like how wheels don't make a lot of sense on roads which are rocky and often stairstepped up steep slopes; nope, the whole concept of "Inventing Wheel" not being a necessary step to further advancement is lost on the game, even if it's empirically possible to build advanced civilized societies without them. It's like it's insulted by wheel-less-ness, and never understands that facts don't care about its feelings. Further, there's no trade-offs: Iron swords are better than bronze, and never you mind that common iron is worse than bronze; unless you have truly outstanding Damascus steel, you're using sponge iron at best. Of course, sponge iron doesn't require tin, so if you're cash-strapped or just lost a tin-producing province, well, Iron Age ahoy! https://www.e-education.psu.edu/matse81/node/2129 https://www.e-education.psu.edu/matse81/node/2129 I wouldn't care about this stuff if it weren't for the pernicious effect of these games on peoples' de facto history education. They think that if it works that way in Civilization, it must have worked that way in reality, and it's hard to remove a bad education.

dclowd9901 6y ago
Not for nothing, and probably saying a lot about my ability to imagine, but I can scarcely think of a world without the infinite lever that a wheel (gear) is. Unless you’re suggesting society should halt innovation before agriculture, which, maybe it should.
- sadfklsjlkjwt 6y ago
  The Inca civilization never had the wheel.
notahacker 6y ago
> the whole concept of "Inventing Wheel" not being a necessary step to further advancement is lost on the game, even if it's empirically possible to build advanced civilized societies without them I think 'monotheism' being a key dependency is the most eyebrow-raising, especially when you're playing with certain civilizations. I'd say the opposite to the article title was true: it's a masterpiece of micromanagement sims, but politically it varies between apolitical and tone deaf.
mywittyname 6y ago
> Further, there's no trade-offs: Iron swords are better than bronze, and never you mind that common iron is worse than bronze; unless you have truly outstanding Damascus steel, you're using sponge iron at best. In civ 4, there was a tradeoff, bronze enabled ax warriors while iron enabled swordsman. Ax warriors were weaker than swordsman, but they received a bonus again melee units, ensuring they'd win a battle against swordsman.
- sadfklsjlkjwt 6y ago
  And yet historically nearly everyone used spears.
zajio1am 6y ago
> and never you mind that common iron is worse than bronze; unless you have truly outstanding Damascus steel, you're using sponge iron at best. Not really. Perhaps pure iron is worse than bronze, but metallurgical studies of ancient iron artefacts show that even weapons from bloomery ('sponge') iron often has some nontrivial carbon content (e.g. ~0.5 %, highly variable) making it quenchable steel. Definitely softer than crucible steel (wootz, 'damascus') with 1-2 % carbon content, but still harder than bronze.
rektide 6y ago
> There's just a few ways to progress, and advances are always better. Some games do have at least randomized tech trees. Pandora: First Contact, for example. Fun write up, thanks for sharing.
davidivadavid 6y ago
Presumably, advances should be better, or they wouldn't be advances. However, whether something is an advance, better, or progress, is subjective. Which means the real problem is that the set of choices is too limited to a "conventional" view of progress (e.g. you can make your work converge towards a prototypical sci-fi city, but not towards the Shire, or any other aesthetic, even though they're valid paths).

by msla 6y ago

dclowd9901 6y ago

Not for nothing, and probably saying a lot about my ability to imagine, but I can scarcely think of a world without the infinite lever that a wheel (gear) is. Unless you’re suggesting society should halt innovation before agriculture, which, maybe it should.

sadfklsjlkjwt 6y ago
The Inca civilization never had the wheel.

notahacker 6y ago

> the whole concept of "Inventing Wheel" not being a necessary step to further advancement is lost on the game, even if it's empirically possible to build advanced civilized societies without them I think 'monotheism' being a key dependency is the most eyebrow-raising, especially when you're playing with certain civilizations. I'd say the opposite to the article title was true: it's a masterpiece of micromanagement sims, but politically it varies between apolitical and tone deaf.

mywittyname 6y ago

> Further, there's no trade-offs: Iron swords are better than bronze, and never you mind that common iron is worse than bronze; unless you have truly outstanding Damascus steel, you're using sponge iron at best. In civ 4, there was a tradeoff, bronze enabled ax warriors while iron enabled swordsman. Ax warriors were weaker than swordsman, but they received a bonus again melee units, ensuring they'd win a battle against swordsman.

sadfklsjlkjwt 6y ago
And yet historically nearly everyone used spears.

zajio1am 6y ago

> and never you mind that common iron is worse than bronze; unless you have truly outstanding Damascus steel, you're using sponge iron at best. Not really. Perhaps pure iron is worse than bronze, but metallurgical studies of ancient iron artefacts show that even weapons from bloomery ('sponge') iron often has some nontrivial carbon content (e.g. ~0.5 %, highly variable) making it quenchable steel. Definitely softer than crucible steel (wootz, 'damascus') with 1-2 % carbon content, but still harder than bronze.

rektide 6y ago

> There's just a few ways to progress, and advances are always better. Some games do have at least randomized tech trees. Pandora: First Contact, for example. Fun write up, thanks for sharing.

davidivadavid 6y ago

Presumably, advances should be better, or they wouldn't be advances. However, whether something is an advance, better, or progress, is subjective. Which means the real problem is that the set of choices is too limited to a "conventional" view of progress (e.g. you can make your work converge towards a prototypical sci-fi city, but not towards the Shire, or any other aesthetic, even though they're valid paths).