All Activity

I like the way you have it now. (I generally don’t like techs that have a negative effect on something else but I recognize that’s mostly a personal pet peeve)

It used to be an unlocking tech, so that you were forced to choose cheaper techs or faster research before the full Forge tech tree could be enabled. Had that for a long time, but then decided it would be nicer for the player for it to be a choice they could make whenever it was convenient. The effects obviously have less impact the later you make the choice, but who knows what may come up. I agree that Special Buildings are a great place for such pairs.

100% agree. I actually suggested something similar the other day in another thread for how we could improve Ptol’s library. I don’t think it has to be a paired tech per se but it makes a lot of sense for it to be one. Maybe these meta techs are places where paired techs work well in general. Nice to see you implemented something similar.

In DE, I've actually pared down the number of paired techs significantly over past alphas. But one paired tech I've kept and that could be particularly interesting for EA in some capacity is in the Forge: The tech isn't required, but presents an interesting choice that helps you as you tech up. Since EA doesn't have the glory resource, the cost for Forging could be time, while Metallurgy costs resources but low/no time.

I'm not going to continue arguing if it doesn't lead to anything. If I'm going to leave the popular thinking of RTS, of the majority of players and this happens since StarCraft 2. There's many reasons RTS are a niche genre. E-sports obsession of devs, publishers and investors. Micromanaging every unit, to the point it feels like babysiting and not strategy. Nerfs, nerfs, nerfs and even more nerfs. This unit is 00000.01% better than other units? —Nerf it into the ground! Listening only the 1% of playerbase, because they're "better at the game".

“Purists” say that because people often come with assumptions that are just plain wrong. You can see that in this thread. Multiplayers often have this perspective because they naturally see more strategies than any single player can. In one game, a multiplayer can see 8 different strategies while a single player can only see one. Multiplayers also push one another to become better in a way that doesn’t exist with SP. It’s not unreasonable to say learn what already exists instead of crowing for something “new” that already existed and might break the game for others.

Any innovation, and the multiplayer purists come and jump. You tell me, there's nothing to fix. And the answer is if the game, apart from the performance, has nothing but incomplete mechanics, because the game is incomplete. It lacks mechanics and any new mechanics, they all come to defend the holy sacred balance (of an incomplete game).

That's why a design has to be done from the outside and not with what already exists. Tech tree mod, something.

I think they theoretically could make sense. For example, if you started out as a base Hellenic civ that you couple develop into Athens or Sparta with unique features then that would be pretty cool. But for simple techs I think it takes away from the cat and mouse game where players adjust their strategies in response to the other because tech pairs, by definition, eliminate future choices. One of the main problems I have is that people want new, novel features and never consider whether those novel features actually make any sense.

They raise their hands to the gods on high, no matter which god. The gods are on high, except for those of the Underworld.

That is true. I'd only use them as a design decision, not as some kind of fix for something.

@Classic-Burger Will your Priests praise the Sun, as welll?

Which is actually an appropriate suggestion if the problem he say exists actually existed. I think more expensive eco techs with shorter train times probably make sense at some phase(s). Right now, you get little benefit by forgoing techs to phase faster and that shouldn’t be the case. My big point is that tech pairs are a really awful “fix” to basically any problem.

Well, it will work for my mod.

As if prices and time couldn't be changed.

No, YOU miss the point. Players often oscillate between getting a tech in one game and forging it in the next. You are complaining about a lack of strategies when you don’t use ones that are already available. Literally none of this requires a tech pair instead of just adding more techs. When you research a tech matters. You all both looking at this from a one dimensional view of if it can be researched and ignore all timing dimensions.

\art\animation\biped\citizen\pray.dae It's used here: \art\variants\biped\gather_praise.xml

That's why the game never changes.

You miss the point, they can do that. I can also "adjust" my attribute multipliers in Morrowind by spending gold on trainers for a skill that my character shouldn't be good at. It will be efficient, yes? But, is that fun? Again, you miss the point by looking at everything from your high-stakes multiplayer viewpoint.

Praise.dae (?)

Technologies don't make a big impact sometimes. For pairs to work there would have to be a larger election scheme. Long paths with technologies are needed, so that there are decisions An example of Path of Exile. Lots of decisions, not a spamfest simulation. With few technologies that do not define a strategy, a coherent line of decisions cannot be followed. Although Path of Exile is exaggerated, you can see how varied it is.

Praise

What animation do you use there?

Even at baseline gather rate, you would still be much slower if everyone else has an access to a tech to make berries faster. Tech pairs sole purpose is to eliminate this choice, which is why I entirely dislike them. Everyone doesn’t research every technology. Even for the techs that most people do get, they don’t get them at the same time. I suggest you look inward and question whether you are yet to discover other strategies that other players have. And, if the situation you describe did occur (which it hasn’t) then you could just adjust cost/benefits so that it doesn’t happen every time for every player.

The hunting tech shouldn't change the berry gather rates. It should just improve hunting. Forget about multiplayer for a second. The game needs to be fun to play first and foremost. If the game is fun, players will discover strategies and counter-strategies. Fun games have choices that are risky, but rewarding. If you devolve a game to a literal spamfest where everyone can get everything in every match (we still don't restrict technologies per civ! AoE 1 had that in 1997), you lose a lot of replayability.