To a mundane army, sure, but I'm sure there'll be anti-wall spells, and what if somebody brings a dragon?  It would just fly into the city and start eating people.

Aren't the Fallen technically monster based, based off of their lore, etc? IIRC, there will be at least one Fallen faction that isn't just corrupted humans (the Urxen, or something like that?). I guess the point I'm trying to get at is why do you think an in-game adventuring society will be like how you describe it? From what we've been told in dev journals and videos, etc, researching adventuring tech lets you recruit heros, go on quests, explore dungeons, etc. In the magic tree there is a spell "Charm monster" that lets you control a monster.

To be completely honest, I just don't understand where your idea came from, because as far as I can tell nothing we have been told indicates it being like that (although it could very well be that I missed something ).

My other impression for an adventuring society (not going Gandalf) would be a society focused on recruiting NPC's, leveling them up, having them preform quests, etc, with the intent of discovering and completeing the Master Quest or whatever it's called. You would have few cities, and the purpose of those cities would be to gather as many adventurers as possible (in this, our ideas are very similar). But again, I fail to see why monsters would have anything to do with it, unless you complete a quest for a Dragon or something and it decides to join you as a reward.

Oh well, since I don't want to derail your topic too much, I'm going to create a seperate post about this.

EDIT: Here is said post https://forums.elementalgame.com/383565

It may be possible if the WHOLE City based protection Techs (hedges/Wooden & Stone Walls) etc were set to be "Global" and not just in the Warfare Tree.

Otherwise I can not see the "Defensible" Civic, Adventure or Magic only based society/Cities seamW3 mentions.

I don't see that happening. The economy of the game is based on farming, research, gold and resource gathering. All of those things are in the civics tree. Because you need all of them to do anything, you can't split them up amongst the other trees. You could start duplicating things, at which point you've made the civics tree redundant.

Sorry, but I don't see how this idea is in any way feasible.

The more I look at what is in each tree the more I agree with Tridus. It may just be for today, but I think there will be a threshhold of needing to research every tree. After that we will be able to focus more. This is a 4x game and the first part needs to be about econimic expansion, which will require at least three trees, in the released version anyways.

I don't see the need for extreme specialization (picking one line of research and leaving it there for the whole game) to be particularly viable. Honestly, that would be pretty boring. I'm also skeptical that it'd be feasible to have such utterly diverse unique play styles based on which tech tree you follow, and give us the freedom to mix and match. Many combinations would be incredibly difficult to reconcile, let alone balance to even a small degree.

As it stands, like seanw3 said, most people will typically research a little in every tree, but beyond that threshold there is plenty of opportunity to specialize. At least, when the research system is fleshed out and balanced better, I think that will be what happens. And to me, that's a lot more interesting.

The problem with the current research system, I think, is just that civics is too important. Either some of the civics techs should be moved into other lines, or other lines should get some additional techs that accomplish something similar to certain civics techs. Or, some civics techs could also be discoverable through other research lines. For example, maybe Harbors could be available in Civics and Warfare. That would make things interesting. The only problem I can see with it is if it'll take you 10 turns for your next Civics breakthrough and 5 turns for your next warfare breakthrough, and harbors is guaranteed to show up in both, then obviously if you want Harbors you'd go with Warfare. But maybe that isn't even a problem, or if it is maybe there's a simple solution.

Let's take this to here for further review?

https://forums.elementalgame.com/383598/page/1/#2644001

This will be and is a very/huge aspect to the game Core....

Actually, in that thread I'm trying to look at the underlying structure of the tech system, rather than the techs themselves.  It'd be good for separate threads to actually talk about what goes in Warfare/Civilization etc.  Mine is just talking about how techs fit together - this one is talking about what the techs are.

That said, I do give brief mention to technology replication and redundant technology thoughts in my analysis (Appendix A).

I see adventurers as killing monsters/ completing quests

I also see a spin-off strategy of Adventuring as focusing on recruiting Monsters

I see adventuring nations as developing their land less, but only because they focus on Adventuring tech.

The idea of having a separate culture for each tech tree seems a little extreme, and as mentioned earlier HAVING to research a little bit of Civics and a little bit of Magic will be needed in every game. (most likely a little bit of each tree). After all, each Faction will have their own techs to research (unless something has changed) and the research of Empire vs Kingdom is (allegedly) drastically different.

Perhaps one Faction will have A LOT more techs in the Adventuring tree related to taming and breeding monsters (Morder) while another Faction will have a lot more techs in Adventuring tree related to slaying monsters or creating epic gear.

I mean, personally I would like to be able to go a some-what beast-ish route (Dragon, some Wyverns, couple Edar, perhaps Salamander/Lizard mounts) while still having the ability to gain high level adventurers or high-tier Wargear/ Equipment.

I think there is a lot of confusion whether I am suggesting "picking one line of research and leaving it there for the whole game".  NO, I aren't.  It is just that I've present it that way.    In my system, there is "freedom" to mix and match.   I am making a point that ideally it is a freedom, but not a "requirement" to mix & match.     No matter how you shuffle the techs amount the 5 trees, if  no attention is paid to design a 1 tree game possible, 1 tree game aren't going to be viable ( a different economic type is not viable. )   

"Many combinations would be incredibly difficult to reconcile, let alone balance to even a small degree."

This make sense and expected.  But if we want EWOM to be revolutionary, having 5 types of Economic model can make the game much better, providing a very different play experience, add variety.   Shuffling civic tech amongst 5 trees still give you a population-based economy.   The OP idea makes certain economy already discussed in the forum viable,  a small but powerful magical kingdom,   small but powerful military kingdom.   And now I add a beast/lair based adventurer's kingdom.     I am proposing to every one that a purely population-based economy is NOT the only way.

(For pop-based economy, the more city/population you have, the more Stables/Magic schools you have, the more powerful you magic/military is.  How standard, how 'conventional' is that?)  EWOM can do better, be revolutionary; let it be a feature that people talk about!

After-all these kind of economy is not typical ones, extra care & more design/balance effort is required to make it work.    This kind of effort can happen in a mod, but it may fail or take forever.   SD's professional effort is needed to achieve this.  

Do you want to play another population-based strategy game, while ignoring other fun & viable possibilities?   

I believe the basic premise is very viable, but its presentation and design needs tweeks of course. One can look at the precursors of this type of individual economic and victory path system in games like Civilization and Master of Magic. 

Master of Magic especially allowed the player to specialize cities for certain types of resources or units.  Depending on the structures built, you could have cities specializing in:

1. food production

2. mana production (enhanced by local mana producing territories and nodes)

3.  military unit production

4.  gold production

5. or a productionfacility powerhouse, one tht can produce other buildings or units with ease, usually near mineral resource territories.

So the first aspect of specialization in Master of Magic  was specialized towns/cities focusing on aspects of production.

The second form of specialization in Master of Magic was the racial benefits/detriments to individualize the playstyle for each of these races.  Some of these may be off a bit, going from memory:

1. General all around good novice player and generic builder races: High Men, Orcs.

2. Great breeder races:  Barbarians,

3. Good production/mining race: Dwarves

4. Good military races:  Nomads,

5.  Combo breed production, bad city control race: Klackons

6. Magically inclined races on Myrror: Dark Elves,  Draconians (could also fly)

7. Weakened race for extra challenge:  Lizardmen, High Elves (pros & cons here)

The third form of specialization was the customization of the player's wizard.  By selecting magic groups a seasoned player could tailor thier wizard for maximum efficiency and bonuses to the race and city builds they wanted to develop for thier civ.

Once you learned the mechanics and nuances of the gme, you could custom tailor your game plus civ build:  race, wizard, and city structures to suit your play style.

With experience, a good player could easily develop builds that could crush any AI build, or intermediate human opponent.  Thus the distinct advantage of specialization within the multitude of available options.  One could theretically have dozens of different gaming styles to play choosing different combinations.

I think that is the key here as well.  Yes you may have to have ca certain basic advancement requirement in Civ and other techs, but what could be added is "Chained" prerequisite techs that unlock greater advantages if taken in combination with similar synergistic techs.  The advanced tech paths would cost more initially, but would open up powerful and unique playstyles.

One example is "Enchanted Roads" from Master of Magic.  There could be a similar Magitech in Elemental available only with synergistic techs like Teleport, Teleportation Gates etc.   Enchanted roads allows instantaneous movement all across the road network.  This opened upp a whole new defensive civilization military as well as diplomatic gameplay in Mom and its equivalent "Railroads" tech in Civilization.  Now defensive units could be sent inmmediately to defend from attackers across continent spanning empires, and was truly the only effective realistic counter to the lack of Zones of Control in Civ 3+4 where attackers could just run around right next to fortresses and defending units.  It was realistic and fun and took away a lot of late game micromanagement as well.  It also sped up caravan and diplmat movement.

So to sum it up, I think you could have speerate economic gameplay and victory paths not only by exclusively focusing on one tech tree only, but by selecting synegistic techs, synergistic races, and synergistic Wizard builds according to the economic/cultural path you want to play.  I think Master of Magic had a great basis for this and Elemental can easily expand and magnify this approach.

Not a bad idea, i had a similar one somewhere. However, i think you should mention possible victory conditions for each playstyle. To be competitive, each playstyle should be able to win a game.

Isn't victory condition given already?  I've been following the forum everyday, I should have mentioned that in the OP.

Yes, each playstyle should be able to win a game... that is what I call balance amongst the 5 trees.

HookedX,  thanks for your support.

I am sure the way you present the idea will garner more support from the fellow forumers.   However, my core idea is more revolutionary, so I want to use a more edgy way to highlight the revolutionary aspect of it.

I expect the first 3 specialization methods you've mentioned fully.   This is my minimal expectation for the game.   For the 4th one, "synergistic techs" is  usually  termed as  "tech combo" instead.    Tech combo will exist no matter how you design the tech tree,  this is a given.    The job of game designer is to make them not too weak, nor too overpowering.    So, its existence is fully expected.

Even the 4 specialization methods you've mentioned is still a population/city based economy, in my point of view.    In a game where you've 20 cities, while your opponent is having only 10 city of similar population, you will immediately know that you are stronger to them (generally speaking).     The amount of land you've captured roughly tells you how powerful you are.

My question is, why not let what I've Achieved already determines how powerful I am?   This is where Ranking Bonus come in.   It awards player in setting some goal, achieve it... and the goal is NOT only getting more land.   Their goal can be most elite army, best traders, best diplomatic, most happiest adventurers etc instead.

In the OP system, when you have 20 city and your opponent 10; you should have no idea if you are more powerful than him, or be faster to achieve the victory condition.  This make the game even more varied, than just the 4 specialization you've mentioned.

Your idea does sound excellent Climber, it  would be a perfect compliment to the Master of Magic/Civilization tech combo and population based production playstyles/victory paths.

Do you think we can suggest your idea effectively to the game devs, and how do we suggest it in a way that they can think about what a unique and rich experience your idea will provide?

You and/or a group of people should fully flesh out the Design Doc/mechanics of this tech tree playstyle and then present it.

I think we should work on getting this idea "heard" by the developers, and advertised to the customers and have them all chime in and help promote this.

At the very least even if it does not make it into the first release of the game, we should get a group of people to make a Mod that will have these Tech Tree playstyles as viable victory path based on objectives completed and ranked scoring.