Viability of tech trees other than combat

Two points:

1) Beelining to a technology doesn't seem to work.  That may be by design, but the increases in cost from one tier of techs within a tree and the next tier prohibit doing much in any tech tree without improving your research capability significantly, which requires that I go up the civ tree to get those bonuses.

2) Force multipliers based on multiple figures in a unit means that I'm all but obligated to go up the combat tree to get to squads and such.

Now, if I want to specialize in magic, I can either take a long time to research up to staves at 4 attack each, put together mages after getting up to squads in the combat tree, and then have them be decimated in combat from anyone who's focused on the combat tree and put together equivalent tiered units from there with axes and armor and such.  To make the other trees viable, equivalent combat power needs to be placed within the magic tree at roughly the same research tier as in the other trees.  Equivalently, there should be defense/dodge enhancement equivalents within the magic tree to armors in the combat tree.  Civs, to my mind, is the tree that makes it so you don't HAVE to have combat; you should be able to buy off armies that come into your borders with influence, making them flip, or to influence the monsters in your territory to go fight on your behalf, making sure your hands stay clean.  That may exist, but I've not been able to make it work; I always get told that I can't recruit the ogres/trolls/whomever in my ZOC.  Freeloading bastards.

Alternatively, and this might not be possible within the current game engine, but it might be nice to have research advancing equivalencies in each tree.  Civ gets civ research, which applies to the civ tree, combat gets combat training, which applies to the combat tree, and magic gets magical research, which applies to the magic tree.  That way, you encourage specialization to a specific tree, rather than make it so I have to jump around through different trees to put together a viable strategy.

11,721 views 29 replies
Reply #1 Top

The problem I've found is that you can't really do much without third tier in all tech trees, and once you get rolling, you pretty much cap out all tech trees.

 

I don't mind it per se, but if they are to represent three viable routes to winning the game, the point of separating them is pretty well moot.

Reply #2 Top

Civilization could use some better defensive techs. It already gives you a larger army capacity. I would like wall buildings to give you more city defenders. That would give it the requisite defensive advantage to deter enemies. We have long since moved away from a single tree being viable to win the game. I think that is a good thing. The current design seems to have that kind of specialization after the third tier. This is an apt direction to take because the following specialization is based on local resources and the political climate. This and the incoming faction differentiation is moving the game to true tech tree perfection. 

Reply #3 Top

Civilization also needs more monster resources in the world to build on. They're so impossibly rare. There's ten iron ore deposits for every bandit camp or whatever.

Reply #4 Top

I too would like to see more defenders both from techs & city lvl ups

Reply #5 Top

Both warfare  and civilization are necessary. Civilization to increase production and population. Ive never found the research techs to be that useful though, especially the latter ones, moslty its just the population increasing that drives higher research.

Magic tech tree I find is mostly useless. I get the two tier 1 techs and forget about it, except to unlock a spell book or champions and quests if I want too. Only late game do I get t3 magic tech like sorcery etc.

Mana needs to be controlled more by the magic tree. Reduce mana per shard and use mana techs to increse it. Also add more useful buildings that cost crystal and some magical wonders. The problem with using magic units like monks and mage for early game units is that they have no future. Without the ability to add magic objects, magic units are quickly obsolete.

Quoting Heavenfall, reply 3
Civilization also needs more monster resources in the world to build on. They're so impossibly rare. There's ten iron ore deposits for every bandit camp or whatever.
End of Heavenfall's quote

And they are terrible, Darkling warriors spawn in groups of 1 and ogres lose to soldiers of around the same lv.

 

Reply #6 Top

Quoting seanw3, reply 2
Civilization could use some better defensive techs. It already gives you a larger army capacity. I would like wall buildings to give you more city defenders. That would give it the requisite defensive advantage to deter enemies. We have long since moved away from a single tree being viable to win the game. I think that is a good thing. The current design seems to have that kind of specialization after the third tier. This is an apt direction to take because the following specialization is based on local resources and the political climate. This and the incoming faction differentiation is moving the game to true tech tree perfection. 
End of seanw3's quote

All three Techs should be independant of each other otherwise what is the point. 

Reply #7 Top

I guess there are some major balance issues affecting the tech trees. I have long since balanced them myself, so I can't really remember much of what the vanilla looks like. I made it a point for instance to make sure that Magic was great for trained units as well as heroes. My Civilizations tree offers many defensive strategies to increase power and ensure peace. It also allows higher levels for trained troops. I assume we will see these sorts of changes soon. I would rather think about how certain factions should do these sorts of things.

 

Resoln for instance should get unique magical abilities, causing the Magic Tree to be more desirable to that faction. 

 

Pariden should also see some advantages here. I would not be opposed to giving them special weapons and magical items.

 

Gilden has little business in this area. They should only get magic defensive items like spell resistance and greater defense against elemental damage. 

Reply #8 Top

The main problem is that for the most part the tech trees are very interdependent and contain many necessary technologies. You are never going to play a game where you won't need better weapons, larger groups, or more production.This is why I advocate splitting the tech trees so that no brainer techs you will always get are on a different branch then the more unique techs. So you don't always get the same techs each game. You could have specialized branches for wide or tall empires, super agressive players that mass produce troops and conquer cities, and players who mass mana. Also you could have branches for resources. Your strategy and starting position should effect what techs you get.

The other problem is pacing. As the OP pointed out there is a huge jump in cost between each level of the tech trees. This encourages players to get every tech on each level instead of choosing specific techs. Also they tried to make it a huge long tree like in Civilization but unlike Civ their are no ages so it just takes a ridiculously long time to get certain things.

I would definitely like to see a wider tech tree with more options that you pick between instead of one big blob of techs you get every game.

Reply #9 Top

Quoting DsRaider, reply 8
The main problem is that for the most part the tech trees are very interdependent and contain many necessary technologies. You are never going to play a game where you won't need better weapons, larger groups, or more production.This is why I advocate splitting the tech trees so that no brainer techs you will always get are on a different branch then the more unique techs. So you don't always get the same techs each game. You could have specialized branches for wide or tall empires, super agressive players that mass produce troops and conquer cities, and players who mass mana. Also you could have branches for resources. Your strategy and starting position should effect what techs you get.
End of DsRaider's quote

 

Seconded.

I would say also, that the UI structure of the tech tree seems built around the idea that all techs are dependent on other techs and you will pick up all your techs in order.  After all, if you skip a tech (that isn't required later) it's basically gone. When was the last time you scrolled to the left in that screen to see the earlier techs?

They would need to institute a totally different interface if they were to introduce a large number of completely optional techs. 

As a corollary, until they change the UI we're going to be stuck with this stupid, grind-y tech structure.

Reply #10 Top

The tech tree right now is more of a "what do I get first" thing instead of a "what goes with my strategy" thing. You basically want all parts of it, civ tech to grow infrastructure, warfare for troops, and magic for... well, for tireless march if nothing else (although I like the lightning spear a lot). The question is, what should you try to go for first... some people might want balance due to cost, for me, I grab the basic spearmen tech and then go heavy into civ first because that makes researching everything else easier. It might not be the most interesting thing you can do with the system, but I honestly don't really mind it either.

Reply #11 Top

The tech trees themselves are too short in my opinion.  I also agree with the OP here.

Reply #12 Top

I don't particularly like how the tech trees currently work either.  They shouldn't be mutually exclusive to one another, but by the same token, neither should they be so tightly tied with one another.  

One solution is to simply have specializations for a civilization either via faction/sovereign traits (or both) and/or an added research that allows you to 'focus' your attention on a particular tech-tree.  You could only pick one (if any) of these, but the pay off is that it would drastically improve the research rate of your nation in that particular tree.  

This would mean that you could still have a jack-of-all trades nation by ignoring the specialization tech, or you could focus more strongly on magic, civilization, or warfare.  All without drastically changing the current system.  The added faction and/or sovereign traits would only be there to augment a faction's particular affinity for one tree and wouldn't severely inhibit or hinder the proposed idea of the above tree specialization tech.

Lastly, I would also agree that of the three tech trees, even if the above suggestion was implemented (or any other balance change), the magic tech tree, which is my favorite, does indeed need some more loving to make it more desirable.

Reply #13 Top


Bellack said it best.  if the three trees are so interdependent, then they're not 3 independent trees; they're one tree spread over 3 interfaces.

As an interesting aside thought; monsters that you recruit should be able to attack other AI players without you having to declare war.  Heck, they're not YOUR monsters, they're just monsters, you know?

Reply #14 Top

Quoting Supreme, reply 11
The tech trees themselves are too short in my opinion.  I also agree with the OP here.
End of Supreme's quote

 

yes but again hopefully one day we will play with much less cities

 

the problem imo is not they are that short

the problem is most late game tech are not fun neither particularly wanted

 

the coolest tech to research are mid early

 

some late tech are cool but overrun by the game pace, i mean magic weapons and armors are cool but once you can research all that stuff you HAVE to be so good equipped you dont need any of that stuff

after mid game i basically dont need anything, every tech i research is just a small bonus but nothing so important

 

dunno i think every tech tree should be rebuilt based on a strenght perspective, trying to think "here in magic you get heroes lvl 9 we need to figure some armor /building that can compare to the exceptional strenght of them"

 

and things should go on, the next tier should be stronger and so on

Reply #15 Top

Quoting Winnihym, reply 13

Bellack said it best.  if the three trees are so interdependent, then they're not 3 independent trees; they're one tree spread over 3 interfaces.
End of Winnihym's quote

 

 

yes and no, there could be some minor requirement but it has to be thoght much better

anyway if they decide to make 3 indipendent trees its ok

Reply #16 Top

After they add a few more techs, I would like to see some exclusionary tech tree designs. Here's what I mean:

 

If you research this tech, you cannot research two other techs -- one per other tech tree. Make this for middle and late tech tiers and you add more flavor to mid-game and late-game strategies. 

Here is one scenario: do you want to research the 9 unit squad size, research late-tier magic items (balanced to make up for smaller squad sizes), or unlock an ability to upgrade outposts to citadels (complete with garrison squads)?

 

This would increase replay value and diversify late-game strategies (diversifying the late-game tech strategies is something this game needs, IMHO). 

Reply #17 Top

Quoting Winnihym, reply 13

Bellack said it best.  if the three trees are so interdependent, then they're not 3 independent trees; they're one tree spread over 3 interfaces.

As an interesting aside thought; monsters that you recruit should be able to attack other AI players without you having to declare war.  Heck, they're not YOUR monsters, they're just monsters, you know?
End of Winnihym's quote

 

Honestly we argued about getting rid of the pointless diplomacy tech tree last game and they finally did after it bombed. I think its been stated that they will NOT be combining the tech trees into one coherent tree. So for now we are stuck researching everything across 3 interfaces since many techs still have requirements in other tech trees and a lot of techs are pretty mandatory or too overpowered to skip when you can get a vital tech for a few turns in one tree while the next tech in your 'focus' costs you 50+ turns. The pacing of the game overall needs serious work imho.

 

What I see as obvious but lack the tact to say more politely looks trollish so I'll add some helpful thoughts. While I think getting rid of all the clutter and making a single interesting tech tree is the best way to go about things I do have some ideas on how to improve the current system.

 

1) Remove all the 'unlock 1 thing' techs. The biggest criminal of all being the bows and the techs that unlock things that help you research techs. You are often presented with a (non)choice between spending a few turns to unlock a bunch of buildings/gear/spells or a single thing. For example while bows can either be useless or god-weapons depending upon the current situation, most players probably choose to unlock a full set of better armor or weapons instead and its nearly always more convenient to do so as they lead to better more interesting things instead of just another unlock bow tech. Or instead of removing them make them more interesting. Using the bow example have them unlock archery towers, or building that gives archery garrison, or a bonus to accuracy, or become the ballistics tie-in for catapults.

 

2) So we MUST have 3 tech trees for some reason. Lets have our new upgrading buildings (future patch iirc) reflect their relevance then. Instead of having research building 1 give 10% boost, and research building 2 give 20% boost, have them start to specialize as magic research building, warfare college building (etc) and you can only choose one or the other per city. Maybe have the warfare one also give a bonus to garrisons/training, or have the magic one grant some magical bonus to garrisons/trained units. So instead of boring research buildings we now have tough choices to make and our cities specialize in wondrous ways instead of being *click**click*  *queue all buildings* or *click* *click* *queue best troop x 5*.

Reply #18 Top

The magic tech tree does need to be more useful I think.  Maybe certain things like the conclave should be moved to magic tech tree, and maybe researching some techs should increase mana gain since mana is too common come mid-game.

 

Low-level magic techs like channeling/shard harvesting, and the exploration line are useful, but the rest of it doesn't seem that useful.  Maybe if I had crystal but no metal it would be different.

 

I wish you researched on each tree independently, but that would be a very complicated design, and might be too much work at this stage.

Reply #19 Top

Honestly, I think one of the biggest problems of this game is lack of meaningful choices.

Research and the Tech-Tree as well as pacing feel just about the same to me no matter who I'm playing as. I really do think the game needs more meaningful choices, and more ability for a player/faction to specialize.

Tech-Tree is just one area, but I really think that FE could learn a lot from GalCiv.

Reply #20 Top

Not just mana, every resource like metal and crystal scales horribly because tech doesn't really effect how many world resources you get. You barely use them early game and so you build up a huge reserve for midgame. So then you can only ever run out late game where finally if you spam metal heavy units you can start using more resources then you produce and deplete your reserves. Then you have no way to increase metal production beyond a few quirky tradeoff buildings. It seems pretty common sense to me that you should be producing much more metal late game then early game considering how much more you use. This would make for some wonderful new techs and improvements so you can specialize research and cities. 

Reply #21 Top

The Civilization tree after the first few is worthless.

The magic tree after the first few techs is worthless.

If they want each tree to mean something they gotta do these things....

Have the Civilization tree have a lot more things you can recruit. 

The magic tree should have a lot more...well magical stuff in it. Especially strategic spells.

Reply #22 Top

Quoting Xan, reply 21
The Civilization tree after the first few is worthless.

The magic tree after the first few techs is worthless.

If they want each tree to mean something they gotta do these things....

Have the Civilization tree have a lot more things you can recruit. 

The magic tree should have a lot more...well magical stuff in it. Especially strategic spells.
End of Xan's quote

 

It's funny that you say this, because I was just thinking: 

 

Apart from when I play as Magnar, the first several techs I ALWAYS research are in the civ tree. By about mid-game, I transition out of the tree and start catching up with warfare. The first two civ techs are better than all four other first tier techs in the other tree, IMO.

For Magnar, it makes sense to invest in warfare in the beginning because of the slave units. For everyone else? You cripple yourself because of the weak early economy.

Reply #23 Top

Quoting Alstein, reply 18
The magic tech tree does need to be more useful I think.  Maybe certain things like the conclave should be moved to magic tech tree, and maybe researching some techs should increase mana gain since mana is too common come mid-game.

 

Low-level magic techs like channeling/shard harvesting, and the exploration line are useful, but the rest of it doesn't seem that useful.  Maybe if I had crystal but no metal it would be different.

 

I wish you researched on each tree independently, but that would be a very complicated design, and might be too much work at this stage.
End of Alstein's quote

Agreed I usally don't bother with the Spell Tree because other than the first few techs they are pointless and the time spent researching needs to go to Warfare and Civ to keep the Empire/Kingdom competitive.  And usally the game is over before I even start thinking about researching higher magic tech.

I've said it before all tech trees ned to be seperate.  Now techs that would overlap you just put thos techs in all the trees and when it is researched in one tree it is researched for all.  For example if you need Blacksmithing to make magic swords as well as normal swords then you would have Blacksmithing listed in both trees. Once it is researched then both trees shows it is researched.  This would be a big help when planing techs and you can at a glance of the tech trees see what needs a preq.  I hope I'm clear on this.

Anyway if you do this and want to stick with one tree then you can pluse it will look better and be more user friendly.

 

Reply #24 Top

In WOM the separation in the tech tree made more sense.  I could build up the Combat tree just enough to defend my position and the Civics tree to get my economy rolling and then focus on Magic, get all the shard and the final spell book and cast CReation for the win.  The Trees did not rely on tech from other trees.

 

That being said there is some logic to the way it is now but Belleck makes a great point.  It should be made clearer what relies on what and duplicate reliance should appear in all trees, researching 1 will update the others.

 

FE seems much more combat heavy and at least early on Economy and Combat take precedence over magic, but to me that is not a bad design choice.  Magic is higher learning and sciences, what culture would focus on that before making sure the basic needs  - food, shelter (defense) are taken care of first.

Reply #25 Top

I agree, before a nation goes to improve its military or magic, first it must improve its basic needs (a.k.a civilization tree), and i think the tech tree is already good in term of its logic.

But as said above, there are some techs in each of those tree which is useless. As said above, right now you just need first few techs of civilization tree to get the basic need to improve your nation, then you can focus on combat.

It is the same with magic tree, you just need first few techs of magic tree, mainly for unlocking spellbooks or shards, then you can leave the remaining unresearched techs in your magic tree. The magic equipment looks appealing, but it is no match if compared with combat tree equipments and army increasing and etc etc. Arcane point building looks useful, but you can substitute it with having many arcane labs.

The point is, most if not all techs in combat tree are useful, while only half or maybe less techs in civilization and magic tree that are useful, you just need civilization and magic tech tree for unlocking few things then you can leave them.

Right now, i don't have any solution to the civilization tree, but i have a suggestion to the magic tree. First, i don't like the idea of increasing the power of spells or lowering their mana cost, because it just make a combat tree focused nation and magic tree focused nation equal or similar in term of magic prowess.

I think magic tree should have techs that can do the following:

1) Unlock a method that increase mana/turn or decrease spells mana cost -> with this, the magic focused nation can cast more early game spells than combat focused nation, hopefully this will equalize their battle capabilities in early game, reliance on spells vs reliance on advanced war equipment. Do note that those that rely on spells still need at least a small army. The more you advance on this tech line, the greater the bonus. But there must be limit to the bonus to make it balanced.

2) Unlock more advanced version of the spellbook tree that grants specific bonuses to the spells and the shards -> some if not all higher level spells need a tech to be researched before you are able to use it at normal efficiency (100% eff.), combat focused nation still can use the same spells, but at lower efficiency (maybe starts at 70%), starting efficiency can be different for every spells (depends on spell tier) . The more you advance in this tech line it can grant bonus to spells efficiency, and maybe grant more abilities to spells (so it's not just improve efficiency), and even grant shards special effect (i haven't thought about it). If possible this bonus must not stack with shards bonus, the more shards you have the efficiency bonus is the same, and higher level spells and area of effect spells have lower bonus than lower tier and single target spell. Again, there must be limit to the bonus to make it balanced.

3) Unlock a way of shard converting -> this present a dillema, as it can destroy the randomness of the map, but maybe the conversion is not 100%. Example is: there are several factor in shard conversion. Water to fire will cost more than air to fire. The cost must be in mana, because if it is not in mana, once you get the desired shard you can immediately unleash what you want with that specific element, so if it cost mana, it can give your opponent enough time to prevent you from casting your desired spells. And shard conversion is not 100%, air shard if converted to fire shard just count as 1/4 fire shard, maybe there must be a way to reverse the conversion but i think it should cost double or more mana and time to do it, so a player must think very carefully before he/she attempt to do shard conversion.

 

These are just my wild idea though, point 2 and 3 may not be possible to be included in the released version, especially point 3 due complextity involved in implementing it.

And i realize that high tier spell are a bit overpowered if those ideas are implemented, that's why the high tier spell must be toned down. Which made me come up with another wild ideas.

I think few late game spells must be much weaker, and to compensate for it, the mana requirement is also toned down. Those particular spells that i want to talk about are the super spells like volcano, earthquake and their kind, imho they are too powerful, honestly i hate that kind of spells, to me it destroy the fun of the game.

The way i see it, those super spells are the equivalent of nukes in Civilization games, but nukes are limited by resources, and it takes very long time to make one, yet you can spam those super spells as many as you like in just 1 turn, as long as you have sufficient mana for it and of course the shards.

So here is idea for the late game spells:

I think those spells should be weakened, and limited in its use/turn by the number of shards you have. Example: I use volcano spell as example, if you have only 1 fire shard, you can only use volcano once every 8 turn. And perhaps the volcano shouldn't be able to instantly destroy city, instead of that, it just summon a volcano for 5 turns that gradually do the following: decrease population by x value, destroy 10 random improvement, negate training queue, and that city can't produce anything (be it train units or build something), after 5 turns, after that the city can normally produce anything, but 10 of its improvement are destroyed (randomly), and its population decreased by x value, city level can downgrade if the population is sufficiently decreased. This is just an example, but i think it is fair enough and logical enough if you ever know how a real volcano or earthquake or tsunami cause damage to a city.