Suggestion for Tech Tree Layout

[enpi]

I really think that a tech tree layout of your techs would bring more clarity into your tech system is is currently not more than a endless list with hyperlinks. How about this?

techtree_Layout 1.jpg (114.7 KiB) Viewed 17921 times

[Arioch]

A tree view would be nice to have, but it would be a technical challenge because the tree is dynamic; tech nodes change depending on which race you play or can be added through in-game discoveries or trades.

If we do one, it will probably be a very late addition.

[enpi]

I hope you will find time to do this. After playing alot of other 4x games I think that a tech tree is todays state of art for technology representation. Its advantages are clarity and preplanning capability and I guess this will also meet the expectations of many players. If you like to draw I would also recommend some nice pictures for each tech in your great art style.

[rattle]

Since dependencies are present the data structure should suffice. I'm all for a tree representation instead of a list.

[sven]

Since dependencies are present the data structure should suffice. I'm all for a tree representation instead of a list.

Well, in my mind, there's actually several different ways we might do something roughly like Enpi's suggestion. At one extreme is the idea of a full in-game navigable tech tree -- given the nature and size of SiS's tree, that would create interface problems similar to those you see in SoTS, figuring out how to zoom and pan become important details, and finding space for the other elements currently in SiS's research screen becomes tricky. That's a relatively major UI design project.

The other extreme is to do something roughly like Alpha Cent* -- and show only the part of the tech tree that corresponds to the the tech currently being selected, and it's immediate prereqs and follow on techs. That's a much more modest feature, one that I think we could fit into the current UI layout without too much trouble.

I'm not entirely sure which of the two enpi is suggesting here

* I don't remember exactly how Alpha Cents tech screen worked, but, the basic layout, as far as I recall, was a block of informative text, plus a large central visualization that included the tech's icon and, I think, lines leading off to other related techs. Even in a relatively simple "partial visualization" case I think showing a bit more of the tech tree is probably wise -- but, there's a sliding scale here in terms of the amount of detail and surrounding techs we might show. A third, related option would be to give players a way of bringing up a visualization of the relationships between all the techs inside a given field. Single field trees are a lot easier to create and display than a complete "tech forest".

[Sziklamester]

I would like also a tech tree for this game maybe the distant worlds or the kerbal/freeorion tech tree fits much more.

Atm I cannot explain more just those trees seems the less plus work and would be nice addition and not make so messy the UI.

[enpi]

I am all for transparency, clarity and ease of use. I dont like hidden information in my games (except for fluff stories like galactic asteroid secrets or whatever). So I am voting for a tech tree model like that of galciv or civ which shows all techs from the beginning on, where I can conveniently plan my tech strategy in advance without clicking hundreds of times on hyperlinks.

I understand that the problem you are facing is the additional effort of programming such a tree. Especially because your approach to tech is only 4 levels deep and not a dozen levels like in MOO2. So, maybe instead of a tree you can make a "circular" tech representation like in Endless Legends. (which tech interface consists of 7 tiers represented as "bubbles" with each approximately 20 techs - it has a nice look and plays clear and easy, IMO)

[faijeya]

The current techs implementation make it impossible to create a coherent tech tree on a 2D plane.

Here's about 7-8%% of tech connections mapped:


I didn't go further than 100 turns and it's already a mess.

[sven]

The current techs implementation make it impossible to create a coherent tech tree on a 2D plane.

Yeah, the intent, more or less, is to a have a roughly SOTS-like tiered tech system, so there are a few techs (like Fusion) that are a shared requirement for large branches of the tree.

A lot of the complexity in SiS's tree, at the moment, comes from the fact that Fusion isn't the only "Gate Keeper" tech. Molecular Manipulation and Advanced Field Theory are also both acting as gate keepers for many of the tier 2 techs. And that makes a visualization of the dependencies a real mess. You can productively draw out graphs for each tech field, but, a complete inter-field master graph is nearly as muddled as, say, an attempt to visualize the tech tree in Alpha Centauri.

I loved Alpha Cent -- and we certainly will be keeping a lot of the inter-field dependencies in the game. But, I think some simplification of the current tech graph is probably a good idea -- in particular, the way we're handling the transition from tier 1 to tier 2 techs should probably be a bit more consistent and obvious.

[rattle]

The tech trees in GalCiv 3 is quite nice. You're either getting a short list view of what you can research right now or see the whole tree. The trees are split up in four areas, like military, construction, economy/diplomacy and ecology. It's quite easy to navigate